The status quo. Framing things in this way is something I first encountered in libertarian/capitalist propaganda (when I didn't know better and was basically a dogmatic libertarian). The message is basically: people should focus on the goods the status quo provides, instead of the political power, economic security, etc. that it doesn't.
I don't see why pointing out improvements in quality of life is "propaganda for the status quo" or precludes talking about political power and economic security. We can and do talk about both all the time.
If you know anything about libertarian cranks, this doesn't make any sense and smacks of projection. They're not "satisfied with the status quo" qua political structure or economy.
There's a value in gratitude and recognizing widespread improvements in QoL, in large part fuelled by growth in the past century, and taking advantage of state capacity. That's not tantamount to saying there are no issues today, let alone that you shouldn't care. You can at least criticize accurately and take things at face value.
> If you know anything about libertarian cranks, this doesn't make any sense and smacks of projection. They're not "satisfied with the status quo" qua political structure or economy.
I didn't say anything about "libertarian cranks." I've only first (and mainly) seen this line of thought in "libertarian/capitalist propaganda."
And I think you can broadly break that propaganda down into (at least) two broad efforts, with somewhat different goals:
1. Preventing movement from the status quo in a non-libertarian direction. That's where this kind of thing comes in, because it can be used to distract from dissatisfaction.
2. Advocating that the status quo to change in a more libertarian direction.
Tautologically, libertarian "propaganda" would be pushed by libertarian ideologues. You've revealed that you're conflating libertarian and "capitalist", so I take it that through your interpretation, any remotely pro-market sentiment is "libertarian propaganda" (like plain ol' Liberalism, or, suggesting that zoning reform i.e. the govt getting out of it's own way can improve housing affordability). After all, no one comes out and says "this is propaganda", and you're telegraphing your yardstick.
> Preventing movement from the status quo in a non-libertarian direction.
The fact that you think the status quo is somehow in line with libertarian ideology, as I helpfully hinted at, tells me you have no clue what you're talking about. Developed countries broadly exercise a Liberal democracy with mixed-market economy and substantial government spending and intervention, which has mostly gone up over time. That's something libertarians whine about, not boast about.
> I first encountered in libertarian/capitalist propaganda
you should definitely look up the communist/socialist propaganda on East Germany and Soviet Union. In capitalism there is no such thing as what is provided by status quo, that's the whole point of capitalism, you can have whatever you want as long as you are willing do whatever it takes, unlike socialism/communism where you're allowed to have whatever the government mandates as the max (land, money, etc.) you can have
> Propaganda for what, exactly?
The status quo. Framing things in this way is something I first encountered in libertarian/capitalist propaganda (when I didn't know better and was basically a dogmatic libertarian). The message is basically: people should focus on the goods the status quo provides, instead of the political power, economic security, etc. that it doesn't.
I don't see why pointing out improvements in quality of life is "propaganda for the status quo" or precludes talking about political power and economic security. We can and do talk about both all the time.
[dead]
If you know anything about libertarian cranks, this doesn't make any sense and smacks of projection. They're not "satisfied with the status quo" qua political structure or economy.
There's a value in gratitude and recognizing widespread improvements in QoL, in large part fuelled by growth in the past century, and taking advantage of state capacity. That's not tantamount to saying there are no issues today, let alone that you shouldn't care. You can at least criticize accurately and take things at face value.
> If you know anything about libertarian cranks, this doesn't make any sense and smacks of projection. They're not "satisfied with the status quo" qua political structure or economy.
I didn't say anything about "libertarian cranks." I've only first (and mainly) seen this line of thought in "libertarian/capitalist propaganda."
And I think you can broadly break that propaganda down into (at least) two broad efforts, with somewhat different goals:
1. Preventing movement from the status quo in a non-libertarian direction. That's where this kind of thing comes in, because it can be used to distract from dissatisfaction.
2. Advocating that the status quo to change in a more libertarian direction.
Tautologically, libertarian "propaganda" would be pushed by libertarian ideologues. You've revealed that you're conflating libertarian and "capitalist", so I take it that through your interpretation, any remotely pro-market sentiment is "libertarian propaganda" (like plain ol' Liberalism, or, suggesting that zoning reform i.e. the govt getting out of it's own way can improve housing affordability). After all, no one comes out and says "this is propaganda", and you're telegraphing your yardstick.
> Preventing movement from the status quo in a non-libertarian direction.
The fact that you think the status quo is somehow in line with libertarian ideology, as I helpfully hinted at, tells me you have no clue what you're talking about. Developed countries broadly exercise a Liberal democracy with mixed-market economy and substantial government spending and intervention, which has mostly gone up over time. That's something libertarians whine about, not boast about.
> I first encountered in libertarian/capitalist propaganda
you should definitely look up the communist/socialist propaganda on East Germany and Soviet Union. In capitalism there is no such thing as what is provided by status quo, that's the whole point of capitalism, you can have whatever you want as long as you are willing do whatever it takes, unlike socialism/communism where you're allowed to have whatever the government mandates as the max (land, money, etc.) you can have