hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 870 of 902 FirstFirst ... 370770820860867868869870871872873880 ... LastLast
Results 17,381 to 17,400 of 18023

Thread: US Politics Thread, 2.0

  1. #17381
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by evil edna View Post
    This boring shit is making me actually start to prefer the idea of anarcho-capitalism
    Some of my real life self proclaimed marxist-communist friends (think Keckers on steroids) are actually excited there's a chance we're gonna get cyberpunk in our lifetime. I mean cognitive dissonance among far right is well established fact, but this? I lack the words how to even describe it.
    Call them morons and stop listening to them, if that's the actual case. Cause I'm having a hard time believing someone is unironically longing for that, esp if they're serious about the marxist worldview.
    I don't, I explain how they are wrong in a slightly trollish manner, as I do here with you guys. Results are the same.
    Then it's as effective as capitalism is with providing me with a good quality of life \_(ツ)_/
    Have you considered it's not capitalism that might be at fault here?
    I have and I've came to the conclusion that is full of shit. Why? Because it's a generational experience, like for example half of people my age still live with their parents and half of Poles earn less than the amount that lets them be independent.
    I'm sorry, you're not happy with increasing taxation and wealth redistribution along the lines of 500+ etc that's happening nowadays in Poland? Free healthcare being provided? Or university education being free? By all objective measures you're living in the paradise you want. So how's that working out for you?

    Trolling aside, I don't know what it would take for you to realize the problem at fault here is not capitalism, communism or any other ism. It's idiots in charge and how the current perversion of the system fosters pathological behaviour. Hate to break it you, but you would be as much of a self proclaimed failure under communism and especially under anarchism. Because with wide adoption of the latter it's not about sharing the bread in your commune but who has the biggest stick to come to your commune to get the bread you baked instead of baking it himself.
    And you don't realize that redistributing the power in socialism keeps those individuals in check wheras capitalism upflits them straight to the top where they can do most harm.

    It's precisely the point of democracy. But you can't see past the perversion of our ideals that was communism and can't remember or don't want to know that socialists were the first ones up against the wall when Stalin came here and yet you keep equating us with them. Maybe I should start equating you with Hitler? Afterall, fascism is the end point evolution of capitalism where few individuals control entire economy.
    Last edited by Venec; February 19 2021 at 07:55:21 PM.

  2. #17382
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system.

    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.

    For your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?

    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.

    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.

    these two statements are directly contradictory, you are calling for such a socio-political system to show it's able to defend itself, while also arguing that the usage of violence to establish it automatically invalidate it.
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.

    does the execution of the gentry in order to force trough land reform by French peasants somehow mean that everything that followed is tainted ?
    You tell me. I didn't see any executed gentry in your cartoon. If it was something you should be proud of, something righteous, I think it's be in there.

    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.

    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.

    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.

    social change, be it trough armed revolution or otherwise, are inherently disruptive and probably violent affairs especially when it means tearing down the existing political power structures wholescale. in such a situation, people are going to die. if you balk at that fine, but consider the cost of not doing so.
    consider the people of texas and oregon freezing to death, so that people like Cruz could pay even less in taxes, the millions that have died the last 50 years because your "good friends" the house of Saud have exported their domestic religious problems to the rest of the world. consider the numerous injustices borne directly as a result of western imperialism and capitalism, there are libraries of tomes detailing these atrocities if you cared to actually read them.

    but you do not engage with any of that, you do not want to engage with any of that, instead you are demanding impossible standards, and if those are suddenly met, by say the Zaptistas, you simply shuffle the goalposts out of reach, you have done that in this very thread. all in the name of ignoring the whole thing so it does not impede upon your happy little bubble where everything is okay.
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".

    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.

    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.

    except you just had a attempted fascist takeover.
    We did. An rather pathetic one by any historical standard, and one that was swiftly and easily defeated.

    But one that remains a risk, and as I say to Erich, and now to you, killing them all via Erich's death camps or your own violent revolution isn't the solution.

    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    Thank you for typing all that, so I don't have to. Noone will read it, Isyel is going to quote one sentence and make fun of you out of context, followed by Varcaus calling us Nazis.

