Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on December 21, 2017

Bookmark and Share

An Introduction to Political Economy

Public Policy

Nature spirits and democratic syndicalism may not seem to have much in common, but I’ve discovered one unexpected similarity: it’s very difficult to discuss either one in a single post. To make any kind of sense out of the ancient belief that the forces of nature are best understood and most truly experienced as persons rather than things, it turned out to be necessary to delve into the entire tangled mess our culture has made about the concept of personhood, and what does and doesn’t count as a person. Only when that was cleared away could we go on and talk about what it means to experience nature as composed of persons rather than things.

In the same way, if we’re going to make any kind of sense of the alternatives to capitalism and socialism, it’s going to be necessary to talk for a while about capitalism, socialism, and the third and usually unmentionable system of modern industrial economics—yes, that would be fascism. In the process, we need to pay attention to the thing that conventional economics systematically ignores—the mutual entanglement of political power and economic wealth—and that requires us to revive a science that has been dead and buried for well over a century now.

If you take an introductory course on economics, you can pretty much count on being told that the modern science of economics was launched by Adam Smith. Like so much conventional wisdom about history these days, this is false, and it’s false for at least two different reasons.

First of all, economics isn’t a science. What sets apart a science from other kinds of human knowledge is that the assertions of a science are tested against what actually happens. When a scientist makes a claim, at least in theory, other scientists run the same experiment or observe the same phenomenon and see if they get the same results. If they don’t, the claim made by the first scientist—again, at least in theory—goes into the wastebasket alongside such discarded notions as phlogiston and the luminiferous ether. Nowadays, this doesn’t always happen, and that’s one of the core reasons that the sciences these days are facing a catastrophic crisis of legitimacy, but that’s an issue for another post; when a science does what it’s supposed to do, every claim is tested to see if it can be replicated. That’s what makes it a science.

Economists don’t do this. They don’t even pretend to do it.  Mainstream economists like to make claims about what will happen when their preferred policies are put into place, mind you, but the mere fact that those claims simply aren’t true never gets considered when repeating them. Consider the way neoliberal economists to this day rehash David Ricardo’s claim that free trade will make poor countries rich. They’re wrong; history shows that when poor nations embrace free trade, they become even poorer, while poor nations that reject free trade schemes generally prosper. Yet the total disconfirmation of free trade theory in practice has yet to register on the economic mainstream.  As far as economists are concerned, Ricardo said it, they believe it, and that settles it.

So economics isn’t a science. It also wasn’t founded by Adam Smith. What Adam Smith founded, rather, was political economy. You won’t hear much about that field of study these days, and that’s not an accident. Political economy, as the name indicates, explores the relations between wealth and power in a society.  For reasons that I suspect my readers will have no trouble understanding, this is something that a great many wealthy and powerful people in today’s industrial nations don’t want to discuss—and that, my children, is why we don’t have courses on political economy in universities today. We have courses on political science, which claim to study power without taking wealth into account, and courses on economics, which claim to study wealth without taking power into account, and both of these highly praised, well-funded fields of study by and large duly churn out vast amounts of poppycock instead of offering useful insights into the societies in which we live.

We’re going to talk about political economy in this week’s post. We’re going to do that because it’s not really possible to understand why the world’s industrial nations are running themselves into the ground without understanding the self-destruct button hardwired into capitalism, and it’s impossible to understand that latter bug—or is it a feature?—without talking about the ways that wealth and power form feedback loops in an industrial society.

The most important thing to understand, if you’re trying to make sense of political economy, is who owns the means of production. Means of production? That’s a convenient bit of shorthand. Every human society produces goods and services; the means of production are the sum total of the arrangements made to do this necessary task. Now of course a category this diverse is going to include things owned by an equally dizzying array of people, but in most societies, ownership of the most important means of production tends to follow specific patterns.

Examples? Consider a feudal society—early medieval England, let’s say. It’s an agrarian society in which most people are employed in farming, and the means of production that matter most can be summed up in one word: land. Who owns the land? That’s a simple matter. The king owns all the land; he grants the right to use it to his immediate vassals, the great dukes and earls of the kingdom, in exchange for their loyalty and obedience; they pass on the same right to barons, the lesser fish of the feudal system, on the same terms; the barons then do exactly the same thing, and we proceed straight down the feudal pyramid to Higg son of Snell in his peasant hovel. Higg has his hovel and the farmland that goes with it because he’s a vassal of Sir Hubert de Ware, who is a vassal of Baron Fulk of Lewes, who is a vassal of Duke Geoffrey of Sussex, who is a vassal of the king. Understand that pattern of ownership of the means of production—that pattern of political economy—and you understand early medieval English society.

Okay, let’s consider another example: early twentieth-century America. It’s an industrial society. and factories and offices are the means of production that matter most. Who owns the factories and the offices? That’s also a simple matter. The factories and offices are owned by corporations. Who owns the corporations?  Their investors. How do you get to be an investor? By having enough capital to purchase stocks and other investment vehicles. How do the investors exercise their ownership? By electing boards of directors in elections in which each share of stock has one vote; the boards of directors then hire and fire the people who run the factories and offices. (Remember, this is early twentieth-century capitalism; things are different now.) Understand that pattern of political economy, and you understand early twentieth-century America.

Notice, before we go on, that there are two crucial differences between the political economies of feudal England and industrial America. The first has to do with the relationship between power and wealth. In feudal England, that’s totally explicit: the king is the head of state and also the landowner of last resort; the dukes and barons are political officer as well as economic magnates. In industrial America, it’s not explicit: in theory—mind you, only in theory—the government is entirely separate from the economic sphere. In practice the wealthy buy and sell political offices and voting blocs the way they buy stocks and bonds, and since there’s no explicit relationship between power and wealth, there’s nothing to keep them from doing whatever they want.

The second difference has to do with the distribution of wealth. In both societies, wealth is very unfairly distributed—the rich are very rich and the poor are very poor—but the feudal system has a counterbalance to the tendency of wealth to flow uphill. If you, dear reader, were a duke or a duchess in early medieval England, and you had the brains the gods gave geese, you would know that your influence, your security, and your survival depended on having plenty of vassals who would come running with drawn swords any time you needed them. How do you get vassals? By granting them landholdings—that is, transferring wealth down the ladder.

But your vassals are in the same situation you are.  They need vassals of their own, and their vassals need vassals, all the way down to Higg son of Snell, who will not only come running with a billhook in his hands when Sir Hubert needs him in battle, but puts in the daily labor that puts bread on everyone’s tables. Thus feudal societies constantly move wealth down the pyramid. As a direct result, they tend to be extremely stable—so much so that when complex  societies collapse, a feudal system is almost inevitably what takes shape amid the ruins.

Capitalist societies don’t do this. Quite the contrary, in a capitalist society like early twentieth century America, all the incentives keep wealth flowing up the social ladder, and nothing brings it back down. The investors who own stock in corporations have an understandable interest in maximizing the return on their investment, so they reliably vote in boards of directors who will hire management who will force down wages as far as possible.  The investors who own stock in corporations also have an understandable interest in keeping as much of their wealth as possible out of the clutches of the tax man, so they reliably pressure and bribe government to spend as little as possible for the benefit of anybody outside the investor class.

As a result, capitalist societies are anything but stable; they suffer from savage cycles of boom and bust. The process at work here is quite easy to understand, and in fact it was very widely understood three quarters of a century ago; regaining that understanding is a crucial step toward making sense of the mess we’re in today.

Here’s how it works. Since working class wages get driven down, and government expenditures aren’t allowed to rise to take up the slack, people in the working classes can’t afford to consume the value of the goods and services they produce. Sales accordingly falter, and so do profits in productive industries. Since the investor class is interested solely in maximizing the return on its investment, in turn, investment money flows out of productive industries and into financial instruments of various kinds, where it drives speculative bubbles. As the bubbles inflate, they suck even more money out of the productive side of the economy. When the bubbles pop, in turn, so does the economy, and down we go into a depression.

