hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1018 of 1029 FirstFirst ... 18518918968100810151016101710181019102010211028 ... LastLast
Results 20,341 to 20,360 of 20577

Thread: Political Shots Fired Thread

  1. #20341
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    :thinking:

    I'm asking you to show us when this was a thing.
    what are you trying to argue ? that humanity where never hunter-gatherers and that god put us on the planet 6000 years ago with full knowledge of agriculture ?

    Hunter-Gatherer societies is a pretty well understood subject in sociology, here is some cliff notes to help you.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nataruk
    meh

  2. #20342
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,327
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    :thinking:

    I'm asking you to show us when this was a thing.
    what are you trying to argue ? that humanity where never hunter-gatherers and that god put us on the planet 6000 years ago with full knowledge of agriculture ?

    Hunter-Gatherer societies is a pretty well understood subject in sociology, here is some cliff notes to help you.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nataruk
    i'm sorry, did you have a point or did you just want to post a Non sequitur ?
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  3. #20343
    XenosisMk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 13, 2017
    Location
    More turbo-lightspeed neoliberal platitudes/virtue signaling/misplaced priorities on full display.
    Posts
    4,863
    inb4 Liare is primalist

  4. #20344
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    :thinking:

    I'm asking you to show us when this was a thing.
    what are you trying to argue ? that humanity where never hunter-gatherers and that god put us on the planet 6000 years ago with full knowledge of agriculture ?

    Hunter-Gatherer societies is a pretty well understood subject in sociology, here is some cliff notes to help you.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nataruk
    i'm sorry, did you have a point or did you just want to post a Non sequitur ?
    The point is that in the very description of hunter gather societies you posted, the cliff notes, it says: "Females hunted smaller animals, gathered plants, made clothing, protected and raised children, and helped the males to protect the community from rival groups."

    Rival groups. Hmm.

    I posted our earliest dated conflict site. It occurs in the same time frame these hunter gather societies existed at. I'm guessing its not an isolated incident, but we don't know, because we didn't get around to recording it until, like, recorded history.

    So the point is that even in your anarchist hunter-gatherer based utopia, there will be predators, and prey who have to defend themselves. Which you pooh-pooed when Alistair made it, but its a major reason why these systems don't, and will never, work. They'll basically devolve into tribal mad max scenes pretty damn quick. See Somalia.
    meh

  5. #20345
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    13,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    no, it does not work, if it worked it would not be under constant attack from the rich and in the process of being dismantled literately across the entirety of the western world, nor would it be so heavily dependent on exploiting the third world as it is.

    simply put, for it to "work" we would need to maintain roughly 70%-80% of the world's population in abject poverty in perpetuity, that is of course assuming that the wealthy come to their senses w.r.t. their class interests, but even then the ecosystem of the planet as a whole is going to collapse underneath us, it's already buckling.

    you're also entirely ignoring the point i was making, i am presenting a massively simplified version of the underlying concept in order to make the explanations less abstract, but then that's par the course for you.
    You're being quite obtuse here. "Work" means it is in existence today functioning on the broad macro scale across multiple nations states on multiple continents. Is it functioning perfectly? Of course not, but it is in fact a real-world system in place today.

    Your preferred system (Anarchism in any of it's many flavors) is not in place of functioning in any meaningful size or scope today. A few remote villages in third world countries vaguely taking on some aspects anarchist-communism, sure, but that's about it.

    My argument is not that Capitalism is perfect, it clearly isn't, and most certainly isn't in any "pure" form. On the contrary, pure libertarian-capitalism is absolutely horrible idea.

    With that said, pointing out that your preferred system has as yet not taken any meaningful form in the real world, and would be very difficult if not impossible to win over large populations today, is an opinion you can counter or not, as you like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    It's also primarily an economic system, not a governmental system. Anarchism as you explain it is both.
    and this is where we learn that Alistair does not understand how economics and politics interact, and that he clearly believes that money does not in any way shape or form influence politics, at all.

    in reality, the two things are heavily interlinked.
    Indeed they are. And of course money influences politics in existing systems, to greater or lesser degrees depending on regulations.

    Which makes the core point of my post, the practical application point, only more relevant.

    How do you intend to create/implement an Anarchist governmental/economic/social system in the real world? A real world dominated by hierarchies you seem to believe we can (and more, want) to cast off, as well as overcoming the money interests and power structures etc. in place today.