  3. #17383
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    16,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by evil edna View Post
    This boring shit is making me actually start to prefer the idea of anarcho-capitalism
    Some of my real life self proclaimed marxist-communist friends (think Keckers on steroids) are actually excited there's a chance we're gonna get cyberpunk in our lifetime. I mean cognitive dissonance among far right is well established fact, but this? I lack the words how to even describe it.
    Call them morons and stop listening to them, if that's the actual case. Cause I'm having a hard time believing someone is unironically longing for that, esp if they're serious about the marxist worldview.
    I don't, I explain how they are wrong in a slightly trollish manner, as I do here with you guys. Results are the same.
    Then it's as effective as capitalism is with providing me with a good quality of life \_(ツ)_/
    Have you considered it's not capitalism that might be at fault here?
    I have and I've came to the conclusion that is full of shit. Why? Because it's a generational experience, like for example half of people my age still live with their parents and half of Poles earn less than the amount that lets them be independent.
    I'm sorry, you're not happy with increasing taxation and wealth redistribution along the lines of 500+ etc that's happening nowadays in Poland? Free healthcare being provided? Or university education being free? By all objective measures you're living in the paradise you want. So how's that working out for you?

    Trolling aside, I don't know what it would take for you to realize the problem at fault here is not capitalism, communism or any other ism. It's idiots in charge and how the current perversion of the system fosters pathological behaviour. Hate to break it you, but you would be as much of a self proclaimed failure under communism and especially under anarchism. Because with wide adoption of the latter it's not about sharing the bread in your commune but who has the biggest stick to come to your commune to get the bread you baked instead of baking it himself.
    And you don't realize that redistributing the power in socialism keeps those individuals in check wheras capitalism upflits them straight to the top where they can do most harm.

    It's precisely the point of democracy. But you can't see past the perversion of our ideals that was communism and can't remember or don't want to know that socialists were the first ones up against the wall when Stalin came here and yet you keep equating us with them. Maybe I should start equating you with Hitler? Afterall, fascism is the end point evolution of capitalism where few individuals control entire economy.
    The problem is authoritarianism, in both those cases.
    meh

  4. #17384
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    22,816
    And capital accumulation is the easiest path to authority.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  5. #17385
    Varcaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 15, 2011
    Posts
    21,236
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system.

    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.

    For your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?

    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.

    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.

    these two statements are directly contradictory, you are calling for such a socio-political system to show it's able to defend itself, while also arguing that the usage of violence to establish it automatically invalidate it.
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.

    does the execution of the gentry in order to force trough land reform by French peasants somehow mean that everything that followed is tainted ?
    You tell me. I didn't see any executed gentry in your cartoon. If it was something you should be proud of, something righteous, I think it's be in there.

    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.

    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.

    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.

    social change, be it trough armed revolution or otherwise, are inherently disruptive and probably violent affairs especially when it means tearing down the existing political power structures wholescale. in such a situation, people are going to die. if you balk at that fine, but consider the cost of not doing so.
    consider the people of texas and oregon freezing to death, so that people like Cruz could pay even less in taxes, the millions that have died the last 50 years because your "good friends" the house of Saud have exported their domestic religious problems to the rest of the world. consider the numerous injustices borne directly as a result of western imperialism and capitalism, there are libraries of tomes detailing these atrocities if you cared to actually read them.

    but you do not engage with any of that, you do not want to engage with any of that, instead you are demanding impossible standards, and if those are suddenly met, by say the Zaptistas, you simply shuffle the goalposts out of reach, you have done that in this very thread. all in the name of ignoring the whole thing so it does not impede upon your happy little bubble where everything is okay.
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".

    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.

    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.

    except you just had a attempted fascist takeover.
    We did. An rather pathetic one by any historical standard, and one that was swiftly and easily defeated.

    But one that remains a risk, and as I say to Erich, and now to you, killing them all via Erich's death camps or your own violent revolution isn't the solution.

    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    Thank you for typing all that, so I don't have to. Noone will read it, Isyel is going to quote one sentence and make fun of you out of context, followed by Varcaus calling us Nazis.
    So much for calling things what they are then?

  6. #17386
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    You can't have stable democracy without democracy in the workplace, because once you allow individuals gain so much wealth that they can just exploit human vices and just bypass the democracy, making the democracy a sham.

    Which is what is happening now and which socialism systematically prevents.

  7. #17387
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    16,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    You can't have stable democracy without democracy in the workplace, because once you allow individuals gain so much wealth that they can just exploit human vices and just bypass the democracy, making the democracy a sham.

    Which is what is happening now and which socialism systematically prevents.
    lol.
    meh

  8. #17388
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by evil edna View Post
    This boring shit is making me actually start to prefer the idea of anarcho-capitalism
    Some of my real life self proclaimed marxist-communist friends (think Keckers on steroids) are actually excited there's a chance we're gonna get cyberpunk in our lifetime. I mean cognitive dissonance among far right is well established fact, but this? I lack the words how to even describe it.
    Call them morons and stop listening to them, if that's the actual case. Cause I'm having a hard time believing someone is unironically longing for that, esp if they're serious about the marxist worldview.
    I don't, I explain how they are wrong in a slightly trollish manner, as I do here with you guys. Results are the same.
    Then it's as effective as capitalism is with providing me with a good quality of life \_(ツ)_/
    Have you considered it's not capitalism that might be at fault here?
    I have and I've came to the conclusion that is full of shit. Why? Because it's a generational experience, like for example half of people my age still live with their parents and half of Poles earn less than the amount that lets them be independent.
    I'm sorry, you're not happy with increasing taxation and wealth redistribution along the lines of 500+ etc that's happening nowadays in Poland? Free healthcare being provided? Or university education being free? By all objective measures you're living in the paradise you want. So how's that working out for you?

    Trolling aside, I don't know what it would take for you to realize the problem at fault here is not capitalism, communism or any other ism. It's idiots in charge and how the current perversion of the system fosters pathological behaviour. Hate to break it you, but you would be as much of a self proclaimed failure under communism and especially under anarchism. Because with wide adoption of the latter it's not about sharing the bread in your commune but who has the biggest stick to come to your commune to get the bread you baked instead of baking it himself.
    And you don't realize that redistributing the power in socialism keeps those individuals in check wheras capitalism upflits them straight to the top where they can do most harm.

    It's precisely the point of democracy. But you can't see past the perversion of our ideals that was communism and can't remember or don't want to know that socialists were the first ones up against the wall when Stalin came here and yet you keep equating us with them. Maybe I should start equating you with Hitler? Afterall, fascism is the end point evolution of capitalism where few individuals control entire economy.
    Where to even start? I'll start at the end. No fascism is not the end point of evolution of capitalism, and in your example you clearly mean nazism. Nazism is the bastard child of marxist economic thought with plain old Bismarckian nationalism.

  9. #17389
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Varcaus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system.

    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.

    For your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?

    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.

    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.

    these two statements are directly contradictory, you are calling for such a socio-political system to show it's able to defend itself, while also arguing that the usage of violence to establish it automatically invalidate it.
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.

    does the execution of the gentry in order to force trough land reform by French peasants somehow mean that everything that followed is tainted ?
    You tell me. I didn't see any executed gentry in your cartoon. If it was something you should be proud of, something righteous, I think it's be in there.

    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.

    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.

    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.

    social change, be it trough armed revolution or otherwise, are inherently disruptive and probably violent affairs especially when it means tearing down the existing political power structures wholescale. in such a situation, people are going to die. if you balk at that fine, but consider the cost of not doing so.
    consider the people of texas and oregon freezing to death, so that people like Cruz could pay even less in taxes, the millions that have died the last 50 years because your "good friends" the house of Saud have exported their domestic religious problems to the rest of the world. consider the numerous injustices borne directly as a result of western imperialism and capitalism, there are libraries of tomes detailing these atrocities if you cared to actually read them.

    but you do not engage with any of that, you do not want to engage with any of that, instead you are demanding impossible standards, and if those are suddenly met, by say the Zaptistas, you simply shuffle the goalposts out of reach, you have done that in this very thread. all in the name of ignoring the whole thing so it does not impede upon your happy little bubble where everything is okay.
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".

    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.

    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.

    except you just had a attempted fascist takeover.
    We did. An rather pathetic one by any historical standard, and one that was swiftly and easily defeated.

    But one that remains a risk, and as I say to Erich, and now to you, killing them all via Erich's death camps or your own violent revolution isn't the solution.

    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    Thank you for typing all that, so I don't have to. Noone will read it, Isyel is going to quote one sentence and make fun of you out of context, followed by Varcaus calling us Nazis.
    So much for calling things what they are then?
    Are you really that dense?

  10. #17390
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    Prove it to me.

    Without calling names, describe how things worked under nazies and how things should work under marxist thought.

  11. #17391
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Prove it to me.

    Without calling names, describe how things worked under nazies and how things should work under marxist thought.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

  12. #17392
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Prove it to me.

    Without calling names, describe how things worked under nazies and how things should work under marxist thought.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
    No, I'm asking you to do it. In simple terms, don't write an essay.

