Inmate's Introductions

[Jazzratt]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?

Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".

Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?

Hobbies: Everyone has them.

Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.

Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.

Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.

Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?

Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.

[apathy maybe]

Though I'm not a mod, not even the mod of this forum, and though I haven't talked about this with Mr Jazzratt, I think it is safe to say it anyway.

If you aren't restricted (and aren't about to be restricted) and if you do post in this thread introducing yourself, it is probably fair to say that your post will be split into a new thread in Introductions. That is to say, if you are actually a leftist, introduce yourself in the forum for the purpose.

That is all.

[pusher robot]

Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?
Martin will suffice.


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".
27.


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.


Hobbies: Everyone has them.
I work on computers, I do digital music composition, and I play the violin. For fun, I like to play video games and bar trivia.


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.
I am a lawyer, but I don't practice law.


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.
Courteously abstain. I don't partake, but I don't mind if others do, so long as they're not obnoxious about it.


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.
Free market, but not radically.


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?
Libertarian, but not radically.


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?
Hobbes, Locke, Mill, Friedman, Rand, Reagan. Whoever wrote my economics textbook also had a big effect.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.
Too authoritarian, too eager to engage in oppressive bloody revenge, and too long on theory but vague as to actual practice.

[Publius]

Name: I go by all kinds of names.

Age: 18. Youthful majestic.

Location: The United States, and I fit the part.

Hobbies: I like fine literature, I like non-fiction, I like neuroscience, I like music, any kind, I like computers. Other stuff.

Something Weird: I'm a National Merit Scholar. Also, I have an inflated sense of self-importance. Can't you tell?

Religion: Logical atheist. Emotional atheist too, for that matter.

Economic View: Whatever works, which is to say not capitalism and not communism or socialism as they have been previously applied.

Social Views: Enjoy yourself. Allow others to do the same. Don't be a dick.

Political Influences: Karl Popper, though only indirectly. Christopher Hitchens. I don't really have 'influences' in the sense of 'people who wrote stuff that I agree with'. I've seen a few Chomsky and Zinn videos on CSPAN and on YouTube, so throw them in there. I was watching some Cockburn and he has a cool accent so toss him in there too... I've gotten a lot of my 'leftism' from fiction, actually, but no one in particular.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: It's completely ineffective as a political force in the Western world. No coherent worldview akin to the Christian Right's.

[apathy maybe]

Publius: You have changed since you first came to this board. Let me see if I can change you once more...


Economic View: Whatever works, which is to say not capitalism and not communism or socialism as they have been previously applied.
So, if capitalism doesn't work, what is wrong with it? One of my biggest problems is inheritance and the ability to accumulate unlimited amounts of stuff. It seems to me, if you are an atheist, the you also wouldn't believe in "natural rights" or similar bullshit. As such, you wouldn't have a problem with losing those two "property rights", would you?


Originally posted by Publius+--> (Publius)Social Views: Enjoy yourself. Allow others to do the same. Don't be a dick.[/b]Sounds good. In fact, I think I tend to agree. We have a bit in common you know.


Originally posted by [email protected]
Political Influences: Karl Popper, though only indirectly. Christopher Hitchens. I don't really have 'influences' in the sense of 'people who wrote stuff that I agree with'. I've seen a few Chomsky and Zinn videos on CSPAN and on YouTube, so throw them in there. I was watching some Cockburn and he has a cool accent so toss him in there too... I've gotten a lot of my 'leftism' from fiction, actually, but no one in particular.
How about you read some of the writings by these people, Benjamin Tucker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin+Tucker), Henry David Thoreau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry+David+Thoreau) and Josiah Warren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah+Warren). They will start you on the path of bring you closer to the dark side...


Publius
Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: It's completely ineffective as a political force in the Western world. No coherent worldview akin to the Christian Right's.You know, the Christian Right doesn't have a single coherent worldview. They have just managed to latch on to the conservative parties around the place (most so in the USA and Australia then I think in European countries, compare Sweden for example).
Yes the radical left is diverse and conflicted. But in some sense, that is just a sign of strength, many views and all that. Of course, there are problems when these various ideologies within the radical left movement can't work together. But heck, they know what they oppose! (See the G8 protests for example.)

Anyway, have fun, and come to the dark side. We have more fun.

(I won't object at all if this post and replies get split into a new thread, something titled, "Publius come to the dark side" or similar.)

[Publius]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 31, 2007 08:19 am




Publius: You have changed since you first came to this board. Let me see if I can change you once more...

The only constant is change. You can quote me on that.



So, if capitalism doesn't work, what is wrong with it?

An economic system based on greed cannot be anything other than predatory. Avarice IS the economy. Under such a system positive effects are merely accidental, ancillary, and really not desirable. Greed is the imperative, everything else is just details.

I don't see how that could be a defensible set of ideas...