That’s what happened all across the industrial world in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, over and over again, until the Great Depression hit and the investor class realized that something had to give. What convinced them of that? The rise to power of two rival economic systems that rejected the basic presuppositions of capitalism, and—ahem—worked.

The first of these systems was socialism. Let’s stop right here for a moment and explain the meaning of the word, shall we? Plenty of people, especially but not only in the United States, have been using that moniker “socialism” to mean any number of randomly chosen things, but the word does actually mean something specific.  Socialism is the system of political economy in which the means of production are owned by the national government. That’s what it is, and that’s all it is. (Most of the things that currently get labeled “socialist” in the English-speaking world are actually social democracy, which is an entirely different system that we’ll discuss in a moment.) If it doesn’t have to do with government ownership of the means of production, it’s not socialism, full stop, end of sentence.

Socialism has its problems. In its most popular form, the version that more or less follows the recipe laid down by Karl Marx, it so consistently produces bloodthirsty dictatorships that a good case can be made for chucking it into the rubbish heap of failed ideologies. The fact remains that as an economic system, it works about as well as capitalism—that is to say, not well, but well enough to stay in power—and it does a much better job of distributing wealth to the working classes than capitalism does, which is why capitalists hate it so much. On the other hand, given a choice, the working classes favor it, for the same reasons capitalists hate it: if you’ve got a choice between two dysfunctional systems, why not choose the one that benefits you most?

Then there was the other rival system, which has been so obscured by shrill rhetoric over the last three quarters of a century or so that we’re going to have to approach it by a roundabout route. Suppose, then, that some charismatic figure in today’s American scene—somebody toward the center of our overheated political spectrum—were to propose a new system of political economy to replace the mess we’ve got now. We’re going to keep capitalism, she says, but it’s going to have its excesses curbed and its abuses prevented, not by the government, but by an organized movement of citizens under my leadership. Each year we’re going to sit management and labor down at the bargaining table, everybody in a given industry all at once, and make them bargain in good faith, with the citizen movement watching both sides to make sure a fair settlement is reached; there will be no more strikes, no more lockouts, no more labor troubles, just a new contract every year, and the citizen movement will enforce that by whatever means happen to be necessary. What’s more, she tells adoring crowds, the citizen movement will take on the same role in the political sphere, and be ready to yank the chains of officials when they get out of line. Of course the citizen movement will have to have special powers to do this, she says, and here’s the enabling act to give it those powers, just as soon as I become Chancellor…

That is to say, we’re talking about fascist economics. Yes, I’m aware that this isn’t the sort of thing that comes to most Americans’ minds when you mention the word “fascism,” but that just shows how thoroughly ignorant most Americans are about history. Fascism was never about the unrestricted rule of the capitalist investment class—that’s a falsehood originally manufactured by Stalin’s flacks back in the days of the Third International, and repeated by the misinformed ever since. Fascism attracted the masses in the 1920s and 1930s because it offered an alternative to unrestrained capitalism with its lethal boom-and-bust cycles. Did it work? Not very well, but then neither did unrestrained capitalism, and here again most people forced to choose between dysfunctional systems will choose the one that benefits them personally.

It was in response to the popularity of the socialist and fascist systems that social democracy came into being. (This, remember, is the thing that Republicans these days call “socialism.”) Social democracy was an attempt to take the best parts of fascist economics and combine them with constitutional government and the rule of law. In place of the “citizen movement” of my sketch above—that’s spelled “The Party” in its historical examples—social democracy puts the elected government of a constitutional representative democracy. In a social democracy, capitalism still exists, but at least in theory, it has to put up with legal checks that keep it from running too far off the rails: laws against monopolies, laws against insider trading, laws forcing banks to have deposit insurance, and so on.

It’s not a bad system, all things considered—which is to say it’s dysfunctional, but slightly less so than any of the three other alternatives we’ve discussed. Its great weakness was that it came into being because the investor class realized that they would end up dangling from lampposts if they tried to keep unrestrained capitalism going much longer, and it could only survive so long as the investor class stayed scared. Once the Great Depression and the age of rising fascist states faded out of historical memory, though, a new generation of capitalists convinced themselves that all this social-democracy stuff was a useless hindrance to their God-given right to engage in a kleptomaniacal orgy of profiteering at public expense.

That was when the Republican Party in the US, the Conservative Party in Britain, and their equivalents elsewhere embraced the view that the sole business of government was to make rich people richer while kicking the poor in the face, and when the Democratic Party in the US, New Labor in Britain, and their equivalents elsewhere embraced the supposedly opposite view that the sole business of government was to make rich people richer while mouthing vacuous feel-good verbiage at those of the poor who were sufficiently politically organized to be annoying. The results are predictable: in Britain, a resurgence of old-fashioned socialism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, who will probably become Britain’s next prime minister if the clown car that passes for a Conservative government keeps bungling things as badly as they’ve done so far; in America, a crisis of legitimacy that’s already catapulted a populist demagogue into the White House and may well replace him with something much worse in the years ahead.

There are alternatives. Next week, in place of the usual ask-me-anything open post, we’ll talk about some of them. The following week? 2018 will have arrived, and it’ll be time for the annual round of predictions about what the new year will hold. Stay tuned!

Ecosophia by John Michael Greer

36 Comments on "An Introduction to Political Economy"

  1. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 6:10 pm 

    “… that just shows how thoroughly ignorant most Americans are about history.”

    BINGO! THAT is the real problem in America today. Ignorance of the “real” history of the world and, especially, the US. All Most Americans know is propaganda disguised as history, and they are in the process of rewriting it once again. Brainwashing since birth has made the country into a Disney World in the mods of most Americans. This is reinforced at every opportunity by TPTB even though the system is crashing/crumbling around them.

  2. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 6:12 pm 

    ,,. ‘minds’, not ‘modes’. I should stop relying on spell-check.

  3. Sissyfuss on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 6:18 pm 

    Minds not modes nor mods, Mak. I’m so confused.

  4. Davy on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 6:36 pm 

    “BINGO! THAT is the real problem in America today. Ignorance of the “real” history of the world and, especially, the US.”
    Shut up old man, don’t start your stupidity tonight or I will neuter your dumbass

  5. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 6:50 pm 

    Sissy, this site has no way to go back and correct anything. I see others who make similar mistakes and do not bother to correct. Like the idiot goat farmer above. But then, he would have to rewrite his bullshit all the time.

    His last sentences should read: “I’m (Davy) an ignorant goat herd who has a closed mind.”

  6. Davy on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:10 pm 

    mad kat, you can stay on topic, respectful, and show balance then you will not be moderated. It is not hard except for ignorant people like you. Your above comment is off topic, general, and polarizing.

  7. Sissyfuss on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:19 pm 

    Mak, I was just funning. It’s Christmas. You and Davy should exchange gifts; just be sure to hold it under water for at least 30 minutes before opening.

  8. Davy on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:22 pm 

    siss, I would buy him some lye soap to suck on. Maybe that would clean his act up.

  9. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:31 pm 

    Sissy, Hahaha. I would not even accept it. I don’t waste gifts on those who do not deserve them. Help should be year round, not just on commercial based holidays.

  10. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:34 pm 

    Davy, I would appreciate a lot of lye soap. It is good for getting rid of unwanted parasites like virus and bacteria. I used it a lot as a kid. I even remember the smell. It is still made here by the ‘natives’ and is a good barter item.

  11. Davy on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 7:48 pm 

    Yea, Mad Kat, that’s why you need to suck on it. There is nastiness in that hole below your snout.