    As I said, if you're just slinging Utopian theory, great. If you're talking anything like real-world practical application, forgive me, you're not doing a very good job of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    My lack of agreement with your Anarchism doesn't make me uneducated, it makes me a doubter of this particular utopian theory ever working in the real world on the scales required. If you want to compare educations over beers one day, just let me know.
    no, what does however make you come off as uneducated is the fact that A: you obviously know fuck all about anarchism+libertarian socialism and B: you're not actually trying to understand what it is before dismissing it.
    I have not dismissed anything. I am asking you, repeatedly, what makes your preferred theory something more than a Utopian thought experiment.

    How can your preferred theory be practically applied and implemented in the real world.

    These are not unfair questions or some form of dismissal.

    These are basic questions relevant to a discussion of practical political science and socioeconomics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    My friend,
    i am not your friend.
    Clearly.

    Please forgive my attempt at casual and friendly civility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    and here again, we have the ignorance on display with the implication that i want to impose either of those by force on a world-wide scale, it would be beautiful if not for the fact that it heavily implies i am deeply authoritarian.
    Then by all means let me ask you directly: How do you intend/plan to bring into being an Anarchist system of any meaningful size or scope?

    As I clearly implied, it is my belief that Anarchism will not come to fruition without imposition, and will not work at any great scale without imposition and authoritarian enforcement. Convince us otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So if you think human nature isn't for hierarchies, prove it. Show us some studies, etc. that prove this theory you support.
    this is not the argument i presented, by tossing the qualification applied to that word (pro tip, you're looking for "involuntary") if you want me to take you seriously address the actual argument.
    The argument is that involuntary hierarchies have been the norm throughout the vast majority of human history, anarchism has not.

    If we look at cultures have engaged in variations of proto-anarchism (pre-industrial tribal groups for the most part), they all fell prey to external powers who engaged in involuntary hierarchies.

    The argument is that human beings natural state is to interfere with each other and to create involuntary hierarchies in order to impose their will on others, for intentions both good and bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Personally, I don't believe for a second you will convince the peoples of even a very small nation to shift to your belief system of Stateless Anarchism, not in our lifetimes, and likely not ever.

    If you think you can (i.e. practicial socio-economics), then tell us how. Otherwise you're engaging in theorycrafting. Which is fine (I love theory discussions).
    i personally could not care less about what a dipshit closeted republican thinks, especially considering any evidence i might present will be immediately dismissed on the basis of whatever objection you happen to think up.
    Well, you've made it clear you don't care what I think or have to ask you, fair enough.

    I presume your wiki link to the Zapatista is the best you have as a real-world success then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    My 10,000 years comment was relating specifically to human cultures creating hierarchies, not "capitalism".
    intentional misreadings really are tiresome.
    Indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    on't be so butthurt so fast mate. If you instantly go full take-ball-go-home crybaby at the mere hint of sarcasm or disagreement, you're not going to get very far with convincing anyone, much less an entire population, of the merit of your preferred belief system.
    i'm sorry ? you're barging into a discussion i had with Isyel about this subject, spreading your ill-informed bullshit assumptions and now you're accusing me of being butt-hurt for dismissing you as disingenuous ?

    get the fuck out of here.
    "Barging in" on a open discussion forum, lol.

    You're clearly quite upset at having your fringe theory questioned.

    But by all means, carry on. Unless you reply, I will not "barge in" on your conversation any further, as you like.


  6. #20346
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,327
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    The point is that in the very description of hunter gather societies you posted, the cliff notes, it says: "Females hunted smaller animals, gathered plants, made clothing, protected and raised children, and helped the males to protect the community from rival groups."

    Rival groups. Hmm.

    I posted our earliest dated conflict site. It occurs in the same time frame these hunter gather societies existed at. I'm guessing its not an isolated incident, but we don't know, because we didn't get around to recording it until, like, recorded history.

    So the point is that even in your anarchist hunter-gatherer based utopia, there will be predators, and prey who have to defend themselves. Which you pooh-pooed when Alistair made it, but its a major reason why these systems don't, and will never, work. They'll basically devolve into tribal mad max scenes pretty damn quick. See Somalia.
    the only one imagining the hunter-gatherer existence as some sort of utopia is you, i have not made that argument nor will you find me doing so.

    the point in bringing it up is to underline that property relations are not intrinsic to our understanding of ourselves or the the world as whole any more than involuntary hierarchies are, whatever else you decide to read into that explicit comparison and point is on your own head, moreover the places where anarchist theory have been put into practice did not and does not devolve into this "mad max" hellscape you seem to imagine, the Zapista's have been running a de-facto anarchist/libertarian socialist "state" organized along these lines in Mexico for almost 20 years while occasionally fighting off the Mexican government.

    the entirety of my reply to Isyel was made to addresses the very argument you just put forth both from the anarchist and libertarian socialist perspective though massively simplified, but you're too busy trying to "troll the brocialists" to actually engage with anything anyway.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  7. #20347
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    You're being quite obtuse here. "Work" means it is in existence today functioning on the broad macro scale across multiple nations states on multiple continents. Is it functioning perfectly? Of course not, but it is in fact a real-world system in place today.
    it's literately destroying the ecosystem we depend upon to survive, with no reasonable means to counteract that destruction other than more consumption.

    you are, literately and unironically doing this.





    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Your preferred system (Anarchism in any of it's many flavors) is not in place of functioning in any meaningful size or scope today. A few remote villages in third world countries vaguely taking on some aspects anarchist-communism, sure, but that's about it.

    My argument is not that Capitalism is perfect, it clearly isn't, and most certainly isn't in any "pure" form. On the contrary, pure libertarian-capitalism is absolutely horrible idea.

    With that said, pointing out that your preferred system has as yet not taken any meaningful form in the real world, and would be very difficult if not impossible to win over large populations today, is an opinion you can counter or not, as you like.
    first you demand evidence, then you flat out ignore it and the political context associated with it and then you decide to "up the ante". Bravo Alistair, you're essentially demanding a impossible standard of evidence and using that as a basis for arguing this.



    bravo.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Indeed they are. And of course money influences politics in existing systems, to greater or lesser degrees depending on regulations.

    Which makes the core point of my post, the practical application point, only more relevant.
    yet you still claim the economy and politics is separate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    How do you intend to create/implement an Anarchist governmental/economic/social system in the real world? A real world dominated by hierarchies you seem to believe we can (and more, want) to cast off, as well as overcoming the money interests and power structures etc. in place today.
    this question has already been answered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    As I said, if you're just slinging Utopian theory, great. If you're talking anything like real-world practical application, forgive me, you're not doing a very good job of it.
    if by "not doing a very good job of it" you mean not meeting some imaginary standard that exists only within the scope of how you understand power-structures then certainly.

    the reality however is that all such projects function much like your typical antifa protest, there might be a handful of people noticing a nazi rally somewhere and calling a counter-protest under the antifa flag, but they're not the "owners" of the protest and they are rarely the ones doing the actual coordination and organizing with law enforcement either it's a collective effort made up of a large number of individuals and groups.

    as for practical applications, Anarchists organize alongside, or outside existing society and you can find groups all over the world, what you're not going to find is things like the Zapistas outside very specific circumstances because,predictably, such initiatives are ruthlessly crushed by force of arms when they do appear, in Europe it's associated with the far-left community centers and squats you find in every major city on the continent and is in many ways a parallel society where individuals and groups organize around what's relevant for the local community, in Athens they're housing illegal immigrants, in Barcelona it's assisting the poor and unemployed and so forth. Anarchism in practice is about "praxis" in the local community with the explicit goal of strengthening it w.r.t. outside influence, "the revolution" is coming when it's coming, and judging from current politics, that's not too far off.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Then by all means let me ask you directly: How do you intend/plan to bring into being an Anarchist system of any meaningful size or scope?

    As I clearly implied, it is my belief that Anarchism will not come to fruition without imposition, and will not work at any great scale without imposition and authoritarian enforcement. Convince us otherwise.
    the mere fact you're asking this amply illustrate you don't actually understand the basic implications of anarchism and how such a society would be organized on a larger scale. (pro tip, it would not be) the idea of implementing anarchism by force of arms died with propaganda of the deed a long time ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    The argument is that involuntary hierarchies have been the norm throughout the vast majority of human history, anarchism has not.
    the anthropology does not support this assertion, basically all hunter-gatherer societies are typified by being aggressively egalitarian and having codified norms that outright punishes "unfair play", a instinctual tendency that appear very early in our development.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    If we look at cultures have engaged in variations of proto-anarchism (pre-industrial tribal groups for the most part), they all fell prey to external powers who engaged in involuntary hierarchies.
    i have made precisely this criticism in the post you did not bother to actually read.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    The argument is that human beings natural state is to interfere with each other and to create involuntary hierarchies in order to impose their will on others, for intentions both good and bad.
    and we're looping back to the anthropology does not support this assertion.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  8. #20348
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    The point is that in the very description of hunter gather societies you posted, the cliff notes, it says: "Females hunted smaller animals, gathered plants, made clothing, protected and raised children, and helped the males to protect the community from rival groups."

    Rival groups. Hmm.

    I posted our earliest dated conflict site. It occurs in the same time frame these hunter gather societies existed at. I'm guessing its not an isolated incident, but we don't know, because we didn't get around to recording it until, like, recorded history.

    So the point is that even in your anarchist hunter-gatherer based utopia, there will be predators, and prey who have to defend themselves. Which you pooh-pooed when Alistair made it, but its a major reason why these systems don't, and will never, work. They'll basically devolve into tribal mad max scenes pretty damn quick. See Somalia.
    the only one imagining the hunter-gatherer existence as some sort of utopia is you, i have not made that argument nor will you find me doing so.

    the point in bringing it up is to underline that property relations are not intrinsic to our understanding of ourselves or the the world as whole any more than involuntary hierarchies are, whatever else you decide to read into that explicit comparison and point is on your own head, moreover the places where anarchist theory have been put into practice did not and does not devolve into this "mad max" hellscape you seem to imagine, the Zapista's have been running a de-facto anarchist/libertarian socialist "state" organized along these lines in Mexico for almost 20 years while occasionally fighting off the Mexican government.

    the entirety of my reply to Isyel was made to addresses the very argument you just put forth both from the anarchist and libertarian socialist perspective though massively simplified, but you're too busy trying to "troll the brocialists" to actually engage with anything anyway.
    The Zapitas are also contributing to your environmental disaster by asserting indigenous people aren't bound by any concept of natural preservation because it's inconvenient to their political control of the area so there is that.
    meh

  9. #20349
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    13,412
    A very throwback (and idealized) belief system mixing way-WAY-pre-industrial tribalism with Marxist communism, a "lets all go back to hunter-gatherer subsistence-lifestyle tribal-like direct-democracy and sharing all our stuff, kumbaya, it'll be great!".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism

    Sounds like a blast. Where do I sign up.


  10. #20350
    smuggo
    Guest
    Liare ITT:

  11. #20351
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,327
    every ideology group has that smelly uncle nobody talks to, Anarchists got those guys, and the paedophiles Anarcho-capitalists.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  12. #20352
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    13,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    every ideology group has that smelly uncle nobody talks to, Anarchists got those guys, and the paedophiles Anarcho-capitalists.
    I know you've said we're not friends, and you're clearly not in it for the banter here, and this post is likely wasted, but I'll say that your heart and idealism are in the right place Liare.

    Have a good day.


  13. #20353
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,866
    Ya'll need to read Homage to Catalonia.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  14. #20354
    Kai's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 2, 2012
    Posts
    6,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Ya'll need to read Homage to Catalonia.
    It is a seriously good read.

  15. #20355
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,327
    it's not even that long either, and it puts the rest of Orwell's works into perspective.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  16. #20356

    Join Date
    April 9, 2012
    Location
    Pit of depravity
    Posts
    7,106
    Its not bad, but its no Twilight.

  17. #20357
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    2,210
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Ya'll need to read Homage to Catalonia.
    You certainly didn't.

  18. #20358
    Timaios's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    982
    To get back to the injustice train, few days ago we found out that a Japanese medical university systematically cut women's test scores for over a decade in order to 'produce more male doctors': https://www.reuters.com/article/us-j...-idUSKBN1KS0S9

    Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point. - Blaise Pascal, Pensées, 277

  19. #20359
    מלך יהודים Zeekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Timaios View Post
    To get back to the injustice train, few days ago we found out that a Japanese medical university systematically cut women's test scores for over a decade in order to 'produce more male doctors': https://www.reuters.com/article/us-j...-idUSKBN1KS0S9
    Now that's so fucked up it's amazing.


    

  20. #20360
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    13,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Timaios View Post
    To get back to the injustice train, few days ago we found out that a Japanese medical university systematically cut women's test scores for over a decade in order to 'produce more male doctors': https://www.reuters.com/article/us-j...-idUSKBN1KS0S9
    Now that's so fucked up it's amazing.


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •