Hello

[Dog]

Hello, I'm a 19 year old White male moderate left-libertarian with an interest in the farther left versions of anarchism.

Don't know what else to add besides that.

[Aussie Trotskyist]

G'day mate.

When you say 'moderate left-libertarian', what exactly do you mean? To you support or oppose capitalism?

[The Jay]

Hi there! Ask me anything!

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

G'day mate.

When you say 'moderate left-libertarian', what exactly do you mean? To you support or oppose capitalism?

I know in the USA there are left-Rothbardians who believe in the concept of the free market but put a more Prodhornian spin on it. (Sorry if this is vulgarizing your views, I know that the Left Libertarian Alliances has extanged many polemics with this school of thought but I feel like it's the best way to summarize it.)

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Hello, I'm a 19 year old White male moderate left-libertarian with an interest in the farther left versions of anarchism.

Don't know what else to add besides that.

If you support any "kind" of capitalism or capitalist social-relations than you are not an Anarchist; Anarchists are anti-state, anti-money, and anti-military; the exact opposite of Left-Libertarians.

That being said, welcome to the forum.

[Aussie Trotskyist]

If you support any "kind" of capitalism or capitalist social-relations than you are not an Anarchist; Anarchists are anti-state, anti-money, and anti-military; the exact opposite of Left-Libertarians.

That being said, welcome to the forum.

He said he was interested in Anarchism, he didn't say he was an anarchist.

[Dog]

Thanks for the welcomes!


G'day mate.

When you say 'moderate left-libertarian', what exactly do you mean? To you support or oppose capitalism?

No, but I'm not a communist.

Speaking historically, I'm leftist. I would definitely be on the left of the French Seating Chart. And I also believe in equality. People shouldn't be constrained from acquiring wealth, everyone should be equally free to apply their talents to the social institution of the market, no one has the right to tell Mr. Jones that he must give up what he's earned through voluntary action (unequal treatment/inequality/exploitation).

I do believe in the labor theory of value, which is another way in which I'm a leftist, but I also recognize the capitalist as performing some of the labor of the firm - the ones at the bottom aren't the only workers, afterall! So I support workers and capitalists' right to the full product of their labor, no more, no less.

[Dog]

I'm using the term "capitalists" just for clarity's sake. Capitalists are just very useful workers.

[Dog]

If you support any "kind" of capitalism or capitalist social-relations than you are not an Anarchist; Anarchists are anti-state, anti-money, and anti-military; the exact opposite of Left-Libertarians.

That being said, welcome to the forum.

*Most anarchists. I'm sorry I don't fit into your close-minded, boxed-in, rigid Anarcho-Normativity.

[Yazman]

This isn't the place for fighting guys. Please try to keep it civil.

[LeonJWilliams]

Welcome.

Why do you introduce yourself in a way that includes the colour of your skin? Does it (help) define who you are?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Welcome to the forums! I hope you learn a lot!

I also recognize the capitalist as performing some of the labor of the firm - the ones at the bottom aren't the only workers, afterall! So I support workers and capitalists' right to the full product of their labor, no more, no less.


I'm using the term "capitalists" just for clarity's sake. Capitalists are just very useful workers.

I don't think you understand the labour theory of value at all if you believe that capitalists actually perform and deserve what they earn with their 'labour' - A capitalist is not a 'very useful worker'. Most capitalists make millions of dollars from the exploitation of the working class whom they employ to gain surplus through the creation of commodities in which they can sell. In plain english, they get poor people to work for them, make thousands of dollars out of the goods said poor people have produced and pay them two hundred in cash at the end of the day to go and buy basic living essentials; It's either that or starve to death for workers. Capitalists are absolute scum of the earth, and the little 'labour' they do perform (handing out money to people for the running of their enterprise) does not credit them (in fact, 'labour' does not make a worker/proletarian in the first place).

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Welcome.

Why do you introduce yourself in a way that includes the colour of your skin? Does it (help) define who you are?

Some people get nervous when introducing themselves and they struggle to find details to share about themselves. Some use gender, and I guess he decided skin color.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

He said he was interested in Anarchism, he didn't say he was an anarchist.

He said this...


Hello, I'm a 19 year old White male moderate left-libertarian with an interest in the farther left versions of anarchism.


The bolded part is key as it means he considers pro-capitalist "versions" of Anarchism to be actual Anarchism and not bourgeois distortions. He considers what he believes now to be "pure" Anarchism so essentially has divided Anarchism into this false dichotomy between the kind of Anarchism Anarcho-capitalists believe in and the anti-capitalist Anarchism revolutionary Anarchists believe in.


*Most anarchists. I'm sorry I don't fit into your close-minded, boxed-in, rigid Anarcho-Normativity.

I am sorry you are so hostile to learning about how the revolutionary left classifies their tendencies.

[Dog]

Welcome.

Why do you introduce yourself in a way that includes the colour of your skin? Does it (help) define who you are?

I do think it's an important part of my individual personality. I think people should be free to identify with groups, otherwise individualism becomes nothing more than a tyranny. I see modern day political correctness as a form of oppressive hierarchy, the bourgeois intellectuals tell the masses that they must feel bad about preferring to be among people like them.

[Dog]

Welcome to the forums! I hope you learn a lot!




I don't think you understand the labour theory of value at all if you believe that capitalists actually perform and deserve what they earn with their 'labour' - A capitalist is not a 'very useful worker'. Most capitalists make millions of dollars from the exploitation of the working class whom they employ to gain surplus through the creation of commodities in which they can sell. In plain english, they get poor people to work for them, make thousands of dollars out of the goods said poor people have produced and pay them two hundred in cash at the end of the day to go and buy basic living essentials; It's either that or starve to death for workers. Capitalists are absolute scum of the earth, and the little 'labour' they do perform (handing out money to people for the running of their enterprise) does not credit them (in fact, 'labour' does not make a worker/proletarian in the first place).

No, it's communists who do not understand the labor theory of value. "Capitalists do not do any useful work" does not necessarily follow from "value comes from labor".

"Surplus value" is just the wage of the laborer you label capitalist.

[Fnord]

He said this...

Are you disagreeing, agreeing, or trying to say something else? I assume it's the former so I assure you, he did indeed say that he was interested in left anarchism, and not that he was an anarchist.




The bolded part is key as it means he considers pro-capitalist "versions" of Anarchism to be actual Anarchism and not bourgeois distortions. He considers what he believes now to be "pure" Anarchism so essentially has divided Anarchism into this false dichotomy between the kind of Anarchism Anarcho-capitalists believe in and the anti-capitalist Anarchism revolutionary Anarchists believe in.

Your distinctions in your own political stance you are sharing in this person's introduction has only very recently come to pass, the philosophy of anarchism has existed long before capitalism itself in different forms. There are different forms of anarchism outside both paradigms and there will always be new forms arising just as with any other umbrella term such as socialism or communism.



I am sorry you are so hostile to learning about how the revolutionary left classifies their tendencies.
The revolutionary left barely has any concrete way of classifying their tendencies as a whole, it's usually numerous tendencies contradicting each other at times with different concepts on how to classify things. I think you may be confusing your tendency of pan-leftism of how you envision the revolutionary left with actual current conditions of the revolutionary left.
He may have said it very bluntly without explaining in detail but you are not helping people to learn more about the left but rather helping people to learn about your tendencies.

Welcome to Revleft Dog, I hope you discover some interesting political findings here when you find what your looking for. :)

[Yazman]

TGU, it isn't your job to decide for people what their position is and what their views are. He's interested in anarchism. That's what that means and it's what he stated he wants to learn about. Leave it at that.

If he was an an-cap he would say so. Quit speculating. When he wants to say what his views are in a clear and concise fashion, he will. It just sounds like you're on the verge of a witch-hunt to get a new person restricted because you read into what he said/don't like what he said. Even if somebody did get restricted or was openly capitalist I still expect you to be welcoming & friendly while posting in Introductions.

The Intro forum is here to welcome new users and introduce them to the community, and part of that is helping new users feel welcome. If you disagree with him that's ok but this isn't the place to start throwing about accusations and bickering over ideology.

If you're not here for some light friendly discussion/to welcome new users, then don't post in Introductions.

[Skyhilist]

No, it's communists who do not understand the labor theory of value. "Capitalists do not do any useful work" does not necessarily follow from "value comes from labor".

"Surplus value" is just the wage of the laborer you label capitalist.

Capitalists skim surplus value without having to break a sweat; therefore they are not useful laborers. I think you may be confusing capitalists with people who are pro-capitalist and make up a large portion of the public. To say that communists don't understand the labor theory of value is a bit silly considering it was created by a Marxist to begin with and has in fact played an important role in communism historically and in quite a few people's political maturing as communists.

Honestly though, sorry for some of the hostility you've already dealt with, we should all be here to teach, learn, and engage in civil discussion; not alienate.

[#FF0000]

I see modern day political correctness as a form of oppressive hierarchy, the bourgeois intellectuals tell the masses that they must feel bad about preferring to be among people like them.

haha welp.

welcome to the forums, dogg.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Why do you introduce yourself in a way that includes the colour of your skin? Does it (help) define who you are?
Ironically, he's down on trans people for (in his view) perpetuating gender as a category, but he's fine with perpetuating race as a category.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I see modern day political correctness as a form of oppressive hierarchy, the bourgeois intellectuals tell the masses that they must feel bad about preferring to be among people like them.
That sounds like a right-wing critique of "political correctness" to me.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

No, it's communists who do not understand the labor theory of value. "Capitalists do not do any useful work" does not necessarily follow from "value comes from labor".

"Surplus value" is just the wage of the laborer you label capitalist.
I stand corrected. :laugh:

[LeonJWilliams]

I'm sorry I still can't get over what I just read, you prefer to be around other white people than black people or any other colour people?

This isn't stormfront you know!

[TheGodlessUtopian]

TGU, it isn't your job to decide for people what their position is and what their views are. He's interested in anarchism. That's what that means and it's what he stated he wants to learn about. Leave it at that.

If he was an an-cap he would say so. Quit speculating. When he wants to say what his views are in a clear and concise fashion, he will. It just sounds like you're on the verge of a witch-hunt to get a new person restricted because you read into what he said/don't like what he said. Even if somebody did get restricted or was openly capitalist I still expect you to be welcoming & friendly while posting in Introductions.

The Intro forum is here to welcome new users and introduce them to the community, and part of that is helping new users feel welcome. If you disagree with him that's ok but this isn't the place to start throwing about accusations and bickering over ideology.

I wasn't trying to get him restricted, why would I? He just got here and I have nothing against him. I was merely trying to explain to him that non-revolutionary brands of "Anarchism" are not actual Anarchism; I remember anarchist comrades on here being awfully angry at the fact that the term Anarchism had devolved in such a way. He clearly expressed the belief that he considered Anarchism to be an umbrella term and I was offering my thoughts on the subject, really no different than any other minor correction.

Furthermore you said...


If you're not here for some light friendly discussion/to welcome new users, then don't post in Introductions.If you didn't want this kind of conversation to come up than you should have said this above mentioned comment far sooner instead of contradicting yourself by saying the following as the first comment...


This isn't the place for fighting guys. Please try to keep it civil.

And I kept it civil-I didn't flame, provoke, or belittle, simply offered my opinion on a topic which seemed to me rather clear cut. As I said before: if you didn't want this conversation to develop than you should have explicitly said so instead of giving caution to flaming. If this was your wish than I would have gladly stopped.

[Dog]

Thanks for the welcomes!


Capitalists skim surplus value without having to break a sweat; therefore they are not useful laborers. I think you may be confusing capitalists with people who are pro-capitalist and make up a large portion of the public.

No, I'm talking about capitalists. They co-ordinate the structure of production. Without a capitalist there to give the prole a job, he starves. Both benefit from the transaction, there is no "exploitation", or to the extent that there is: it's due to anti-social intervention on the part of governments (regulations, patents, licensing, ect.).


To say that communists don't understand the labor theory of value is a bit silly considering it was created by a Marxist to begin with and has in fact played an important role in communism historically and in quite a few people's political maturing as communists.

Karl Marx didn't create the labor theory of value. The classical economists did, long before socialism was developed.


Honestly though, sorry for some of the hostility you've already dealt with, we should all be here to teach, learn, and engage in civil discussion; not alienate.

Though I do have a pretty thick skin, thanks. I look forward to many more discussions. :redstar2000:

[Dog]

I'm sorry I still can't get over what I just read, you prefer to be around other white people than black people or any other colour people?

This isn't stormfront you know!

Eh it's irrelevant, I don't bring it up because it just causes conflict, our society is so biased against the concept that I don't bother. Let me just say quickly that human freedom is all about tangoing with whoever the hell you want.


I wasn't trying to get him restricted, why would I? He just got here and I have nothing against him. I was merely trying to explain to him that non-revolutionary brands of "Anarchism" are not actual Anarchism; I remember anarchist comrades on here being awfully angry at the fact that the term Anarchism had devolved in such a way. He clearly expressed the belief that he considered Anarchism to be an umbrella term and I was offering my thoughts on the subject, really no different than any other minor correction.

Debate all you want, I think Anarchism can be anything you want it to be. Let me just say that human freedom is all about being who you want.


Furthermore you said...
If you didn't want this kind of conversation to come up than you should have said this above mentioned comment far sooner instead of contradicting yourself by saying the following as the first comment...

And I kept it civil-I didn't flame, provoke, or belittle, simply offered my opinion on a topic which seemed to me rather clear cut. As I said before: if you didn't want this conversation to develop than you should have explicitly said so instead of giving caution to flaming. If this was your wish than I would have gladly stopped.

No, by all means keep coming at me, human freedom is all about challenging and debating our ideas.

[Dog]

Ironically, he's down on trans people for (in his view) perpetuating gender as a category, but he's fine with perpetuating race as a category.

And you're down on me for perpetuating race as a category, but you're fine with perpetuating class as a category. We all have our little categories, that's what human freedom is all about.


That sounds like a right-wing critique of "political correctness" to me.

Nonsense. Political correctness is inherently authoritarian and rightist. Exploring radical ideas is what human freedom is all about.

[#FF0000]

Nonsense. Political correctness is inherently authoritarian and rightist. Exploring radical ideas is what human freedom is all about.

political correctness isn't about shutting down ideas tho. it's a very rough and hella imperfect social negotiation towards a more inclusive language.

so i mean, yeah. i don't see why people get all sad about political correctness. i think it's better than what we had before?


Debate all you want, I think Anarchism can be anything you want it to be. Let me just say that human freedom is all about being who you want.No, no, because words have definitions.


No, I'm talking about capitalists. They co-ordinate the structure of production. Without a capitalist there to give the prole a job, he starves. Both benefit from the transaction, there is no "exploitation", or to the extent that there is: it's due to anti-social intervention on the part of governments (regulations, patents, licensing, ect.).

I think it's pretty obtuse to say that workers and bosses are negotiating on equal terms, dude.

[Dog]

political correctness isn't about shutting down ideas tho. it's a very rough and hella imperfect social negotiation towards a more inclusive language.

Inclusive to political correctness. That's why it's totalitarian.


so i mean, yeah. i don't see why people get all sad about political correctness. i think it's better than what we had before?

Capitalism was better than feudalism.


No, no, because words have definitions.

And I'm operating on the basis of those definitions.


I think it's pretty obtuse to say that workers and bosses are negotiating on equal terms, dude.

Equal terms only exists in games of chance.