  12. GregT on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 8:22 pm 

    I have two neighbours here who still make lye soap.

    “There is nastiness in that hole below your snout.”

    The only nastiness here is you.

    Give it a fucking rest already.

  13. MASTERMIND on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 8:40 pm 

    John M Greer needs to take a shower and get a fresh shave…He has obviously lost his marbles with his new spirituality blog…

  14. Makati1 on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 10:49 pm 

    “U.S. life expectancy drops; drug overdoses spike”

    “Health researchers have some grim news for Americans: We are dying younger, and life expectancy is now down for the second straight year — something not seen in more than half a century….

    “The rest of the world is improving. The rest of the world is seeing large declines in mortality and large improvements in life expectancy,”…

    … the report contains reassuring news for older Americans: If you make it to age 65, you can expect to live another 18 years if you are a man and 20.6 years if you are a woman….

    … the biggest killers of young people include what statisticians call “unintentional injuries” — a category that covers drug overdoses, traffic crashes and falls. Deaths from those causes rose 9.7% in 2016….

    The opioid epidemic is not the only explanation for falling life expectancy, Anderson said. Stalled progress on the nation’s biggest killer, heart disease, is playing a long-term role, despite a decline in deaths in 2016, he said.”

  15. fmr-paultard on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 11:06 pm 

    recruiting genital farmer hard. he’s not supertard

  16. GregT on Thu, 21st Dec 2017 11:11 pm 


    Would you mind corresponding in English.


  17. DerHundistlos on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 5:03 am 

    @ Davy

    Please refrain from making cruel comments regarding others. Poor Mak does not deserve the personal attacks.

    I enjoy reading your insightful commentary, particularly as it relates to the environment.

    Thank you.

  18. Davy on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 5:45 am 

    “Please refrain from making cruel comments regarding others. Poor Mak does not deserve the personal attacks.”

    Please, make a point to mad kat to stop his polarizing hateful comments that create an environment of extremism. Once you do that and mad kat refrains from his extremism we will all find common ground. This is a two way street. You are also one of the worst for polarizing hateful comments. So I don’t think you are one to point fingers.

  19. Makati1 on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 5:48 am 

    Davy, I will continue to post articles about the decline of the US anytime I want to. It is not hate, it is current events. That you don’t like them is your problem, not mine. Just ignore them if they bother you.

  20. Makati1 on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 5:51 am 

    “”We are examining the use of RMB instead of the U.S. dollar for trade between the two countries,”

    The State Bank of Pakistan has already declared yuan as an approved foreign exchange for all purposes in the country.

    Another country is ditching the USD. The ball is gaining speed.

  21. Davy on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 6:02 am 

    mad kat, I will continue to neuter and moderate your extremist views that are unfair and unbalanced attacks that are mostly off topic. They do not contribute to a good debate. These comments are pressured and divisive. I could give a shit about any support you have from other extremist who likewise contribute to polarization and degradation for the search for the truth. mad kat, you are in my cross hairs. I have proven my seriousness for years now. There are so many hypocrites here who want their cake and eat it. They want to spread their personal agendas but whine when their personal agendas are attacked because they themselves are attacks. mad kat, you will be hounded to the very end I promise you that. I also promise any other extremist here a hounding. You can attack me all you like it just strengthens my message that extremism will be met with extremism and the results are a message of nullified goo.

  22. Davy on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 6:10 am 

    Sino Paki trade is insignificant to the big picture. Bilateral trade is beneficial to countries to a point. There is nothing special economically about this news just more attempts by mad kat to push an agenda of US decline. The US is declining and the word increasingly multipolar but the degree of change is limited by structural constraints. Anyone here can cherry pick the news for effect without digging deeper. Have you ever seen a comment by mad kat that gives deeper understanding to the headlines? No he gives one liners that are for effect not substance.

