Top products from r/Shitstatistssay

We found 28 product mentions on r/Shitstatistssay. We ranked the 66 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/Shitstatistssay:

u/theorymeltfool · 19 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

Okay, sure thing:

> He felt that those relationships in capitalism were not good for people and that we can and should do better

This was a myth at the time, based on a few extreme examples of kids working and bad working conditions in factories, BUT, even these terrible working conditions were better than the alternative a generation before, when kids had to start working on farms as early as they were able to. And when kids worked on family farms, they didn't earn anything. At least in the factories they earned money and got early job experience. Not ideal, but better than the alternative at the time.

The capitalist relationships at the time were absolutely better for people, because industrialization meant cooler products for less work. The oft-quoted "fact" that industrialists of the time were "Robber Barons" is an absolute myth.

> ....and he tried to figure out how we might get to alternative, better economic systems.

So Marx is a try-hard failure. The better economic system is free-market, as seen by places like Hong Kong (not ideal, but closer to a free-market than Venezuela). If he wanted a better voluntary business system, he should've started one. And if the market thought it was better, then more and more companies would create their organizational structure off of his research. But since it's not ideal, and doesn't really work when you allow idiots to vote, you'll only see direct-democracy worker-cooperatives in small-local businesses, like bookstores and cafe's. Larger companies that are more close to what Marx's "vision" might entail (depending on who you read, because Marx liked to talk in non-specific terms and frequently appropriated or created new words/definitions) like Mondragon Corporation, are still non worker-managed even though the company is worker-owned. And I'm totally okay with whatever arrangements people do, as long as it's voluntary. But people like this professor seem to want government intervention in the marketplace in order to force companies to align with his interpretations of Marxist theory.

What's next?

u/ee4m · 1 pointr/Shitstatistssay

>Very, very few of them do.

Ford Foundation is a deep state front. It created modern feminism and promoted and backed the free market movement, which was kicked off in the chilian dictatorship and then spread to all our countries.

>Or you've been deluded into thinking that there's some massive desire for libertarianism among corporations, which there isn't.

Why wouldn't corporations want to do away with work place safety regulations, pollution limitations, labour laws and anything else that stands in the way of profits. Do they not want anti trust laws gone - like the ones the banks did away with that lead to the melt down in 2008?

Average men have been targeted and used to support tea party, right libertarianism and so on based on the lie that its grass roots and will bring them freedom.

Thats the opposite of the truth, well researched book about it here.

u/thoreaupoe · 1 pointr/Shitstatistssay

I don't think it's as simple as that, but reforming welfare laws to what they were pre-LBJ would be a good start. Charles Murrary's Losing Ground is a good introduction into what disincentives became entrenched during the "Great Society."

u/LWRellim · 2 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

> Unfortunately now that such beliefs are being firmly instilled in children, I don't see the problem going away for a long, long time.

Well, in a sense yes. But in other senses, no. Definitely there are things that are taught (and/or learned) at an early age which significantly alter our view of the world throughout the rest of our life.

But most people -- and this is especially true of the majority (the "masses") of people when they are in groups -- often don't really "believe" things with any level of depth or certainty, but rather are "swayed" by those around them ... this is "scarily" true even in regard to relatively simple or obvious things.

So the end result is that -- in everything from clothing and hairstyles to political view -- "fads & fashions" pass like cyclical waves through the population.

And you can't be certain that even previously VERY popular things might not experience very sudden "reversals" in response to events.

An excellent example of this is "eugenics" -- which really (in its modern form) had its roots in Victorian England and the Social Darwinist movement... then spread and became VERY popular in the US (and then was subsequently proselytized to Germany). Now it didn't in fact disappear (it still exists, just under other names), and it wasn't refuted or negated... but the "sentiment" of the population DID in fact turn against it.

The same with and related to the socialist-nationalist (i.e. fascist) movements of the 1920's & 30's (FDR's "New Deal" regime was, like Hitler's Reich, really just an emulation of Mussolini's Italian "Fasces" system even to the point of emulating similar symbology) -- yet like the eugenics movement, it's popularity "fizzled" after the excesses of WWII. (Though of course we were still left with it's parasitic bureaucratic/societal detritus... and on the path to "empire" such things became entrenched.)

So I guess the point is that things (including seemingly core beliefs) CAN change, and sometimes they can "turn on a dime".

And no doubt just like the people who "believed" and/or participated in the wider "eugenics" things in the early 20th century many/most people who currently say one thing will claim in the future that they never believed any such thing.

A more recent example is the "housing bubble" -- NOW everyone bemoans it and claims they "saw it coming", and "knew it was going to be a disaster" and various other claims. But as one who really DID see it at the time (and got laughed at and called a cynical idiot/fool, etc.); I know most of these people are full of shit -- they fundamentally CHANGED their belief regarding it AFTER the fact -- during the actual bubble, they were refinancing, taking out HELOC's and either "flipping" houses themselves or were certainly considering doing it (the ones who were late to the game).