And if indeed greed is the only motivator of humanity, what does that say about humanity?



One of my biggest problems is inheritance and the ability to accumulate unlimited amounts of stuff. It seems to me, if you are an atheist, the you also wouldn't believe in "natural rights" or similar bullshit. As such, you wouldn't have a problem with losing those two "property rights", would you?

I think property rights are illegitimate. That was basically the thing the drew me away from libertarianism, when I realized that the entire edifice of capitalism was built on a house of cards, that is, that property rights, supposedly God-given and legitimate, were based on land that has been stolen and stolen again countless times throughout history. Once you realize that, everything built on those assumptions fails.



Sounds good. In fact, I think I tend to agree. We have a bit in common you know.

Yeah. Maybe we should, like, check out a movie sometime or something...

Wait.



How about you read some of the writings by these people, Benjamin Tucker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin+Tucker), Henry David Thoreau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry+David+Thoreau) and Josiah Warren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah+Warren). They will start you on the path of bring you closer to the dark side...

Individualist anarchism is interesting, but I doubt it's something I'll be taking up any time soon.



You know, the Christian Right doesn't have a single coherent worldview.

Well, they don't have a coherent anything, but you know what they stand for.

On issues like abortion, gay marrige, Isreal, the War in Iraq, etc. you can almost certainly guess their position. Even on issues like immigration, social welfare, etc.



They have just managed to latch on to the conservative parties around the place (most so in the USA and Australia then I think in European countries, compare Sweden for example).

I'd say most radical christians act based solely on the idea that the apocolypse is near and we better prepare propery.



Yes the radical left is diverse and conflicted. But in some sense, that is just a sign of strength, many views and all that. Of course, there are problems when these various ideologies within the radical left movement can't work together. But heck, they know what they oppose! (See the G8 protests for example.)

I'm not sure I oppose global trade.



Anyway, have fun, and come to the dark side. We have more fun.

(I won't object at all if this post and replies get split into a new thread, something titled, "Publius come to the dark side" or similar.)

I don't want to make a spectacle of myself.

[Tungsten]

An economic system based on greed cannot be anything other than predatory.
Whether it's based on greed or not surely depends on what the people participating in it are motivated by. I don't agree with you that capitalism is a house of cards; it's more like a giant vending machine. It's not a person and isn't run by anyone in particualr, so it doesn't have a personality or a set of moral values and I do think that's the main advantage of it. Capitalism isn't based on greed anymore than the Internet is based on kiddie porn or anymore than guns are based on school shootings.

I think property rights are illegitimate. That was basically the thing the drew me away from libertarianism,
Oh so that's the reason, is it? I'm not primarily a pragmatist, but the question is, though- do property rights work? And if not, why aren't they working? And what is the goal of them in the first place?

when I realized that the entire edifice of capitalism was built on a house of cards, that is, that property rights, supposedly God-given and legitimate, were based on land that has been stolen and stolen again countless times throughout history.
But where does that leave legitimately acquired wealth (i.e. earned recently, through labour)? Is that not property and should that not come under the protection of property rights? Wouldn't this arguably contradict your position on social issues?

[Publius]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 07:41 pm




Whether it's based on greed or not surely depends on what the people participating in it are motivated by.

Which is greed.

The issue isn't whether it's logically contradictory for capitalism to be unselfish -- it might not be --, the issue is whether it IS selfish -- and it is.

Yes, I'm sure you can find some people in the economy who do things for non-greedy reasons, but that's only the exception that proves the rule. You and I both know why these people are somehow remarkable.


I don't agree with you that capitalism is a house of cards; it's more like a giant vending machine. It's not a person and isn't run by anyone in particualr, so it doesn't have a personality or a set of moral values

It's run by all who participate, and it has all their values. It isn't a magical black box into which you put human choices and values and out come inhuman ends.

If people in an economy are greedy, that's a greedy economy.



and I do think that's the main advantage of it. Capitalism isn't based on greed anymore than the Internet is based on kiddie porn or anymore than guns are based on school shootings.

Capitalism IS based on greed. Ask an investment banker why he picked that line of work. For the great hours? For the fun of it?

Again you're confusing the idea that capitalism COULD be not based on greed with the actuality that it is. It may be possible for there to be a nominally capitalist economy that isn't 'greedy'. But that economy isn't any that exists nor any that can or will. So what's left? Greed.



Oh so that's the reason, is it? I'm not primarily a pragmatist, but the question is, though- do property rights work?

Well, if you want to talk pragmatism, we can go that way.

I think it's pragmatic to tax the rich because they have more money they need, by definition.

I still think there can exist privately controlled property, I just think it must always be subservient to the public good. And really, how else could things be?


And if not, why aren't they working?[

Because some people have a lot of property and some have a very little, and this is bad.


And what is the goal of them in the first place?

Good question.

What IS the goal of property? As I understand, it's simple perpetuation: those who have property rig the system to keep it and get more.

I can't for the life of me see how this system is equitable, so I suppose we establish something better.



But where does that leave legitimately acquired wealth (i.e. earned recently, through labour)?

In the hands of laborer, unless he or she should choose to trade it for something else.


Is that not property and should that not come under the protection of property rights?

By 'property' I meant 'land', which of course cannot be created easily.


Wouldn't this arguably contradict your position on social issues?

Perhaps.

But my point is that ownership of land is and always will be based on might makes right. And I dislike that. I might be wrong in my attempts to fix property, but that doesn't make me wrong about might makes right being a logically and morally bankrupt system of dispensation.

[pusher robot]

I might be wrong in my attempts to fix property, but that doesn't make me wrong about might makes right being a logically and morally bankrupt system of dispensation.

Then logically, you ought to be an anarchist, since the entire concept of government by social contract is based on a "might makes right" philosophy.

I would posit that such a system is neither moral nor immoral; it is amoral. Since humans cannot agree on a common objective morality, that is the best possible compromise.

[Publius]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 06, 2007 02:01 am




Then logically, you ought to be an anarchist, since the entire concept of government by social contract is based on a "might makes right" philosophy.

Well, you also have to take into account that I'm a consequentialist and I just don't think anarchism would work.



I would posit that such a system is neither moral nor immoral; it is amoral.

No, it's immoral, at least in my estimation.


Since humans cannot agree on a common objective morality, that is the best possible compromise.

Since we can't agree on a common morality, it makes sense to cede most of the Earth's wealth to a few powerful elite and allow them to dictate our lives? Eh?

[Tungsten]

Which is greed.

The issue isn't whether it's logically contradictory for capitalism to be unselfish -- it might not be --, the issue is whether it IS selfish -- and it is.
Surely you're aware that there are different types of greed, some destructive, some not? I don't believe the majority of selfishness we see today is destructive, otherwise the system wouldn't last a week- no system would. I don't think communism or socialism is any different in that respect either. Do you really think the communists here are advocating that particular ideology for unselfish reasons? Or is it because they think that they have something to gain from it? The only real difference I can see (which is another reason why I threw my lot in with economic liberalism long ago) is that destructive greed is legally limited by the contents of the destructives' bank accounts. In both communism and socialism, once the right policies are in place, it's unlimited. Use this as an anology- who's more likely to drink themselves to death? An alcoholic with his own money, or an alcoholic with everyone elses too? Look at the bottom line.

Capitalism IS based on greed.
I thought it was based on self-ownership, which I suppose, is a form of greed, but I disagree with you that this is primarily destructive.

Well, if you want to talk pragmatism, we can go that way.

I think it's pragmatic to tax the rich because they have more money they need, by definition.
I do as well, for a different reason; they use up more public resources.

I still think there can exist privately controlled property, I just think it must always be subservient to the public good. And really, how else could things be?
Well it's going to be like that anyway, especially in an emergency situation. Right or wrong, I can't see any government standing by in such a situation.

Good question.

What IS the goal of property?
I always thought property was assertion of self-ownership, or at least that's the way I see it. Naturally, communists don't recognise private property because they don't recognise self-ownership.

As I understand, it's simple perpetuation: those who have property rig the system to keep it and get more.
Isn't this as true for those at the bottom as for those at the top? Do they not benefit as much?

By 'property' I meant 'land', which of course cannot be created easily.
Have you heard of geo-libertarianism?

Perhaps.

But my point is that ownership of land is and always will be based on might makes right. And I dislike that. I might be wrong in my attempts to fix property, but that doesn't make me wrong about might makes right being a logically and morally bankrupt system of dispensation.
I know my ideology isn't entirely consistent in the ideological sense, but isn't all politics theoretically based on the principle of might makes right? Isn't that the argument anarchists make (they're right too, in a way)?

[Publius]

Surely you're aware that there are different types of greed, some destructive, some not?

Greed is greed.

It differs in degrees, perhaps, and in results, certainly, but is based on the same thing.


I don't believe the majority of selfishness we see today is destructive, otherwise the system wouldn't last a week- no system would.

The issue is simply that most people are not in a position to be that greedy. What's the average 9 to 5 worker going to do to manifest his greed in the capitalist economy? He might work more hours (he almost certainly will), he might buy consumer. He could even do things like steal, but the risk for that is disproportionate to the gain, I would imagine. Now compare that to how a CEO can leverage his greed.


I don't think communism or socialism is any different in that respect either. Do you really think the communists here are advocating that particular ideology for unselfish reasons?

Some are. But a lot of them admit that the class struggle is based on class interest, which is probably true.