    Pakistan-China trade volume reaches $13.77 billion in 2015-16: NA …

    “Mar 14, 2017 – Pakistan-China volume of trade which was $4 billion in 2006-07 reached $13.77 billion in 2015-16 while Pakistan’s exports have jumped to $1.69 billion from $575.”

  23. Makati1 on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 6:30 am 

    Davy you don’t “moderate” anything. You are an arrogant bully. Nothing more. Delusional to the core, which is obvious to anyone who bothers too read your rants.

    As for the ongoing slow death of the USD, the numbers may be small but they constantly increase. The numbers are fast approaching a trillion dollars per year. At some point they will hit a tipping point and the rush to dump USDs will go ballistic. Be patient. That day is fast approaching.

  24. Makati1 on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 6:40 am 

    “The Chinese yuan surpassed the euro in October to become the world’s second-most-used currency in international trade and finance, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) said in a statement on Tuesday.” (2013)

    “HSBC foresees a sharp increase in the use of the Chinese yuan in global trading and payment, in particular in China’s trade with emerging markets.” (2014)

    “During the last two years, the number of countries that use the yuan for more than 10% of the value of their payments to China or Hong Kong has increased by seven. That brings the total of such countries to 57. There are currently 101 countries using the yuan as a trade currency.” (2016)

    “China sees new world order with oil benchmark backed by gold”

    “Yuan-denominated contract will let exporters circumvent US dollar”

    The beginning of the end of the USD.

  25. deadlykillerbeaz on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 6:51 am 

    Socialism is state capitalism, it is capitalism. Everything goes to the state, you get nothing except for what the state gives. And that would be nothing. What it really is, that’s all.

    Once again, socialism is state capitalism. It is capitalism, except, you don’t count. With unbridled capitalism, who don’t count. Socialism is capitalism.

    It’s a club, you ain’t in it.

    Besides, Marx, Engels, Lenin were genocidal racist madmen gone wild.

    The pronouncements (often private) of Marx and Engels shocked me the most. I had thought that they were expounding a philosophy that addressed civilization’s inequities as philosophers have always done. But this is not so. They both wrote to each other and to their inner circles bombastically, advocating the benefits of war, the necessity for slavery, ethnic hatred and virulent anti-Semitism (Marx was born Jewish). They advocated genocide, mass murder, assassinations, and terrorism, all of which, they said, would clear the way for a brave new world. (Hitler learned from them, as did Pol Pot, and certainly Stalin and Mao).

    Here’s a quote from Lenin:

    “Comrades! The kulak uprising in your five districts must be crushed without pity. You must make example of these people. 1) Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. 2) Publish their names. 3) Seize all their grain. 4) Take hostages per my instructions. Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks. Telegraph your receipt and implementation.”

    You tell ’em, Vlad.

    Just bad seeds, cretins, political shitheads not worthy of fogging a mirror. Glad they’re all gone and good riddance.

    Much like the pompous Buddha Al Gore and the idiot George Soros with a kinder gentler goal (destroy the village to save the village). Both are pathetic examples of the human phenotype.

    Much like Lenin, Stalin, Marx, and Engels, forget about ’em.

    Best to forget about Al Gore, George Soros, et al.

    Can we forget about all of the war and strife that took place during the 20th Century and move on?

    Just a better world without socialism and capitalism.

    The world can do without either one.

  26. Davy on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 7:25 am 

    Mad Kat, where is the reference for your huge exaggeration? Show me the Trillion and
    Explain what that means. This is how I neuter you. You just got your extreme exaggeration moderated. Bozo

    You are a extremist who is an attention seeker. You are a narcessistic braggart who constantly cuts others down in self promotion. You are a lonely old man parading as someone special. Disgusting.

  27. Hello on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 7:39 am 

    >> The beginning of the end of the USD.

    The end of reserve currency will be the best thing that happens to the US. It will finally let them allow to come back as a manufacturing powerhouse.

    Unless of course by then they have imported too many unproductive unskilled uneducated phillipinos and other 3rd world south east asians.