>Always makes me wonder to what extent I've been infected by this drivel and how much time I've spent/will continue spending driving the poison out.

Well, to a certain extent, everyone is infected with at least some "drivel" it's almost unavoidable. (Cf the tail end of another comment I made ITT).

Basically all "instruction/education" is going to include some "worldview" -- that's kind of the point, to create and convey to the next generation some (at least seemingly) logical sense of "order/understanding" of the world, including the physical world as well as dealings with other people.

And it's pretty much impossible to even achieve a decent "transfer" of what the instructor knows (or think they know); much less to do so without things being so to speak "lost in the translation" (or transition/transfer); and invariably the instructor is going to have to end up conveying things that they have simply "accepted" but which are probably subtly flawed (at best) or wholly false (at worst) -- and attempting to correct that (i.e. get rid of the chaff, but keep the grain) is something that everyone is going to fail at, and in the process probably introduce some entirely "new" poisons as well.

Then of course the environment that each generation (indeed each student) is receiving the information in is going to be at least subtly if not substantially different than that of the instructors.

It's why I tend to use the term "indoctrination" rather than "education" (or "schooling"). Most people see the former term as a derogatory one, and have "warm fuzzies" about the latter term(s) -- but really "indoctrination" is what ALL formal schooling is about. You can call it a "curriculum" if you want, but it is still a "doctrine" (i.e. a body of beliefs, or "teachings/things to be taught" -- laid out in a systematic manner for instructing others, chiefly children). And by definition, any such curricula/doctrine is going to have to have a certain "worldview" (or some specific/eclectic mixture of them), it is going to have some "framing" as well as some pre-defined "goal" of what it considers successful transfer -- the only other option in formalized schooling is to present data and information in a wholly chaotic and random fashion, as if there were no sense of order or connections, and yet that too is a form of "framing" and conveyance of a worldview (i.e. that the world is chaotic and without any sense of order, etc).

So of course it is going to be a SUBSET of data -- there simply isn't time/ability to present everything -- in a sense all instruction is therefore is of data that is "cherry picked" relative to some constructed (and flawed) theory of how the world (both nature and society) are ordered.

And some of that is going to be "poison".

u/crampedgorilla22 · 10 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

Yes, railroads were privately funded by people like Vanderbilt. The men who built America is a great show that talks about this among other things.

u/DEL-J · 7 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

The US unorganized militia is codified as any able bodied male age seventeen to forty something:

So... there’s that. However, papers don’t grant rights in my book.

Beyond that, no, most terrorism has not been carried out by the right wing. Maybe in recent decades or something like that, but overall, it’s not even close:

I’m willing to learn something, but you gotta provide some data. I’m willing to learn, but you should know that ultimately I don’t care, so I’m not too attached to my thoughts here, but even if what you say is true, it changes nothing about my opinions otherwise.

u/ziziliaa · -3 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

It's relevance is that it educates you about the prehistory of humanity, the neolithic revolution and the beginning of civilization where class society and private property first appear. To understand what Marxism is you must understand the basics first. I would also recommend you the following books if you want to understand the philosophical basis of Marxism, dialectical materialism which is essential:

Quantum Social Science by Emmanuel Haven, Andrei Khrennikov

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
by Thomas S. Kuhn

Ubiquity: Why Catastrophes Happen by Mark Buchanan

Non of these authors are Marxists as far as I know but they are following in the footsteps of Marx and Engels, who developed the logic of dialectical materialism out of philosophical inquiry into the natural world.

u/a_can_of_tea · -26 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

God forbid we read books to understand history better and not make caricatures out of people.

Let me pose it this way, why do you think Stalin did what he did? Because he's an evil statist? Grow up.

u/SatAnCap · 20 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

Jokes on them, I shall use that as a wishlist! >:D

(Also they forgot Basic Economics, so it's wrong)

u/quaestor44 · 29 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

I'm guessing Hawking didn't read this book

Another expert in one particular area assuming knowledge he does not have in other fields.


I'll call it Neil Degrasse Tyson Syndrome. Or perhaps Bill Nye syndrome?

u/EvanGRogers · 1 pointr/Shitstatistssay

Hitler was economically bound to lose eventually.

Modern doesn't mean good. Go read "Tombstone" and come back to me.

u/LewRothbard · 1 pointr/Shitstatistssay

Apparently OP spends too much time calling people "cucks" and reading Trump memes and he hasn't had time to sit down with Three Felonies A Day.

u/DavidNcl · 1 pointr/Shitstatistssay

Rothbard talks about the role of the protestant millennialist cults in the rise of the modern state:

This book: is a much broader look at the deep history and influence of such cults.

So basically, I'd expect any (protestant) christian to be a massive statist of the worst sort. The one's who are educated enough to have realised that God/Jesus isn't and couldn't be real are or were often communists (which is really a bizarre kind of christian sect... if you look at it squinty eyed).

u/just_want_to_lurk · 8 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

Three Felonies a Day

> The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law