Or is it because they think that they have something to gain from it? The only real difference I can see (which is another reason why I threw my lot in with economic liberalism long ago) is that destructive greed is legally limited by the contents of the destructives' bank accounts. In both communism and socialism, once the right policies are in place, it's unlimited. Use this as an anology- who's more likely to drink themselves to death? An alcoholic with his own money, or an alcoholic with everyone elses too? Look at the bottom line.

Why give the alcoholic everyone elses? That's just dumb policy.

And as I see it, if we're forever trapped in greed, if humans will always be greedy, then ultimately it doesn't matter one bit what pie-in-the-sky fantasies we dream up, we're all going to be fucked anyway.



I thought it was based on self-ownership, which I suppose, is a form of greed, but I disagree with you that this is primarily destructive.

Greed is, by definition, wanting more than you need. And in a world where not everyone has what they need, this is destructive.



I do as well, for a different reason; they use up more public resources.

There you go.



I always thought property was assertion of self-ownership, or at least that's the way I see it. Naturally, communists don't recognise private property because they don't recognise self-ownership.

See, that's a nice theory, even I can admit that. But it just isn't how property works in the real world.

"Self ownership" is not why you own land in America and Chief Running Duck doesn't. This is obvious, and no matter what just-so stories are made up to justify property ownership you can't erase the fact that the land we all live on was taken using guns and violence. That's the basis of property all around the world. That's history. The question now is, where do we go?



Isn't this as true for those at the bottom as for those at the top? Do they not benefit as much?

The Walton children benefit more from private property than do inner city children.


Have you heard of geo-libertarianism?

Yes. It was an influence for me.



I know my ideology isn't entirely consistent in the ideological sense, but isn't all politics theoretically based on the principle of might makes right? Isn't that the argument anarchists make (they're right too, in a way)?

Well, there's social contract theory. There's cooperation.

But in a sense you're correct, in that all decisions have to backed up by some force in order to have force. But that doesnt' mean we need to just keep on the way things have always been.

[freakazoid]

Name: Clayton

Age: Currently 22

Location: Kansas

Hobbies: Airsoft, computer/video games, shooting real steal guns, looking at guns, preparing for the TEOTWAWKI, :D

Something weird: Hmm.... I'm an anarchist, Christian, YEC all rolled into one :D

Religion: Christian anarchist

Economic view: Umm... I'm an anarchist. That mean that the bourgeoisie are good right? :P

Social Views: I'm still an anarchist.

Political Influences: No real "influences" but I like reading Leo Tolstoy, Thoreau, and I've seen some of Chomsky's stuff.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Seeing as how I AM a leftists I don't really have any, except that it seems that some like to jump to conclusions :(


On issues like abortion, gay marrige, Isreal, the War in Iraq, etc. you can almost certainly guess their position. Even on issues like immigration, social welfare, etc.

I can guess what they are too, but I probably am not guessing the same thing as you, <_<



I&#39;d say most radical christians act based solely on the idea that the apocolypse is near and we better prepare propery.

Yeah, we actually do need to be preparing, if not for the "apocalypse" then for the coming TETWAWKI event.

edit - updated my age, :D

[Coggeh]

Thought i&#39;d do this :lol:

Name:Kev

Age: 16

Location: Eire

Hobbies: Parkour and footie.

Something Weird: i lost a toe while serving in Nam

Religion: Scientology ....mmm palcenta :P

Economic View: Reaganomics baby :D

Social Views: I wonder what the wife is making for dinner :rolleyes:

Political Influences: Bill o&#39;reilly ,ITS THE NO...SPIN...ZONE ...and hes looking out for you

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: too many long words ... :blink:


This isnt serious btw for those who are going .. wtf :blink:

[Tower of Bebel]

Really said how people like Coggy and Freakazoid have to stay here.

[Coggeh]

Ah i just did that and now im un-restricted .. hmm .. what a waste .. someone delete it please lol

[apathy maybe]

So much for the claim the people never get unrestricted around here <_<. Anyway, a good place would be introductions, I&#39;m sure Ms. Jazzratt will move this line of thought there sooner or later... :)

[UncleCyril]

Name: Ian

Age: 24

Location: London, UK

Hobbies: Science (I&#39;m a graduate student in biology), reading science/psychology/politics books and internet debates (like this one), poker, going to the pub.

Something Weird: I am a member of a 200-year old London-based debating society.

Religion: Have a guess.

Economic View: Left-liberal

Social Views: Libertarian

Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics? Richard Dawkins & Steven Pinker. There are no modern politicians whom I admire.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: It is based on a wildly optimistic and naive view of human nature and group psychology.

[runningmadbull]

Name: Austin

Age: 17 as of the past spring.

Location: The Great Lakes, but I suppose that also includes Canada, so I am on the US side for clarification. That leaves it to about eight states (MN, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH, PA, NY), see if you can guess which one&#33;

Hobbies: I like model railroading, philosophy, history, forestry, the woods, etc.

Something Weird: Well, when it comes to the classic soda vs. pop debate, I actually refer to a single beverage as a pop but the collective entity of the carbonated flavored beverages as soda. Most people simply use pop to refer to it all where I come from.

Religion: I am a conservative orthodox (not to be mistaken with the Eastern Orthodox denominations) Christian.

Economic View: Well, I&#39;d say that I am an economic libertarian very much so. I see this as different than fiscal conservatism which I tend to think is more protectionist and biased toward corporations.

Social Views: I am a social conservative in my personal life, but the extent to which the state is I do not know. I believe that we need to have an ordered liberty as liberty cannot last long when people are running amok. When people refuse to restrain themselves government legislates taking away more freedom, so in some sense I am a libertarian within conservative order.

Political Influences: Well, let&#39;s see here. The Bible. The Christian Reconstructionist movement. Not to mention paleolibertarian and paleoconservative influences. In economics I would say Austrian economics in general.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Well, you guys are kind of too much lifestyle radicals. Not to mention wrong on most issues. Overall though I admire the angst and the antistatist anti-imperialist stuff is something I can agree to. I tend to more or less admire the anarchist (particularly individualist anarchist) side more than that of statist communists which I diametrically oppose.

[Sacrificed]

Name: Benjamin

Age: Eighteen.

Location: The Midwest.

Something weird: The only pizza topping I whatsoever care to eat is pepperroni.

Religion: "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

Or;

"Dionysos, who is in fact a god, the most terrible and yet most mild to men."

Economic view: I&#39;m more radical than any of you - I want nothing more than the entire dismantling of the post-industrial system and a communalization of all that remains. Historically this requires the population level to be reduced by a few billion; hence I await with great eagerness the coming socio-economic turmoil of the new century.

I do, however, utterly and completely reject Marx and everything associated with him. I reject the dialectic - if Becoming had an end to be reached, it would have already arrived. I reject "class consciousness" for precisely the same reason I reject the Lockean theory of sentience: they are equally nonsensical. I will therefore not be accorded the same level of respect as a Marxist, who shares in the monopoly Marxism has over the radical left.

Social views: Radical anarchism. The "perfect" society would be a psychocracy, fashioned in part after the Bacchanalia. Man would have no need of crime because everything he wanted would be available for the taking; the individual would learn to lose himself within the greater Dionysian experience.

Political influences: Friedrich Nietzsche, Georges Bataille, Max Stirner, Michel Foucault, Søren Kierkegaard - the only Christian who might rightly be called &#39;human&#39;&#33; -, Arthur Schopenhauer (these last two influence my social, not strictly economic or political, views).

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: That it rests on a false, dialectically-idealist conception of things. Communalization shall arise naturally, and can only arise after the greatest disaster of an era which is still survivable. Anything less and the old order reasserts itself; anything more and there is nobody left alive. A revolution today would be a laughable and short-lived affair. Better to work to quicken the onrush of civilizational collapse, I think.

[Jazzratt]

Point one: So you don&#39;t even have cheese or tomato on your pizzas? That must be fucking weird.

Point two: You sound like a semi-retarded cockgrinder with a stupid nihilistic psuedo-philosophy but it takes all sorts to fill this forum so have fun posting.

[Sacrificed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 12:55 am
Point two: You sound like a semi-retarded cockgrinder with a stupid nihilistic psuedo-philosophy but it takes all sorts to fill this forum so have fun posting.
Still beats Hegelianism, ftw.

[Faux Real]

Not everyone here believes in the almighty doctrine of dialectics. <_<

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 06:45 pm
So you&#39;re a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you&#39;ve been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.
Personally, I was banned for being a realist.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?
Dean...


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".
21


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don&#39;t want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?
Handover Vagina, USA


Hobbies: Everyone has them.
Drinking, music, discussing philosophy / psychology / et. al.


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.
I have a little - known disorder known as Hypohidrotic Ectodermal Dysplasia


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.
Atheist


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you&#39;re a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.
Communist


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?
Libertarian communist.


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?
Erich Fromm, Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Marx, Carl Jung...


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What&#39;s your beef.
Not enough theory or militant action. But it all depend on where you are.

[funkmasterswede]

Name: Graeme

Age: 20

Location: Alberta, Canada

Hobbies: Philosophy, Economics, Music Composition, and Collecting Music

Something Weird: I have a lot of marxist friends.

Religion: Atheist

Economic View: Anything that involves completely voluntary exchanges, so obviously a freemarket, but I welcome voluntary communes and cooperatives.

Social Views: Harm Principle-Do anything as you want as long as you are not aggressing on another person. So libertarian.

