|
At this point someone needs to step up as The Undertaker because jrod is motionless and ready to be placed six feet under.
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Undead Hippo posted:Getting people to open up and talk about themselves is cult recruitment 101 stuff. (As well as standard for door to door sales, which shares a lot of the same characteristics). When arraigned against a group of people hostile to your ideology, first humanize yourself, then encourage them to open up, then try and crowbar your beliefs/product into the mix with slight personalization. "Oh yeah, I was lonely too, but then I found the light" This post is violating the non-aggression posting principle, you should show more respect for posting rights. Just because you do not currently own any private messages does not mean you should show jealousy towards your fellow posters.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
My hot take is that anarcho-capitalism/libertarianism as proposed by j-ro here would evolve into anarcho-communism within weeks if not days.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:Oh come now. Individual ownership of everything? All of society being reduced to compacts between people? The starting scenario is only distinguishable from feudalism if you squint. I didn't say those weeks or days would proceed smoothly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:If you say "arguably", you'd better have data to support your bias. Please provide your data. No, arguments do not necessarily require empirical evidence. An argument can rely on logic alone. If one wants to prove their argument had existential validity they must provide empirical evidence but the statement you're criticising is discussing the concept of government and non-government organisations. If you want proof of corruption in non-governmental organisations and/or governments there are ways of finding out that don't necessarily require you to accuse someone of bias, especially if you yourself cannot provide justification of your accusation of bias. After all, if they are guilty of throwing unsubstantiated claims then you should at least not do the same thing in calling them out.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:I'll also repeat a point I made earlier, Anarcho-communism is a government of the community, though. It's merely against the concept of a state. It also doesn't assume that everyone is inherently good. The basic way of considering it is that in an anarchic commune, there is no formal law, and instead is a principle of "don't be a dick" - everyone works together as best they can for the good of the group. If someone is injured or disabled, they don't have to work. If someone can work but chooses not to, they are violating the dick principle, and will be given less resources (i.e. food or booze). Decisions on dickishness are given by judgement of the community as a whole, and follows the spirit of the 'law' instead of tying itself up in the minutae of a written law. This isn't the whole of it but acting like communism assumes universal benevolence is disingenuous and a straw man.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 12:53
|
|
|
And the whole community enjoys a good lynch mob if someone decides to be a little murdery.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:The best solution we currently have is to align yourself with the party that is most in line with your personal beliefs and work with it to move towards the changes you want to see, which can be done through a number of ways like speaking directly to the congressmen from your district and to work more closely with state and local elections where your efforts can have a bigger impact. Just to say, though, what you describe is not a democracy in any way. The method you describe is a plaster over the wound of a non-democratic state. When your political choice is to attempt to democratically alter one of two ruling parties, you have to question the validity of the process. Not to defend capitalist libertarianism or not engaging with the political process, but America's concept of 'democracy' is somehow the least democratic system I've seen in a country with legitimate voting.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
cheese posted:Wrong, we live in a world of abundance where we have the technology to meet the reasonable needs of every human. We do not because humans are greedy creatures. Thanks for trying though. You know, when I first read the OP, this was the line I wanted to rant about. I decided to catch up on the thread but it still sticks out as the most bullshit part of the whole argument. Scarcity is a concept but not a proven fact and frankly the continued survival of humanity plus our consistent food surplus in 'first-world' nations suggests that the concept of scarcity peddled by capitalist libertarians is either a dishonest lie or a mistaken assumption.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Wait, how is democratically changing society not democracy? But you're not 'democratically changing society' as your country is a first-past-the-post system that effectively limits you to two parties. Before continuing, it's worth mentioning I'm British, and we have the same problem. Of those two parties, there's observeable trends towards polarisation (apologies for Time but this was the non-bullshit one I could find fastest). In such a system, you can perhaps shape a narrative within your own party, but that party has less than 50% of (vote-eligible) American support (according to most American voting public analyses). If a minority of the population can choose policy, it's not a democracy. It may well be the best choice - see a technocracy or meritocracy, but that doesn't mean it's a democracy. And frankly, American universities have admitted that the US is an oligarchy. Your personal politics are less important than that dude with more than just a few Benjamins to flash.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
