Great thread! Will have to download all of these in case they disappear

Wadani;936182 wrote: What's ur beef with mary harper? I'm reading her book this weekend so I can't comment on that... but she writes very similar voyeuristic articles for the BBC. I'm thinking of two in particular, an article where she's surprised Addis Ababa is modern and has cupcakes, and an article about Somali women going to the gym.

Surprised Mary Harper didn't write this, because the coverage and captions are awful.

DoctorKenney;936134 wrote: I gave you the exact reason why the economy collapsed. I told you it was caused by the Fed's monetary policy as well as Government inflating the housing bubble and you chose to ignore my point, not even responding to what I said, nice job I didn't ignore your comment, I responded to it directly by asking if you if you really believed that government doesn't enact neoliberal economic policies, the same way I asked you if you were serious about the IMF and World Bank not being neoliberal institutions. I had to confirm whether I was really reading something so inane. You have no facts.

DoctorKenney;936100 wrote: Governments should be neo-liberal. But the problem is the US Federal Government is far from being this way. Alan Greenspan and Barney Frank caused this economic collapse. But yet everyone refuses to see this. I think low taxes, low government spending, minimal regulations and free trade is something we should all agree on. But you completely dodged the point and ignored my contention. Nice job safferz I'm just fascinated by your ability to classify things as "not really capitalist" or "not really neoliberal" when they don't fit your ideal-type model of what you imagine neoliberalism to be. It's stuff that would get you laughed out of any economics department anywhere. You're just not being serious, and it's impossible to debate someone who either can't or refuses to grasp the basic contextual information and facts about economics from which we could then have a productive discussion.

DoctorKenney;936070 wrote: When the Federal Government is guaranteeing home mortgage loans and lowering lending standards, then that's a distortion of capitalism. This knowledge is so basic that I'm wondering if you're deliberately being dishonest here. So in the same way you don't consider the IMF and World Bank neoliberal institutions, you don't think that governments can be neoliberal and enact neoliberal economic policies? lmao!

Wadani;936008 wrote: Safferz, ur undoubtedly an intelligent and well-informed person who brings a lot of value to Sol's intellectual environment. But at times, like in the above post, u come across a tad bit condescending in your choice of words. Such a style will only shift the debate from an honest exchange and critique of ideas and positions, to one where egos reign supreme as each person becomes defensive and tries to reinforce his/her superority at whatever cost, sacrificing objectivy and the pursuit of truth in exchange for a perceived victory. I match my tone with what's already been directed towards me by a particular person. Take a look at xabad's posts in this thread.

Alpha Blondy;936001 wrote: yes, of course! i'm so infatuated with you, ma istidhi? P.S thanks Raula. You are clearly just too stubborn to admit when I've taught you something, but I appreciate the slip lol

xabad;936000 wrote: and how come your rep power is 35 with just 158 posts ? ha. what are you secrets ? lol what does "rep power" mean? I made this account in 2010 and forgot about it for a while, then really only started posting a few weeks ago.

That was Raula you quoted

And I said I'm not going to answer that question, and explained why several times now.

xabad;935991 wrote: then you have something to hide. just state your positions, so that we know better where you coming from. If it helps you to think of me as a Socialist, Communist, Anarchist or whatever (not that you seem to know what those positions entail), feel free to do so. But I'm not letting you derail the thread by making it about my personal politics.

DoctorKenney;935985 wrote: The 2008 crash had nothing to do with capitalism LOLOL. You've already lost.

xabad;935979 wrote: if not capitalism what do you want then ? so we can know your stance As I said before, what I believe is irrelevant to a discussion and critique of neoliberalism.

raula;935976 wrote: If indeed Swahili is just another language...how come it hasn't been abondoned after its use (E. African trade)..??? & how do you term the emergence of the spanish language in S. America?? Why would Swahili disappear after hundreds of years, simply because of 60 years of British (and briefly German) presence in East Africa? Not to mention the British used indirect rule in Africa - rule through already existing indigenous structures - meant that English did not become the language of power in most African encounters with the colonial state. The colonial conquest of Africa was also very different from the colonial conquest of the Americas, so it's not the most useful comparison.

xabad;935973 wrote: the problem was not capitalism but with ****** deregulation, and capitalist societies are still better, richer and will self correct in the end. Heh, another "but that wasn't really capitalism" argument to subvert evidence that it hasn't worked.

DoctorKenney;935968 wrote: You Socialists have lost the debate back in the 20th century. Deal with it And you're stuck in the 20th century with Friedman and Fukuyama -- if you've looked at all at the world around you, you'd see the last decade has been the crisis of capital and the collapse of global capitalist economies.

Keep the "haram" critiques of socialism coming, just sat down with my popcorn. Can someone provide me with the hadith criticizing Marx and Engels? What was Imam Shafi's view on "commodity fetishism"? lmao

DoctorKenney;935951 wrote: Again, I do NOT support the IMF and World Bank making parasitic loans (with high interest rates) to corrupt African dictators. That's not neo-liberalism. That's colonialism under a different name. Countries like the United States (100 years ago), Japan, West Germany, Chile, South Korea, and others have ALL prospered due to neo-liberalism. If you actually read the works of F.A. Hayek and Mises than you would know what I'm talking about I have -- if you don't consider the IMF and World Bank neoliberal institutions, you're in a parallel universe.

Alpha Blondy;935941 wrote: what about dealing with madrasah educated east African academics who tell you bantu Christian Africans were ripe to be colonalised, and worthy of enslaving. Except I've never heard that from a Muslim east African academic, but the scenario I described above is one I have direct experience with and those ideas are increasingly common when discussing the history of the Swahili coast. So try again.

xabad;935934 wrote: if you are muslim also, you should know that socialsim is haraam. So explain to me exactly how socialism is haram, as opposed to other secular political and economic philosophies and forms of governance. I'm getting popcorn for this.

DoctorKenney;935921 wrote: Except that none of these African nations actually practiced neoliberalism. Too much government spending, high taxes, high debts, high regulations, little property rights, are what African nations are filled with. It was never practiced. Unless you give me evidence that it's application didn't work, then you have no argument. lmao only on SOL can someone conveniently discard neoliberal structural adjustment policies and the IMF and World Bank as non-practitioners of neoliberalism to make an argument that neoliberalism hasn't been impeded African development. You would be eaten alive for making that argument in an economics or political science class at my university.

Alpha Blondy;935916 wrote: irrespective of their leanings, these ''islamphobes from the interior'' have valid grievances. their religious views shouldn't prejudice your neutrality. surely as a researcher, you ought to behave with the utmost discretion. laakin, it seems to me you lack basic 101 ethnography. Get back to me when you have to deal with missionary educated east African academics who tell you Swahili Muslims on the coast are not real Africans, but Arab settlers who enslaved Africans.

xabad;935903 wrote: what would you ideal economic system look like ? are you for state control of all modes of production or some. explain yourself That's irrelevant -- I made a comment about why I dislike Thatcher and so far this has been support for and critiques of neoliberalism and its human costs, I don't think we need to derail the conversation.

DoctorKenney;935889 wrote: But to claim neoliberalism is like the World Bank is like claiming all Socialists are like Stalin. Dishonest comparison Except it's not. Neoliberalism refers directly to a type of economic policy and view of the market, articulated in documents like John Williamson's Washington Consensus. The IMF and World Bank are international institutions that embody neoliberal economics and design their policies accordingly.