Political Influences: Aristotle, Rousseau, Mill, Kant, Hoppe, Proudhon, Konkin, Chomsky, Nietzsche, Stirner and Deleuze.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: It is far too sectarian and unwilling to accept criticism. Outer criticism is labeled as bourgeois or reactionary and dismissed.

[lilo32]

Name: lilo

Age:17

Location: the desserts new mexico

Hobbies: kick boxing

Something Weird: i like to eat chocolate chip cookies with nacho cheese

Religion: catholic.

Economic View:liberal

Social Views: hypocrisy

Political Influences: ghandi

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: well isnt criticizing falling into norms??

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Sacrificed: Don&#39;t I know you? You&#39;re THIS (http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8214) guy aren&#39;t you? :lol: The one who thinks that chaining up a dog and leaving it to starve to death is "brave"? :angry: where&#39;s a puking emoticon when you need one?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yay&#33; I&#39;m a restricted member, my life&#39;s dream&#33; I actually have no idea why I&#39;ve been restricted, but I suspect that it has something to do with me posting something about Max Stirner. Oh well.

Name: Gabriel

Age: 20

Location: Kodiak, Alaska, although I have lived and been to many different places. And I don&#39;t give a flying fuck, I&#39;ll name my exact address if requested. Always outnumbered, NEVER outgunned. :D

Hobbies: Surfing. Leading a self reliant, subsistence lifestyle. Reading about and being involved in anti-state movements.

Something Weird: I&#39;m a big fan of horror films.

Religion: I&#39;m agnostic.

Economic View: Mostly I&#39;m a supporter of the anti-"capitalist" market place. My sympathies lie mostly with mutualism and Agorism. However, I believe that anyone should be allowed to engage in any voluntary transaction of goods or services as they see fit, and I believe entirely in voluntary association, so other economic means could take place as well.

I&#39;m also very much interested in worker self-organization, co-operatives, and syndicates.

Social Views: As a anarcho Individualist, I oppose all coercion and violence, unless of course it is in the interest of self preservation and/or survival.

Political Influences: The biggest one is Benjamin Tucker. Others include Lysander Spooner, Voltarine De Cleyre, Bakunin, Emma Goldman, Kropotkin, Samuel Konkin III, George Orwell, Eugene Debs, and Noam Chomsky.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Well, if we are talking about Communists, my biggest criticism is that the entire ideology is based on thuggish cohercion, sucks donkey balls, and that all people who subscribe to Marx&#39;s lunacy should do humanity a favor and hang themselves. Besides that, though, no complaints at all. :)

[Robert]

Name: Rob.

[luxemburg89]

Originally posted by Robert the [email protected] 22, 2007 03:40 am
Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Utopian, vague, and dishonest: if you want to kill me for the good of the revolution, just say so. I don&#39;t care.
Is it really vague or do you just not understand?


So take me very seriously when I say "All you commies are just damn kids"*. Because you are.


Evidentally 55 years was not long enough to teach you how to use a semi-colon, or indeed what a subordinate clause is. Alas, what do I know? - I am &#39;just a damn kid&#39; after all :rolleyes: .

*Some advice*: I don&#39;t think anyone that refers to themself as &#39;great&#39; is going to be taken seriously somehow.


Location: Texas, whar ever&#39;thang&#39;s bigger and better


Everything?&#33; Including racism, sexism, homophobia, mass-murder, gang-rape, child abuse, animal abuse, ignorance, idiocy, stupidity, oppression, germ warfare, trench warfare, nuclear warfare, social and class divisions...etc.? Well, if you say so mate...


Something Weird: I&#39;d tell you, but it would just bum everybody out. Hint : Man is the cruelest animal.


Well, good job you didn&#39;t tell us then. Or was that a use of comic irony? Your posts are so laughable it&#39;s becoming hard to tell which jokes are intentional.

I used a lot of long words in this post, would you like me to get you a dictionary?

P.S. All communists are &#39;kids&#39; are they? Well take a look at this list and identify the &#39;kids&#39; would you:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/index.htm

[apathy maybe]

Location: Texas, whar ever'thang's bigger and better
Really? Well fuck you. ;)

Oh, edit.

[Robert]

germ warfare, trench warfare, nuclear warfare

In Texas? You really are an ignoramus. Please get help.

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by Robert the [email protected] 02, 2007 04:50 am

germ warfare, trench warfare, nuclear warfare

In Texas? You really are an ignoramus. Please get help.
I think he was just exaggerating in order to make his point.

[RedKnight]

Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?
Jason


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids". LOL I'm 24


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now? Ohio


Hobbies: Everyone has them. Tin Whistle, Chess,Karate


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you. I have Asperger Syndrome, as well as Tourette Syndrome.


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene. I'm an agnostic. I just can't seem to be decide between the atheistic "Cult of Reason", and the deistic "Cult of the Supreme Being".


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate. I do not have a strong socio-economic preference. Probally a synthesis of guild socialism with market socialism.


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy? I'm a libertarian socialist.


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics? I have many figures whom have influenced me in different ways. Probally my strongest infuences ideologicly are Mansoor Hekmat, Josep Broz Tito, and Pierre Proudhon.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef. I'd say my biggest criticism of the post-Soviet Communist movement is it's blind anti-western attitudes, and it's misalliance with certain islamist/non-Communist groups.

[Joby]

Name: Burke

Age: 19

Location: Dallas, TX. Unfortunately.

Hobbies: Drugs, mainly weed, a couple of the opiates, a few of the "aines," but psychadelics are my personal favorites. Oh, and alcohol. I play drums.

Something Weird: I'm the definition of normal.

Religion: None

Economic View: Free-Market. We aren't ready for socialism yet, especially on a worldwide basis.

Social Views: Libertarian, and most normal people would consider it extreme.

Political Influences: Locke, Jefferson, Marx, Trotsky, Goldwater

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: They never do anything.

[ironguy]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?

Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".

Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?

Hobbies: Everyone has them.

Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.

Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.

Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.

Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?

Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.

Name: Roy

Age: don't care to say

Location: 3852 Ferry Landing rd, Dunkirk, Calvert Country, MD, 20754. this is in the United States of America by the way, on planet Earth, in the Milky way Galaxy. (I'm in the house thats of ok size, its all white. you know when your there when you see a large rows of fruit trees.)

Hobbies: proving I'm innocent when convicted of a crime. weight lifting, talking politics, and then some.

Something Weird: I am naturally attracted to those who contest with me. (i can be a /b/ about it too :p )

Religion: Christian

Economic Views: Socialist

Social Views: Plane old American Democracy would suit me just fine. the system it self tends to be very neutral and very fair. its only the people that push it left or right.

Political Influences: many many people... John Edwards, John Lennon, Ghandi, Dr. King, George Washington, Bejerman Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, Barack Obama, Vladimir Lenin, Che Guevara, and Oprah...


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: none... i do have some criticism for how the revleft site is handled... it seems some members here are to quick to judge and are not willing to listen to you. this is why communism is so wrongly held back...

PEACE :)

[Bud Struggle]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username? Tom.



Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".
You should take me pretty seriously, I'm 49ish. :cool:



Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?

I'm from Florida now, though I used to live in NYC for the longest time.



Hobbies: Everyone has them. I play piano and guitar, I do a bit of horsemanship and dressage as well as some boating and fishing in the Gulf of Mexico.




Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.
I'm one of those guys that control the MEANS OF PRODUCTION! :lol: I own a factory and I make chemicals and soaps and cleaning products, etc.



Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene. I'm a Roman Catholic. And while I have never had the opportunity to kiss the Pope's Toe, I pray nightly for the opportunity :lol:. Seriously, I am a practicing Roman Catholic and abide by all the Church's Creeds and teachings.




Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.
I guess you could say I was a cross between a paleo conservative and a Libertarian. I believe that each man is put on this earth to make the best life he can for himself and his family. I believe that government has no business in my life other than providing security for myself and my property and paving roads so that my good could get to market as quickly as possible. As a Christian I also believe in giving charity to those less fortunate.



Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?
None. I wish to be left alone by government.




Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?

I like St. Thomas Aquinas, Edmund Burke, William F. Buckley, Jr, and Pat Buchannan.



Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef. I have no problem with radical leftists at all. In fact, I kind of like you guys. Now, I wouldn't want you within a thousand miles of my business;), but it certainly is interesting to see your views on economics and on the future of government. I also find your intramural debates of the meaning and practice of Communist theory quite fascinating, too.

Anyway, it's a pleasure to be here, Comrads. :hammersickle: :)

[Sentinel]

I'm one of those guys that control the MEANS OF PRODUCTION! http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/laugh.gif I own a factory and I make chemicals and soaps and cleaning products, etc. That was indeed 'something weird'. Very interesting to have an actual capitalist here. It's quite rare, the average right-winger we get here is an idiot who merely supports capitalism, against their own class interests..

Maybe there are some petty-bourgeois restricted users as well, but that's about it.

Welcome.

[Bud Struggle]

Welcome. Thank you so much, you are most kind. I am rather interested in the Worker's Movement/Union Movement/Socialist-Communist Movement, for a couple or reasons. I am a Christian and as such am commanded to treat my employees as I would want to be treated, so I want to see what's been thought of in the world of worker's rights so that I could translate (in my own Capitalist way) some of those ideas back to those who work for me. An injury to one is an injury to all--if indeed all men are brother and sons of God.