cheese posted:We have scarcity in that we cannot all have a nuclear powered aircraft carrier, but the idea that basic housing, reliable and healthy food, clean drinking water, preventative medical care, universal education, etc for all people are somehow beyond us because "scarcity" is hilarious. As I typed that sentence, dozens of cars were built by factories full of robots. Wholeheartedly agree!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:This should have happened during the Cold War, not decades later. Pretty much. I'd say that the polarisation has been happening, but was at a slower pace until the things he mentions allowed an acceleration of the process. I'd say the end of the Cold War certainly added another speed boost, and I suppose that the baby boomers coming of age in the Reagan Era led to a generation who didn't have pre-New Deal knowledge of the world, and so were more open to corporatist / neo-liberal theory as the solution to their ills as the previous problems of deep poverty no longer affected a much larger middle class. Of course, this is me spitballin' as I am not a US historian so feel free to correct me if I'm off here.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Just because a narrative explanation is plausible doesn't mean it's true, or even likely to be true. We can come up with an endless series of plausible reasons that led to the hyperpartisan split. What matters is having some sort of evidence for your causal pathway. Well yes, I never said it was empirical fact. I'd love to investigate and produce empirical evidence to prove or disprove my theory, but I have Very Important shitposts to make.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
If the non-aggression principle applied to non-whites then Murray Rothbard is wrong. Are you trying to tell me Rothbard is wrong? 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Caros posted:That said the atlas shrugged on is on my plate. It is a monster of a book and I'm still debating just how much depth I want to go into. Too much and I worry that I'll just end up posting updates that are just "gently caress you ayn rand" over and over again by the middle of the book. An LP idea: playing Bioshock to perfectly match the length of an audiobook of Atlas Shrugged, with a constant scream track by the player.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Being fair at no point has HorseLord brought up Stalin in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
Can't get taxed if you don't have income! Checkmate, statists.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
From jrode to jackboots: it appears talk of anarcho-capitalism turns to talk of Nazi fascism. The invisible hand of the free posting market has spoken: ancappitude leads to Nazism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Speaking of which, I'm kind of surprised that the House Freedom Caucus chose the Tortilla Coast instead of a beer hall. Mate, the HFC couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. They'll let some Mexicans do the planning for them while complaining about how awful Mexicans are as people.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
I suppose I can pop now he's given names - after the USA entered the WW2 effort proper, they bombed several Dutch cities. A report in 2005 (for Nijmegen at least) came to the conclusion that the USA had assumed it was a German city (in this case Kleve), but that it was a simple mistake. Which obviously rubs people the wrong way since no apology was forthcoming for what was a mistake. But then hey, the Red Army watched the Warsaw Uprising get brutally crushed with amusement from their binoculars.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
In summary, Hitler was right. Sieg Heil!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:*literally make children do a fascist oath in school every day * Not to argue against this but it blew my mind when I realised the Pledge of Allegiance was written by an openly socialist dude.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
zeal posted:HorseLord is right regarding America. his WWII comments are needlessly hyperbolic, but he's not wrong that the United States is a nation of cowards founded on genocide Sounds like someone needs a little lesson in what happens to people who ain't patriotic enough. We'll cure you with a medicine 'sans frontier' if you know what I mean. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
The American Constitution was a nice idea in theory that ended up a quagmire in practice. Like most constitutions actually. We (Britain) bypassed this problem by never writing the loving thing down so it was a quagmire from the start. Oh wait that made the problem worse.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
zeal posted:only if you can get through the militaires sans frontier guarding my bunker-fortress, statist swine I have an espionage rating of D motherfucker you'd be best be scared!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:i like how the yank constitution has basically no human rights provisions but people say poo poo like this Mate, a Stalinist is probably not the best person to rail against a state not guaranteeing human rights. Even if you agree with him, tankies can't believe in human rights and suppressing dissent.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
The invisible hand of jrod is turning us against each other. Truly he is the puppetmaster... but is it violating the non-aggression principle to make us do this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
zeal posted:modern, dedicated stalinists and trotskyists have always struck me as odd. it was a succession dispute in an empire most of them didn't even live in, that no longer exists, whose contenders left no dynasties to continue supporting. i mean, come on guy. stalin and trotsky are both a little too dead to care which one you'd have preferred get the big chair after Lenin Be fair, though, one of them ruled the USSR and the other one got mined for thought-ore. There's nothing wrong with imagining a scenario where Lenin's last letter was passed on and Stalin didn't ascend to rule. It'd be purely academic of course... unless, wait, do you have a time machine? I'll pay you in doughnuts!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Haha holy poo poo that owns.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Because there are no other reasons why Stalin might not be considered praiseworthy. Stalin is a bourgeois lie to further the imperialism of the fascist American state.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Really the tiny bit of popularity that libertarianism enjoys today is actually Stalin's fault; if he hadn't done such a terrible loving job as a leader of the world's premier communist nation then communism and socialism wouldn't be such huge boogeyman ideologies today among lower and middle-class people in capitalist nations. To be honest Stalin could have done nothing wrong and he'd still be evil because 'COMMUNISM' - that blood is on his hands or Mao's or any left-leaning leader is irrelevant. Blood is on the hands of all of the 'developed' nations in equal measure. It's just easier to big up the horrors of the Soviet bloc and its allies because it suits the goals of capitalist governments.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Big talk from someone whose country has no actual constitution and hence no human rights provisions possible in one. We do actually have a Human Rights Act now, but the Tories are trying to repeal it because it strikes down their right to discriminate against minorities. Hahahahah ah hah ha 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:He'd be labeled as evil because 'COMMUNISM' but the propaganda machine wouldn't be nearly as effective without all of that blood. But the West had done this, for centuries. Like, do you think history was a giant book of peace and love amongst mankind until Lenin/Stalin slid in and hosed things up? I don't even defend Stalin and his legacy but this is ridiculous. QuarkJets posted:and you don't wind up causing huge famines loving Stalin, not developing weather controls. I could understand blaming Mao's Great Leap Forward for the extent of the deaths of the Great Famine, but the Holodomor's terribleness was his ethnic targeting of the victims, not his decision one day to run into the fields and kick their crops to death for a giggle. QuarkJets posted:then more countries might have looked at communism as a viable solution, which would have further legitimized all socialist and communism-lite ideologies. You think Stalin being a good little kid would undo decades of oligarchs owning the media of the capitalist countries? Remember when America bought out the first Italian elections so the communists couldn't get in? Remember when America banned left-wing Filipino politicians from voting until after a bullshit trade deal was signed that gave away the Philippines' economy to American corporations? Communism could have been done perfectly and America would have done this poo poo. QuarkJets posted:Basically what I'm saying is that Stalin failed communism by being poo poo, thereby greatly enhancing the effectiveness of the US propaganda machine I agree with the second half, but Stalin is not the reason communism has lost. He is the reason the Russian Federation is such a pain in America's arse right now, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:did stalin replace them with cardboard cutouts to make places look fuller Now I'm just imagining Stalin running around Mother
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Why Should We Care About Property Rights? - the thread for Stalin's legacy apparently
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:All the survivors had 6 babies. bloody welfare queens
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:and things like the Holodomor, which no Stalinist is ever, ever going to blame the Soviet government for. My view of both the Holodomor and Mao's Great Famine is that the famine itself was a tragedy of circumstance but that the awfulness of them is the ethnic targeting of the victims (Ukrainians in one, the Tibetans and North Chinese in the other).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:don't feed into Ukrainian nationalist myth by pretending they were the only people to suffer in that famine. I'm happy to be corrected - who else was affected?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:No, that's not what I'm saying at all you strawmanning bastard. Maybe go back and read my posts again? More effective, yes. But it was going to win anyway because by the time people became aware of Stalin's legacy it was long after America has started the anti-Communist doctrine. Gramsci predicted the hegemony and it was then practised. And a straw man is not necessarily a fallacy, especially since there's a valid case that I'm using reductio ad absurdum. QuarkJets posted:Another strawman argument? I'm not actually going down the road of suggesting that Holodomor was intentional genocide, like you seem to be implying. And trying to attribute the entirety of the 1932 Soviet famine to weather is simply laughable Historians mention natural disasters. What was the natural disaster that Stalin caused. Did that motherfucker summon a volcano? I hate4 it when Stalin does that. QuarkJets posted:Oh god another strawman argument, jesus christ. I never said that Stalin should be "a good little kid" or whatever the gently caress you're trying to imply with that loaded statement. Remember how I said that the capitalist propaganda machine would be in full swing regardless but that its effectiveness was enhanced by Stalin's actions? Of course you don't, because you apparently didn't actually read my post. Oh I read it, but it's horseshit. You specifically ignore the two instances PRIOR to the revelations of Stalin's crimes I mentioned. Italy and the Philippines. Italy was 1947, Philippines was 1946. Kruschev's secret speech was 1956. Tell me about this time machine that the CIA used to suppress democracy with ease because of Stalin's crimes. QuarkJets posted:Not the sole reason, no. My argument is that he played a significant impeding role. My argument is that's bullshit if you look at US intervention in the world in the 20th century.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
HorseLord posted:Tesseraction you're a terrible Khrushchevite Hey I keep askin' for your books/sources on Stalin so that's on you, buddy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 21:03
|
|