Topic: How Social Justice Warriors Are Creating An Entire Generation Of Fascists - page 2. (Read 4761 times)

Regional leaders, not "leader of the world".

But you just said...




So you deny that it's anarchy in the background, which allows all these more organised systems to form on top of it?

What did you drink today bro?

Is the world leaderless: Presidents, Prime-Ministers,Kings,Queens, Dictators, how you call those? Our friends or our tyrant rulers?
What happense if you don't follow the orders of your neighbor? Nothing.
What happens if you dont follow an executive order? You go to jail.

So it seems to me that power is pretty much constrained in a few hands, not to talk about banksters and other ruling classes.


That only proves that socialim exists, it doesnt say anthing about an-cap. But the question is ,

Is there any place on Earth where there are no tyrant rulers? And the answer is no.

They even claim ownership of fucking Antarctica and 100 m^2 islands in the Pacific Ocean, heck they even partitioned the fucking Moon.
So the tyrant's powergrab is really limitless, if they could they would want the whole Universe to rule upon...


Yes but the civilized part, the courts are mostly biased when it comes to political cases. As the justice system itself is run by the government and paid by it, so dont tell me they dont have influence above the judges.

As for the agression part, see that's the problem, that violates the NAP. The fact that governments run huge mililary and can kill billions of people with nukes, is not really a sign of peaceful society.

Not to say if machinegunned police breaks into your house, full surveilance ,etc etc.

It's a pretty totalitarian world that we live in, with minor exceptions that are not like exceptions but more like moderate societies.

Iceland,Switzerland,Hong Kong,Chile and others are not totally free societies but they are closer to freedom than others, unfortunately the rest of the world is fucked up.

This rings a bell. Funnily enough, one could say that internationally, we already have anarcho-capitalism.

• Is the world leaderless? CHECK!
• Are there various socialist communes, AKA cities and countries and the like? CHECK!
• Do disputes get resolved using a merit based system, with simple metrics like fire-power, cannon fodder and land resources? CHECK!

What exactly were you complaining about again?

This guy is full of shit, damn near every argument he makes is reductio ad absurdum, he even admits it at one point in the video! I love that the students keep calling him out on his shit, that's hilarious.

Science demonstrates why internet arguments are usually fruitless. Our brains are incredibly biased, and arguing often triggers flight or fight response.

It becomes about winning the argument, rather than about getting to the truth of the matter.

I came across this video and found it very relevant to the OP of this thread, and how scam accusations work around here. In general he is arguing the insanity of limiting people's speech to limit offense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oSxdZcCNlM

So that's all you can say, a picture of a statue.

It's really lame, i addresset every point detailed, yet you can't even debate me honestly by re-addressing my points.

Maybe because you can't even defend your believes. How could you when obviously they doesnt make sense.

Many well educated PHD leftists failed to logically prove their claims, and their moral right to rob & cage people, so how could you prove it, you obviously cant.


Don't be so radical, it's just a game, most people know that they`ll never win, it's all about the chill and the thrill of winning, it's more like a fun game.

If somebody plays the lottery for the sole purpose of get rich quick then they are really dumb, but 90% play only for fun, the same with casino gamblers.

So we should neither tax it nor ban it like many idiot powermongers want it. It;s not their business to interfere in other people's lifes. We are grown adults we should be capable of thinking for ourselves.

Those who ask for the wisdom of the state are probably stuck at the level of a 5 year old asking their parents for advices.


Don't even try to argue with leftists, it's obvious that even they dont understand their theory, and cant defend it, so they expect us to defend their theories, haha..

The lottery is a tax on people who have a certain kind of idiocy, and it's highly regressive.  It would be more responsible on the part of the state if people had to take a test to prove they understood statistics and probability before they were allowed to play.

Oregon's new 'low carbon fuel' tax will be a similarly regressive tax.  I've got money so it will be an nuisance to me but people closer to the edge are going to have some real hardships.  It's primary goal is just to make a certain class of eco-centric people feel like 'they' are 'world leaders' in 'saving the planet.'  And, as we see with the Cylvia Hayes thing, to make various grifters a ton of money.  Doing shit for show is one thing, but doing it for show and socking others with the bill is quite another.

These are two of a huge number of examples of left leaning politicians failing us.  How the Socialists think they are going to solve the distribution of wealth thing using regressive taxation is beyond me.  I don't think they even care about it all that much or at best they are planning to get around to it later.  Since a lot of them are exploiting the hell out of these regressive taxation schemes for a variety of projects (including making themselves and their friends rich) I'm not holding my breath for them to change any time soon.

No banknotes are representative units of the global wealth (or atleast it should be, if the banks would keep 100% reserves , i think we both can agree on bitcoin atleat isnt it? 100% reserves & no central bank)

I already went over this: SUPER RICH PEOPLE ONLY EXIST BECAUSE THEY USED THE GOVERNMENT TO ELIMINATE COMPETITION!

How hard is it to understand. In a free society, wealth would be much better distributed, without coercion, based simply on skills & dedication!

