RTCW - The Harsh State Of Things

[Killer Mike]

Do you have a version with a z axis?

We could argue about the chart too. Just posting a chart doesn't automatically make you correct about the subject.

If you read the chart...it just shows that you break up the economic and social factors. You saying that libertarian and communism views are on opposite spectra was just incorrect.

"Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist."



I think we should just leave it at that and keep personal political aspects out of it. There's no need to bring in quotes from Ghandi or spread other personal views on politics. It is against the rules ya' know!

[HuGgY BiZzLe]

Yes you are correct, based on your chart. But I don't agree that the chart is the authority on the definitions. At any rate, a pure libertarian can never be a pure communist.

[HuGgY BiZzLe]

I think we should just leave it at that and keep personal political aspects out of it. There's no need to bring in quotes from Ghandi or spread other personal views on politics. It is against the rules ya' know!

Oh calm down. Only 5 people post on this forum anymore, and Savage seems like a reasonable person. I doubt it would turn into a flame war.

[SavageParrot]

Oh calm down. Only 5 people post on this forum anymore, and Savage seems like a reasonable person. I doubt it would turn into a flame war.

Yes speaking of prohibition that doesn't work, this forum was pretty lively and entertaining and then they banned politics and it's ended up a repository for whines...

[nigel]

Plenty of people call themselves Left libertarians, anarcho-communists but logically the ideologies of Classical Liberalism and Marxism clash in a fundamental way and you get a confused bunch of people who think that property ownership constitutes an oppressive power structure. To solve this they propose a power structure to prevent privatized ownership of anything.

Bottom line is that they need a way to enforce collectivism, and that is through force of some sort, something which is strongly opposed in classical liberalism/anarcho-capitalism. Call yourself libertarian communist, but it's just a misleading term which poorly describes your philosophy.

[SavageParrot]

You are assume that in order to believe something, what you believe has to be realistically achievable, that it's not a valid point of view unless there's a roadmap to make it happen. Sure if you had to try and put it into action it would be impossible to stay true to both aspects but then if anyone ever tried to force other people into it I would assume they have missed the point anyway.

I think that both capitalism and government are detrimental to the human experience as a whole. I think that one quarter of the world uses half to two thirds of the resources while the rest live in poverty and suffer as a direct result and what I see on a day to day level is that government exists by and large to propagate that, through the milieux little wars, sanctions and territorial pissing contests they get into to protect their own unreasonably large slice of the pie.

[nigel]

You are assume that in order to believe something, what you believe has to be realistically achievable, that it's not a valid point of view unless there's a roadmap to make it happen. Sure if you had to try and put it into action it would be impossible to stay true to both aspects but then if anyone ever tried to force other people into it I would assume they have missed the point anyway.

I think that both capitalism and government are detrimental to the human experience as a whole. I think that one quarter of the world uses half to two thirds of the resources while the rest live in poverty and suffer as a direct result and what I see on a day to day level is that government exists by and large to propagate that, through the milieux little wars, sanctions and territorial pissing contests they get into to protect their own unreasonably large slice of the pie.

You're stawmaning me, I never claimed any of the things you are responding to in your first paragraph.

The central concept in Marxist thought is collectivism and the central thought in libertarianism is individualism. You can not reconcile these two things into a coherent philosophy. One values individual freedoms in respect to all areas including property and the other values the good of the whole. The latter manifests in central planning which necessarily results in the infringement of property rights via force, something which violates everything libertarian thought is built upon.

To be clear, I don't care what you believe, my whole point is that you are using words in inappropriate ways which are at best meaningless and and at worst misleading.

[SavageParrot]

You're stawmaning me, I never claimed any of the things you are responding to in your first paragraph.

Why do people continue to use the strawman thing when they never get it right? I swear it's the internet evolving to deal with Godwin's law.

Bottom line is that they need a way to enforce collectivism, and that is through force of some sort, something which is strongly opposed in classical liberalism/anarcho-capitalism.

Right there. That's where you made the assumption. Notice the word assumption because I never claimed that you directly said it. Your comment here assumes that the two doctrines can't combine because of the need for collectivism to be enforced, which is only true if you hold the simultaneous assumption that you have to be able to implement something in order to be able to believe in it.

You don't need a way to enforce collectivism you just need people to choose to live that way. Yes it's horribly unrealistic and it will never happen but that's not the point. If I'm going to believe something it's not going to be the middle of the road. The middle of the road is just where you end up because it's the only place everyone can tolerate.

The central concept in Marxist thought is collectivism and the central thought in libertarianism is individualism. You can not reconcile these two things into a coherent philosophy.

Getting enough people to agree on a set of rules doesn't make a standpoint more coherent. Demanding that we, in so far as there is a we in this type of situation, have a consistent manifesto (in itself kind of pointless) in order to be even considered as a valid point of view is a fundamental misunderstanding of the mindset. Or to put it another way, I doubt you could get 20 people that describe themselves as communist libertarians to even agree on an agenda. I'm not looking for a philosophy, I'm just telling you where I stand. I don't even care if other people in the same section of the political chart agree with me or not. Which is kind of the point.

You can call me an anarchist if you like but I'm not looking to break the system. It'll break itself eventually.

One values individual freedoms in respect to all areas including property and the other values the good of the whole. The latter manifests in central planning which necessarily results in the infringement of property rights via force, something which violates everything libertarian thought is built upon.

Yes and part of being free to choose means it's entirely possible to choose collectivism. Again, and I doubt you even know you are doing it, you are assuming that I need to offer a solution for how it would work in practice. I don't need to do that. People will either choose to live collectively according to their consciences or they won't, that's all there is to it.

To be clear, I don't care what you believe, my whole point is that you are using words in inappropriate ways which are at best meaningless and and at worst misleading.

Words and concepts are never fixed, they are always evolving. If you want to try and nail them in one place then good luck to you, but pretty soon you'll run out of words.

[Paco's Gun]

nice thread derail fags

you're supposed to be bitching about each other's stats not political ideologies

[Paco's Gun]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mznsEcZlM2I

[SavageParrot]

nice thread derail fags

you're supposed to be bitching about each other's stats not political ideologies

[picmip]

Yeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

[SuPer PuZZy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mznsEcZlM2I

I think...(yes sunglases moment) some people do hack!!!!

[likethat]

I believe Spock was really a Jedi. I mean shit if we don't have to have a logical driven out come of reality. Then he was my Father. He also, might have even been The Count from Sesame Street. I mean hell that dude had some mad math skills.

[likethat]

If you get to board. Check this out. Not work safe and not for the kids!

http://www.apocalypsecartoons.com/roc/roc.html