  13. #17393
    Varcaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 15, 2011
    Posts
    21,236
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Varcaus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system.

    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.

    For your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?

    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.

    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.

    these two statements are directly contradictory, you are calling for such a socio-political system to show it's able to defend itself, while also arguing that the usage of violence to establish it automatically invalidate it.
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.

    does the execution of the gentry in order to force trough land reform by French peasants somehow mean that everything that followed is tainted ?
    You tell me. I didn't see any executed gentry in your cartoon. If it was something you should be proud of, something righteous, I think it's be in there.

    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.

    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.

    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.

    social change, be it trough armed revolution or otherwise, are inherently disruptive and probably violent affairs especially when it means tearing down the existing political power structures wholescale. in such a situation, people are going to die. if you balk at that fine, but consider the cost of not doing so.
    consider the people of texas and oregon freezing to death, so that people like Cruz could pay even less in taxes, the millions that have died the last 50 years because your "good friends" the house of Saud have exported their domestic religious problems to the rest of the world. consider the numerous injustices borne directly as a result of western imperialism and capitalism, there are libraries of tomes detailing these atrocities if you cared to actually read them.

    but you do not engage with any of that, you do not want to engage with any of that, instead you are demanding impossible standards, and if those are suddenly met, by say the Zaptistas, you simply shuffle the goalposts out of reach, you have done that in this very thread. all in the name of ignoring the whole thing so it does not impede upon your happy little bubble where everything is okay.
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".

    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.

    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.

    except you just had a attempted fascist takeover.
    We did. An rather pathetic one by any historical standard, and one that was swiftly and easily defeated.

    But one that remains a risk, and as I say to Erich, and now to you, killing them all via Erich's death camps or your own violent revolution isn't the solution.

    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    Thank you for typing all that, so I don't have to. Noone will read it, Isyel is going to quote one sentence and make fun of you out of context, followed by Varcaus calling us Nazis.
    So much for calling things what they are then?
    Are you really that dense?

  14. #17394
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Prove it to me.

    Without calling names, describe how things worked under nazies and how things should work under marxist thought.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
    Also in before,because lol it's not 180 characters, 20s youtube vid with furries or some disturbed people, six panel comic strip or infographic with all 6 full sentences in it.
    Last edited by rufuske; February 19 2021 at 08:22:16 PM. Reason: too late

  15. #17395
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Varcaus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Varcaus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system.

    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.

    For your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?

    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.

    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.

    these two statements are directly contradictory, you are calling for such a socio-political system to show it's able to defend itself, while also arguing that the usage of violence to establish it automatically invalidate it.
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.

    does the execution of the gentry in order to force trough land reform by French peasants somehow mean that everything that followed is tainted ?
    You tell me. I didn't see any executed gentry in your cartoon. If it was something you should be proud of, something righteous, I think it's be in there.

    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.

    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.

    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.

    social change, be it trough armed revolution or otherwise, are inherently disruptive and probably violent affairs especially when it means tearing down the existing political power structures wholescale. in such a situation, people are going to die. if you balk at that fine, but consider the cost of not doing so.
    consider the people of texas and oregon freezing to death, so that people like Cruz could pay even less in taxes, the millions that have died the last 50 years because your "good friends" the house of Saud have exported their domestic religious problems to the rest of the world. consider the numerous injustices borne directly as a result of western imperialism and capitalism, there are libraries of tomes detailing these atrocities if you cared to actually read them.

    but you do not engage with any of that, you do not want to engage with any of that, instead you are demanding impossible standards, and if those are suddenly met, by say the Zaptistas, you simply shuffle the goalposts out of reach, you have done that in this very thread. all in the name of ignoring the whole thing so it does not impede upon your happy little bubble where everything is okay.
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".

    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.

    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.

    except you just had a attempted fascist takeover.
    We did. An rather pathetic one by any historical standard, and one that was swiftly and easily defeated.

    But one that remains a risk, and as I say to Erich, and now to you, killing them all via Erich's death camps or your own violent revolution isn't the solution.

    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    Thank you for typing all that, so I don't have to. Noone will read it, Isyel is going to quote one sentence and make fun of you out of context, followed by Varcaus calling us Nazis.
    So much for calling things what they are then?
    Are you really that dense?
    I appreciate you meaningful input to the discussion at hand.

  16. #17396
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Prove it to me.

    Without calling names, describe how things worked under nazies and how things should work under marxist thought.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
    Also in before,because lol it's not 180 characters, 20s youtube vid with furries or some disturbed people, six panel comic strip or infographic with all 6 full sentences in it.
    Just write 3 or 4 sentences describing how nazies dealt with, for example, company ownership, trade unions, welfare or worker rights vs how you think democractic socialists want to do it.

  17. #17397
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    15,110
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Foiritain View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    If you value leisure time this current economic system is probably the worst in the west for at least a millennium.
    WAT
    Obviously it depends on how far down the income distribution you are, but it certainly holds for the independent working poor who are often the most indoctrinated into praising capitalism.

    Do you really think the millions of hours worked in bullshit jobs have any real social value? That's all stolen leisure time.
    wat. So people who used to work in the field 13 hours a day 6-7 days a week had more leisure time as opposed to people now who clock in 8 hours 5 days a week? the logic being that because the work they did had social value it therefor counts as leisure time?
    averaged out over a year, a medieval peasant worked about 200 hours less per year than we to now.

    a day's work was considered about 4 hours in many places, especially in relation to feudal obligations.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    by this reasoning, democracy is a massive failure due to the way the French revolution played out.
    There are literal libraries written critical of the actions of the French Revolution Liare, rightfully so. That does not alone make Democracy a failed system..
    yet, you presented a line of reasoning that makes even any sort of attempt at a social/anarcist system objectionable on the basis of subset of events in Catalonia. you didn't consider other examples, you where given one that has good, easily accessible English documentation for you to read and simply ran with it. you didn't materially critique it, you literately just dug up a single factoid, stripped it of it's entire context and declared the entire project "bad".

    the hypocrisy you're putting on display right now is astounding Alistair.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    With that said, I have a number of far more recent examples I would cite to show the weaknesses and problem of Democracy, at least as practiced in the United States. I don't have any need to go back 100 years to show that.

    And I'd add, the French Revolution overthrew a Monarchy, a Tyrant.
    Capitalism is explicitly the tyranny of the workplace and the implicit enslavement of labour trough making every necessity predicated on accessing money and work the only source of said money.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    or your system of Anarcho-Syndicalism to be the system in power, it would either need to forcefully overthrow a duly elected western representative Democracy or convince the majority within that Democracy to vote for that economic system.

    How well do you think you're doing convincing doubters such a vote would be in their best interests?
    western "democracy" overthrows itself, it's quite far along the road in the US at this point, but the rest of us isn't far behind.

    Fascism is the methods of colonialism brought home as decay in liberal democracy sets in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Let me be honest, I don't think you care about convincing people. I think you relish, at least conceptually, the idea of violent revolution and all that comes with that.
    i do not care about convincing you, because your only response is the equivalent of going "LALA I CANT HEAR YOU GOBBUNISM BAD!" every time anything is brought up.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    you can go over to the far right and join the monarchists and Phrenologists.
    You think I'm on the far right anyway, You think almost everyone is on the far right. And as such you seem to see little difference between the rest of us, we're all fascists to you.
    here we are again, first you strip my argument of its context, then you project whatever boogeyman lives in your head onto it and reach the conclusion you desire.

    i have never levered such accusation at you, i have accused you rightfully of being tone-deaf and blind to what's happening and likely to actively collaborate because that's basically what centrists do, but that is not what you're accusing me of here. instead you're constructing a strawman that somehow believes everything to the right of stalin is a child eating fascist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Defending yourself and your territory in War from an opposing army is not the same as rounding up the formerly wealthy resident and/or average unarmed civilians suspected of not being anarchists, and mass murdering them.
    it's a good thing that's not actually what happened, but understanding that would require you to grasp the deeper context.

    where there "anarchist death squad" going about murdering especially catholic priests ? yes there was, but the context of why are also important. the Catholic church was a active participant in support of the fascists. civil wars are, by their very nature, ugly affairs. your implied assumption that somehow, trough the magic of democratic friendship, this doesn't happen in other cases. is ahistorical, or simply to serve whatever narrative you're constructing in your head.

    literately every revolution has purges, it's regrettable, but functionally unavoidable because, by the point you're taking up arms against your neighbour, it's a forgone conclusion. if you argue that the presence of such "taints" the overall revolution, then every revolution is irrevocably tainted.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    i am going to let you into a little secret Alistair, you do not seem to grasp this simple, fundamental truth. politics is the application of violence
    Ah, the Clausewitz obverse.

    Interestingly, this is the very same rhetoric the far-right often uses, that even mild policy they disagree with is really abhorrent violence against them by the State.

    More, I believe that mankind should be moving away from violence being our solutions over ideological differences.
    yet you do nothing to actually achieve this end, your entire political belief system, that is essentially "moderate democrat" consists of supporting candidates who are explicitly invested in ensuring the conditions that created the existing mess in the first place is maintained, and that any attempt at pushing against that is kept out of the mainstream of politics. it can be described succinctly as "more of the same, with minor tweaks".


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Ultimately, philosophies that believe in violence as the prime methodology to change system believes that it is ok to impose their own beliefs on everyone without obtaining consent from them in any way. I don't agree with such mindsets. The consent of the governed is a requisite for legitimacy in my book.
    i never consented to having my surplus labour stolen. i am pretty sure a whole lot of people in Texas never consented to freezing to death and so on.

    arguing government by consent requires that system of obtaining consent to actually be meaningful and representative, the consensus, as can be seen by the rapid increase in political polarization, the rise of fascism, is that people do not consider it as such anymore, it never really was in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    when you vote for Joe Biden you explicitly endorse the act of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia so that they can continue bombing school busses, hospitals and weddings. you are complicit in this action trough your endorsement of this flagrant violation of international law. it doesn't matter that you didn't have a choice in the matter, both candidates wanted to continue this practice, you actively endorsed it by participating in the system.
    When I vote for Biden, I am making a choice between him and Trump, and choosing the lesser in my view of the two evils. The only third option is not to vote.

    Unless you think like a Trumpist, and believe the violent overthrow of the U.S. to impose your own system is a legitimate third option.
    and this means you somehow do not have a obligation for the actions that result ? you are literately restating a point i refuted in the quote.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    I do not believe in physical violence as the tool to solve political or economic philosophical differences. It really is that simple for me. I find it abhorrent. Mankind needs to move beyond the simple paradigm of "Might makes Right".
    yet you explicitly endorse and support a political system that bases its entire legitimacy on this, while actively deriding people who genuinely want to implement a political system that achieves precisely this goal. because "people might get hurt!" while thousands, if not tens of thousands are fed into the machine you explicitly support and endorse every year.

    so, are you a fool, or a liar ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    I believe in educating people, and convincing those who disagree peacefully. Without bloodshed or revolution.
    no, what you support is disagreement within the scope of "acceptable politics", once things move beyond that, you will hold your nose and accept it as "just and necessary" as active oppression is carried out by men in uniform. your posting w.r.t. the george floyd protests illustrate that very well indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    I see you as no different that any other bloodthirsty revolutionary. You think your ideas are the only right ideas, and you'd happily kill anyone who disagrees to see your personal vision implanted if they get in your way or oppose you in any form.
    do you really have no other argument than "both sides are the same!" and "you're a dangerous violent revolutionary!" ?

    to paraphrase a Spanish play from the era. "do you know the difference between a nazi, and a communist ? the former is going to kill you because of what you are, and nothing you do can change that. you cannot stop being gay, jewish or gypsy. the latter is going to kill you because of what you do, and you can simply stop doing that, if you stop selling weapons to the nazis and close your factory. they will stop trying to kill you."

    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Lets be honest too, the 50 Anarcho-Syndacalists in the U.S. have little chance at beating 75 million Trumpists in armed conflict anyway.
    do you even know what a an-syn is ? because as a movement, that's been functionally dead since the 50's and you have this weird fixation on it.
    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.

  18. #17398
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    8,410
    Also, RE: Alistair, I don't hate anyone here or even dislike. I think, despite everything, we're a cool bunch that has stick together for the past 10 years or so. The shitters that got on my nerves are long gone from this forum. The debate can get heated sometimes, I do enjoy sometimes provoking people, esp when I'm annoyed with repeating the same arguments over and over but in the end I treat these discussions more like way to kill time than and get some practice with real life arguments, because this is one of the few places left on the web that I know of you can get good argument out of with smart people involved (not like I'm an eagle myself).

  19. #17399
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    18,136
    It's been a busy couple of weeks for Malcy. Can someone update me on who we're currently putting up against the wall?
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    And btw, you're such a fucking asshole it genuinely amazes me on a regular basis how you manage to function.

  20. #17400
    Joshua Foiritain's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    4,356
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    It's been a busy couple of weeks for Malcy. Can someone update me on who we're currently putting up against the wall?
    The discussion is a circle so the same as when you last looked.



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
  •