Those central bankers running the global debt ponzi scheme obviously got lucky by exploiting the naive ideas. But guess what your leftist comrades are doing the exact same thing, they just want a different kind of tyrrany, you know the people...

Oh but it took roots in Venezuela and we all see what a paradise it is thanks to socialism.
 
✓Kids being killed on the street by cops
✓The protect & serve honest cops only beat people up because they protect us
✓Capital Controls
✓Buy food for tickets and limited amount =food rationing
✓Huge taxes
✓Total government tyrrany
✓Collectivized labour
✓Daily dose of tyrrany
✓Media propaganda
✓Total control you cant do anything besides work&eat&shit&reproduce to give life to the next generation of slaves
Your socialist paradise indeed

Well so far you havent addressed my points with valid arguments you just change subject.

If socialism is so good why does it have to be forced on us? Why can't i just be a capitalist and mind my own business and you buy yourself a region and create a socialist commune for you and your allies and everyone coexist in peace.

Because as i understand you also force me to adhere to your nightmare system which is exactly statism



Yes thats true, so how is it the lottery's fault. It's the government that steals the money, can't you realize that.

How about we dont give internet to you because your ISP pays taxes to the government, would you accept that situation? Based on your logic.

Negatory, I just see the world more accurately than you do. Capitalism absent government is a nightmare.

Yeahhhhh, I've got some bad news, homeslice. You don't know shit about the lottery, it generates 2 billion dollars a year for the state of Oregon. Now who's the statist?

Yes so now your solution is that we should totally get rid of all "would have" "should have" situations aswell.

It's like if you are envious that 1 guy won the lottery of 100m $ and everyone else lost. So let's redistribute the lottery prize a good idea isnt it? Well hell no, thats not the point of the game. The whole point of lottery is for alot of people to enrich 1 lucky guy, and it's voluntary.

On the other hand, because 1 random guy is unlucky we should steal from all employers to feed him. How is that not coercion?

Also wtf , the employer gives him the job to begin with, if it werent for him risking his capital to run the business, the government would not have any subjects to steal from and give it to somebody else.He gives him the job so deal with it.

Why is it the employer's fault that he is unlucky? Why is it the lottery's fault that X person didnt won the jackpot?
Why should both of these be robbed according to your theory?

You are a statist Beliathon!

If one was hungry at the moment the contract was signed, coercion was at play and the contract was signed without true consent. This applies to approx 90% of Earth's population.

Think of banknotes as freedom tickets and it will make sense. Only the super rich will ever be free in this system, that's why they've convinced everyone else that they too will one day be millionaires.  

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires"
-John Steinbeck

Holy shit you really have no fucking idea of what you talk about.

Can't even present a solid counterargument just regurgitate your master's propaganda over and over when it has been disproven by thousands of times.

Voluntary is voluntary, what the fuck is so hard to understand about it.

You are not exploited by your boss at work, and he doesn't steal capital from you. You voluntarly signed a job contract with him when you hired you. Unless he points a gun at your head, the agreement is completely voluntary, you can always leave.

You can always leave an exploitative job, but you can never leave government control, so your are full of crap.
Also if you dont like the job , quit and create your own business how about that, it takes 5 seconds to think of it and you fail to do even that.

The first 2 quotes are lunatics who can't think even 5 seconds about it, and the 3rd one is abstract and its offtopic.

So it seems to me that voluntary solutions always hang around, if you fail to see them that's your problems, but don't tell me that they are not there.

It's almost as if you leftist guys are hating success and want everyone to be robbed because your envy and laziness just cant tolerate somebody having done more productive things than to watch TV all day and live on welfare.

Voluntary my ass. This is what you trot out, the tired old, "we're free because free trade" fallacious argument bullshit? Weak man, very weak. A market is a coercive force. Those without money are coerced by the system into tolerating exploitation. Coerced into being on the bottom of someone else's hierarchy, with all the suffering, shame, and other indignity that entails.

“America touts itself as the land of the free, but the number one freedom that you and I have is the freedom to enter into a subservient role in the workplace. Once you exercise this freedom you’ve lost all control over what you do, what is produced, and how it is produced. And in the end, the product doesn’t belong to you. The only way you can avoid bosses and jobs is if you don’t care about making a living. Which leads to the second freedom: the freedom to starve.”
-Tom Morello

"I see all this potential, and I see it squandered. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables – slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off."
-Chuck Palahniuk

“We feel free because we lack the very language to articulate our unfreedom.”
-Slavoj Zizek, Welcome to the Desert of the Real

The only choice we have left now is between embracing the corporate fascism nightmare or rejecting it in favor of a post-capitalist democracy in whatever form it takes.

The only cure for capitalism is democracy at work, a transition to an alternative culture of economy.

Communism faces the same idealistic problms and logical fallacies as socialism so of course it will not exist.

Capitalism on the other hand doesnt exist because a few powerhungry individuals do everything to prevent it, because then their powerhungry looting and warmongering propaganda would cease.

So while leftism is a logical paradox, and cannot ever exist morally and efficiently. Capitalism is logically possible and highly probably once we get rid of these stupid belief systems propagandized to us.


This post proves that you have no idea what your talking about. How is there a ruler in capitalism? When all of it is based on voluntary transaction.

You got a farmland, you raise chicken and sell the eggs for money (without government taxing you or health inspectors check for your eggs to be healthy ), the market will decide if your eggs are worth to be bought, and people will boycott you if you try to sell them snake oil.
However if some looters break into your farmland trying to steal your eggs, you have all the rights to defend them.

That's all capitalism means, so scale this 1 example up to 1 billion people, and it will work wonderfully. Any additional disputes can always be decided in courts, violence is never the answer.

----------------

Anarcho-socialism on the other hand is a contradictory statement. See socialism means: rob the wealthy and give it to the poor, how the fuck is that done without violence.

Socialism and communism is the most destructive herd mentality idea of modern times. It's also completely based on violence.

You can set up a commune like the kibbutz system, but you will always have parasites who will infest it, like with every free giveaway, who wont work and only get the rewards. If you force them to contribute , then you use coercion and force, if you don't then more of them will come and infest your socialist paradise and sooner or later it will all collapse.

No wonder socialism is always the decline of capitalism (see in EU right now) , as it can only happen after capitalism, because its a giant looting mechanism. After there is nothing to loot anymore, capitalism (or atleast a phony version of it) happense again, and then this cycle continues.

Or atleast it will continue until governments exist, once governments cease to exist, socialism will also be remembered as a foolish primitive idea and people realize that a contractual-voluntary society is much better than a giant and violent red-looting mechanism☭

I agree, and just like pure communism, it never will. Both are pure fantasy.

Anarcho mean without leaders, so there's no central decision maker saying "no capitalism". However, social anarchism could only survive is a culture which loathes violence, deception, and coercion. In such a culture, the practice of capitalism would (will) be seen as despicably unethical, sort of the most modern people view outright slavery. We only tolerate subtle and hidden slavery now.

What you described there is not capitalism, what you describe there is corporatism or fascism.

Pure capitalism never existed yet, or atleast not in modern times. The capitalism since the middle age was mostly mercantilist (government intervention, overprotection of peer merchants, anti-free trade, high tariffs, capital control,etc etc) or just simply corporativ-fascist.

You must look up the real definition of capitalism then because you don't have a slightest clue what it means.

Furthermore anarcho-capitalism also allows the existence of socialist communes, whereas anarcho-socialism doesnt allow capitalism, thats the difference. See in anarcho capitalism you can just buy up a huge property with your commune and establish there a socialist commune just like the jewish people do with their kibbutz system.

I have no problem with socialism, if it's voluntary. Sure get 1000 people and set up a socialist commune where you voluntarly agree to help eachother, i have absolutely no problem with that.

What i have problem with is when you try to force your commune on me, because i dont want to be a part of it.

That is the fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism, in capitalism you vote with your money, voluntarly (yes there will be some equality problems but as long as other people dont threaten you with force, there will be no other problem aside from envy)

However in socialism you can't voluntarly ask people to work with you, and when they dont you will use force agains them, which is the fundamental flaw with it.

--------------------------

Do you understand that the crooked capitalists, the billionaires were created by the government? They used the government as a tool to eliminate competition.How is that capitalism? It's fascism.

Furthermore in a perfect capitalism system the wealth inequality would be directly proportional to people's talents and i guarantee to you that it would be much lower than today. Every able bodied people is capable of something and in a free society they can pursue their dreams without regulation and taxes. The unfortunate will get donations from charity.

If you eliminate force from society then, and only then people can be free. And that my friend socialism can never do because in socialism the commune dictates the terms and every opposition member will comply by force... That's not freedom!

I won't claim to know we can make anarcho-socialism work on the same scale as industrial capitalism,  but I know for a fact that anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron and an impossibility. Capitalism is a hierarchal system using systematic violence to maintain the hierarchy, it is absolutely antithetical to anarchism. In capitalism he with the most wealth rules, always. Capitalism is an invention from the gunpowder age that translates poorly to modern society. Ethics were much simpler back then. Reason urges us forward while our fear change holds us back. For now.

Capitalism is a dead thing walking, propped up by the embalming fluid of never ending debt and austerity. It will be over soon, but not nearly soon enough.

TECSHARE is a default trust OG and a BCT institution.

If you weren't an ignorant noob you'd already know that.   

/cluestick

I want it too, unfortunately socialism will never bring that.

Socialism is a demagogue wishful thinking idealist propaganda that is used by the leftist ruling class to give them absolute power.

You can't have anarcho-socialism, its a contradictory statement. You cannot force people to pay in your "commune" , because if you do then you are not an anarchist, you are a communist.

See, anarcho-socialism will last about 5 minutes then it will slip into classic communism where a ruling class will emerge that will subjugate their inferiors.

You wan't total equality? Guess what, that will never happen because humans are not born equal, every one of us has strenghts and weaknesses, you cant equalize it and you shouldn't.

What you should do is give people a free society where everyone can pursue their dreams. And that's only gonna work in anarcho-capitalism.