  28. Davy on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 8:00 am 

    The end of the US dollar is ahead because the global system likely cannot continue on its present course. This means the dollar and the system that grew up with it is dated but do not expect an alternative but same system to replace it. If you think this is the case you do not understand the global system as an economic system that is a civilization. This is more than economics it is now all human activity. All human activity is under threat.

  29. fmr-paultard on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 8:10 am 

    money is a difficult subject but “this” tard thinks something is needed only if it has value. the value of money should be to aid in the functioning of economic activity. bitcoin is an alt-tard technology which is designed to cut off the middle men and has virtually no value in fostering economic activity.

    economic activities are important because supertards need it to discover and exploit oil, fly planes and practice permacultist wisdom. these activities contributes postitively to our needs.

    so money laundering, illicit drugs, and tax evasion or in the case of eurotard’s money scheme by PBMB “confederation”, the usefulness of such system much be parasitic.

    But alt-tards complain about parasitism. Why don’t they criticize bitcoin? Hypocrisy.

    If they are parasitic this gives government the right to regulate resources essential to operation of bitcoins (electricity and intardweb traffic)

  30. Former Peak Oil Reader on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 9:54 am 

    (Offtopic) I used to appreciate the commentary here.

    Now this site has become the playground for a weird personal feud between old men.

    Can you please, please go back to talk about the real issues? Otherwise I (and maybe others) will give up on this site completely.

    Or maybe just create a daily topic where Makati and Dave can swear and throw poo at each other to their hearts content?


  31. fmr-paultard on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 10:15 am 

    that’s disrespecting to compare supertard and aswang and put them together in the same sentence. if i ever manage to create my religion to worship supertards this would be blasphemy punishable by public flogging. this is better than beheading as in islam.

    supertards doing a difficult job but done right, it’s easy. that’s why i don’t see ZH fakenews on my screen anymore. So tired of it. Alt-tard media fatigue!

    Thanks president trump for not grabbing the bumpski. It’s for shooting SENTAPBs.

  32. Apneaman on Fri, 22nd Dec 2017 11:19 am 

    Former Peak Oil Reader says

    “Now this site has become the playground for a weird personal feud between old men.”

    How the baby boomers — not millennials — screwed America

    “The boomers inherited a rich, dynamic country and have gradually bankrupted it.”

    “It’s all about me” may have been coined by millennials, but perhaps it really belongs to the Boomers?

  33. DerHundistlos on Sat, 23rd Dec 2017 6:16 pm 

    @ Davy

    Show me examples where I am responsible for as you say, the worst polarizing hateful comments.

  34. Davy on Sat, 23rd Dec 2017 6:32 pm 

    Der hund, I have better things to do than research your hatefulness and foul language. You do it too and denying it makes you look stupid.

  35. fmr-paultard on Sat, 23rd Dec 2017 6:50 pm 

    dear supreme highest tard please bless President Trump and keep him safe because he grabbed anything known to a horny man but the bumpski. We thank you for Luke 22:36 . Yes Father we will sell everything we got as you instructed. We pray you bless our supertards and keep them safe but discourage them from the dead-end practice of permacultism. We want you to guide our supertards well so they reject the religion of extremism and supremacism with the fake bible “Mein Kampf” and fake ZH, fake struggle, fake liberation, fake renewals, and alliance with Islam.

    We reject extremism because it’s a false flag. We want liberty, honor, stability, and freedom of inquiry so our supertards can makes our life enjoyable.

  36. fmr-paultard on Sat, 23rd Dec 2017 6:55 pm 

    supreme taco tard Father we understand that Constantine was a real tard when he plotted to worship the combined gods that include you Father. By this logic the extremist SENTAPBs who worship none of these gods are leading as astray and they won’t be able to recruit our supertards as their Cambridge Five. They’re not smart enough not even reaching the level of Constantine. I don’t believe in you Father but I give thanks and will attend mass once per year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *