Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Consul]

…In my terms, Bernie Sanders could reasonably described as "left-ish"…

Sanders is more than just leftish. He is definitely a leftist. However, although he calls himself a democratic socialist, it is more accurate to call him a social democrat.

"Social democracy is an ideological stance that supports a broad balance between market capitalism, on the one hand, and state intervention on the other. Being based on a compromise between the market and the state, social democracy lacks a systematic underlying theory and is, arguably, inherently vague. It is nevertheless associated with the following views: (1) capitalism is the only reliable means of generating wealth, but it is a morally defective means of distributing wealth because of its tendency towards poverty and inequality; (2) the defects of the capitalist system can be rectified through economic and social intervention, the state being the custodian of the public interest; (3) social change can and should be brought about peacefully and constitutionally."

(Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideologies. 7th ed. London: Palgrave, 2021. p. 95)

[Consul]

A practical example: Punk music was a postmodern rejection of the "elitism" of rock's ever improving bands and musicians.

Postmodernists tore down the wall between high/elite culture and low/popular culture. They also tore down aesthetic walls between historical periods, genres, and styles (bricolage, polystylism).

"Postmodern culture is marked by a historical blurring – that is, representations of the past and present are displayed together in a bricolage. Bricolage involves the rearrangement and juxtaposition of previously unconnected signs to produce new codes of meaning. Bricolage as a cultural style is a core element of postmodern culture. It is observable in architecture, film and popular music video. Shopping centres have made the mixing of styles from different times and places a particular ‘trademark’. Likewise, MTV is noted for its blending of pop music from a variety of periods and locations. There has also been a notable collapse or blurring of genre boundaries within cultural products. The film Blade Runner is frequently cited as a movie that mixes the genres of noir, horror, sci-fi, etc. Similarly, the Shrek films and the TV series The Sopranos and Da Ali G Show illustrate aspects of genre deconstruction. Further, they are double-coded (Jencks, 1986), allowing them to be understood both by the literati and by a popular audience."

(Barker, Chris, and Emma A. Jane. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications, 2016. p. 237)

[Lagayascienza]

…In my terms, Bernie Sanders could reasonably described as "left-ish"…

Sanders is more than just leftish. He is definitely a leftist. However, although he calls himself a democratic socialist, it is more accurate to call him a social democrat.

"Social democracy is an ideological stance that supports a broad balance between market capitalism, on the one hand, and state intervention on the other. Being based on a compromise between the market and the state, social democracy lacks a systematic underlying theory and is, arguably, inherently vague. It is nevertheless associated with the following views: (1) capitalism is the only reliable means of generating wealth, but it is a morally defective means of distributing wealth because of its tendency towards poverty and inequality; (2) the defects of the capitalist system can be rectified through economic and social intervention, the state being the custodian of the public interest; (3) social change can and should be brought about peacefully and constitutionally."

(Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideologies. 7th ed. London: Palgrave, 2021. p. 95)

I don't think social democracy lacks an underlying theory. Nor do I believe it is inherently vague. It admits (at least the social democracy I believe in admits) that capitalism is the best way to generate wealth but that, as Heywood mentions, it needs regulation to prevent social unrest. It also needs regulation because, on its own, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism is highly destructive of the environment, of culture and of civilisation. For these reasons, there is no nation on earth where capitalism has gone unfretted.

In terms of economic theories of value, the subjective preference theory, beloved of the right ( whose cheer squad, the MAGA crowd, wouldn't know an economic theory if one stood up in the McDonald's large fries), explains a lot but not all. The cost of production theory of Ricardo et al also has explanatory power. There is no single magic answer in economics any more than there black and white answers in any other field. It's what works. And what works in economics will depend on many factors, not least of which is how human beings feel about how wealth is created, the costs of its creation, and the manner of its distribution. I believe in a market economy but not in a robber baron economy that trashes the joint.

[Consul]

I like philosophy to be as clear as poss, and applicable to reality. I've not delved into continental philosophy, because with the bits n pieces I've looked at the jargon is too annoying - I can't keep it all in my head while simultaneously trying to follow the points being made. So I can't speak on that.

What are those "bits n pieces" of continental philosophy you looked at?
Anyway, the common distinction between "continental philosophy" and "analytic philosophy" is nonsensical.

"It is absurd to mark philosophical differences with these two labels. Apart from involving a strange cross-classification – rather as though one divided cars into front-wheel drive and Japanese – the labels are seriously misleading, in helping one to forget that the origins or analytical philosophy itself lay in continental Europe (notably so, when its founding father is taken to be Frege and its greatest representative Wittgenstein), and that the interests of 'continental' philosophy are not confined to the European continent."

(Williams, Bernard. "Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look." In The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy, 2nd ed., edited by Nicholas Bunnin and E. P. Tsui-James, 23-34. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003. p. 23)

[Sy Borg]

A practical example: Punk music was a postmodern rejection of the "elitism" of rock's ever improving bands and musicians.

Postmodernists tore down the wall between high/elite culture and low/popular culture. They also tore down aesthetic walls between historical periods, genres, and styles (bricolage, polystylism).

"Postmodern culture is marked by a historical blurring – that is, representations of the past and present are displayed together in a bricolage. Bricolage involves the rearrangement and juxtaposition of previously unconnected signs to produce new codes of meaning. Bricolage as a cultural style is a core element of postmodern culture. It is observable in architecture, film and popular music video. Shopping centres have made the mixing of styles from different times and places a particular ‘trademark’. Likewise, MTV is noted for its blending of pop music from a variety of periods and locations. There has also been a notable collapse or blurring of genre boundaries within cultural products. The film Blade Runner is frequently cited as a movie that mixes the genres of noir, horror, sci-fi, etc. Similarly, the Shrek films and the TV series The Sopranos and Da Ali G Show illustrate aspects of genre deconstruction. Further, they are double-coded (Jencks, 1986), allowing them to be understood both by the literati and by a popular audience."

(Barker, Chris, and Emma A. Jane. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications, 2016. p. 237)

It's not about genre deconstruction to me, but a matter of quality. Music, for some reason, has always been associated with youth. Come to think of it, that "some reason" is money.

In the end, young, working class kids could not cover complex prog songs, and they couldn't afford the equipment. Nor could they relate to the songs, which tended towards mythical allegories about the uplifting of one's spirit and other arcane ideas. So they played something they could play - simple, loud rock'n'roll. The marketers called it "punk" but it was just fast and loud rock'n'roll.

[Consul]

I don't think social democracy lacks an underlying theory.

Heywood writes: "…social democracy lacks a systematic underlying theory"

Social Democracy in the EB: https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy

[Sy Borg]

Never mind social democracy, the circle is turning and, once again, many of young people today want this:

Or, at least, they think they do ...

[Gertie]

Spoilerish alert for Anatomy of a Fall, Saltburn and The Zone of Interest

...........

...........

...........

I was thinking my favourite films of this year all had a post-modern flavour (I've not seen Poor Things yet but I expect that will too).

Part of what I liked about Anatomy of a Fall was how it didn't give us an answer (whether the lead character pushed her hubby out the window or he fell), rather it offered alternative narratives in a court setting, and alternative narratives of a relationship. The real judge was the blind son, who has to make a choice in a world where his certainties are rocked.

Saltburn was a wild, showy ride of playing with genre and expectations, a juxtaposition and de-construction of the facade of venerated aesthetic classicisism and the tattier visceral manipulation of the Mr Ripley self-serving wannabe, with no telling us who to judge. It was a hoot.

The Zone of Interest def wasn't a hoot. It took the perspective of the real Aushwitz camp commander and his family who built their home next door to the camp. Literally just a wall between. And showed them very naturalistically going about their daily lives, with ordinary middle class hopes and worries. Just like us. Blanking out the reality they couldn't quite see. With just the music and sounds ofrom the camp to evoke the horror. That narrative shift and documentary style without judgement was a deliberate way of getting us to relate and reflect on the ordinariness of evil, and was thoroughly chilling.

They're not going to be everybody's cuppa, but messing with genre and convention was an integral part of what made all three films engrossing and impactful for me. And they all felt fresh and challenging in a way which was still inviting. They were all done with skill and intelligence too.

[Pattern-chaser]

Sanders is more than just leftish. He is definitely a leftist. However, although he calls himself a democratic socialist, it is more accurate to call him a social democrat.

"Social democracy is an ideological stance that supports a broad balance between market capitalism, on the one hand, and state intervention on the other..." (Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideologies. 7th ed. London: Palgrave, 2021. p. 95)

From that description, I would describe a social democrat as a centrist. Left-wing politics is no friend to market capitalism, outside of the USA. It's just that Bernie and Elizabeth (Warren) are the closest that America comes to the people they usually call "commies". Outside America, the left stretches a lot farther left than Bernie goes...

[Consul]

From that description, I would describe a social democrat as a centrist. Left-wing politics is no friend to market capitalism, outside of the USA. It's just that Bernie and Elizabeth (Warren) are the closest that America comes to the people they usually call "commies". Outside America, the left stretches a lot farther left than Bernie goes...

Social democrats are left-centrists. (There is a left wing within social democracy that is closer to democratic socialism than its right wing.)

By the way, there is a communist party in the USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA

[Lagayascienza]

I wonder how many votes the US Communist Party gets.

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are, as far as I know, about the only ones in American politics who would, in most democratic countries, be considered even slightly left of center. And they are so far right of communism it would be egregious to us the word communism in the same sentence as their names.

[LuckyR]

I wonder how many votes the US Communist Party gets.

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are, as far as I know, about the only ones in American politics who would, in most democratic countries, be considered even slightly left of center. And they are so far right of communism it would be egregious to us the word communism in the same sentence as their names.

The US Communist party hasn't run candidates for federal office since 1984. But the one candidate for office under the Communist Party label in 2020 ran in a local election in Long Beach California. He got about 10% of the vote.

[Lagayascienza]

10%! That is surprising. But, since, as I understand it, there is no preferential voting system in the US, that 10% do nothing - they are wasted votes. I guess the same is true for votes which go to independents who don't win. Is that correct?

[LuckyR]

10%! That is surprising. But, since, as I understand it, there is no preferential voting system in the US, that 10% do nothing - they are wasted votes. I guess the same is true for votes which go to independents who don't win. Is that correct?

Sure, but that's the way democracy works, if your candidate loses he doesn't get the job. Before Gingrich invented polarization though, the winning candidate might try to throw a bone to his constituents who didn't vote for him in this election hoping to get their vote next time. But now no one does that because if they stray from the party line, they'll get primaried.

[Lagayascienza]

Not always. It works differently in a preferential system where a candidate can win on preferences even though he/she does not get the most primary votes. This is in contrast to a first past the post system. Some say a preferential system is fairer - it results in proportional representation and allows for more diversity of representation. Others say it is too complicated. But folks seem to like it in Australia. It operates in some US states and cities, too.