And also, a happy worker is a good worker. A happy worker makes a better product, serves a customer better, makes themselves more money and makes me more money. If one were to take away all my wage earners--and bring back slavery--I'd go broke in six months. I need the enthusiasm of good workers to make me successful. I think you kind people may have something valuable to teach me.

[Joby]

That was indeed 'something weird'. Very interesting to have an actual capitalist here. It's quite rare, the average right-winger we get here is an idiot who merely supports capitalism, against their own class interests..

Maybe there are some petty-bourgeois restricted users as well, but that's about it.

Most of the communists on here are won't be in 2 years. Or when they get a girlfriend, whichever comes first.

Nice signature, though. Did you know he was Aldous's brother?

[apathy maybe]

Funny thing, I've been around since 2002, in that time I've got a partner, a degree and moved to a different country.

Most of the active people on the boards have also been around for at least two years.

I think you are a reject, and fit Sentinel's "idiot" claim.

[Jazzratt]

Most of the communists on here are won't be in 2 years. Or when they get a girlfriend, whichever comes first.

I joined in June 2006 so I'll make a wager with you: If I remain unrestricted and fervently communist during the month of June, you send me a pony. If I don't, I'll send you a pony.

I literally mean a pony, rather than in any slang sense.

[RedAnarchist]

Most of the communists on here are won't be in 2 years. Or when they get a girlfriend, whichever comes first.

Some people have been here for six or seven years. And "girl"friend? We do have straight female and bi/gay male members here, you know.

[Goodoldrebel]

Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?


I am not going to answer that question.


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".

I guess I am a damn kid, at least as the current society judges it. Truth is I would have been considered an adult through most of history.


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?

A country whose policies I do not give a damn for.


Hobbies: Everyone has them.

That's my business.


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.

I was a diehard capitalist until a month ago when I did some thinking on my own and came to some other realizations. Before that I was a "moderate liberal" so I moved from moderate left to right to anarchist in three years time.


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.

I don't talk about that to anybody else. My ideas languish inside my mind.


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.

Look here, I am an anarchist without adjectives. To tell the total truth, I do not think so much about economics, but I kind of shun commerce.


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?

Libertarian. Everybody else leaves everybody else alone, that is if they want to, because voluntary cooperation is great.


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?

Myself.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.


The New Left in general. I also do not like these sort of single-issue caucuses and, well, hippies. I am an Old Left kind of guy.

[apathy maybe]

Seriously, if you are a leftist, what you posting in the OI introduction thread for?

I assume you don't consider "anarcho"-capitalism to be included in your "anarchism without adjectives".

[Sentinel]

when they get a girlfriendThen I'll be here forever I suppose, as I'm interested in guys mainly. :)


Nice signature, though. Did you know he was Aldous's brother?Of course I know that. He was no communist, and some of the stuff he stood for was outright despicable. But yet he was a remarkable and very intelligent man -- one of the first transhumanists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) as well as one most prominent members of the non-racist part of the eugenics movement. He was also the first director of UNESCO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO), but was replaced before his term ended -- likely due to his left wing, humanist views.

Julian Huxley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley)

[Goodoldrebel]

Seriously, if you are a leftist, what you posting in the OI introduction thread for?

I assume you don't consider "anarcho"-capitalism to be included in your "anarchism without adjectives".

I do not "hate" anarcho-capitalists per se, but I think they are stupid. I am not going to suggest that they aren't authentic anarchists, they are just mentally challenged ones. The truth is that capitalism cannot exist without the backing up of the state. Anarcho-capitalists must choose where their hearts lie, with anarchism or with capitalism. I think most of them would choose capitalism in the end. I used to be one, but I chose anarchism and with that the fact that capitalism and anarchism is incompatible.

[Dejavu]

Name: Luka

Age: 30

Location: Californiastan

Hobbies: Reading, Writing, games , party, self-improvment

Something Weird: I used to be Marxist

Religion: Atheist

Economic View: Austrian Economics - FREE Markets ( meaning no govy intervention.

Social Views: Methodological Individualist,Radical Libertarian, Market Anarchist

Political Influences: Carl Menger, Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Socialism cannot lead to prosperity. Modern 'capitalism' is neo-mercantilism and a few notches more tolerable than Socialism. Socialism and Economics are an oxymoron. Sometimes its a bit annoying when pro-Socialists mistake modern capitalism with the free market. Whats even worse is when vulgar libertarians and conservatives do the same thing.

[RedAnarchist]

I presume you mean Libertarian in the American sense, because that word was originally used to describe anarchism (For example, Anarchist-Communist is often known as Libertarian socialism).

[Joby]

Then I'll be here forever I suppose, as I'm interested in guys mainly. :)

haha I guess I forgot that option :blushing:



Of course I know that. He was no communist, and some of the stuff he stood for was outright despicable. But yet he was a remarkable and very intelligent man -- one of the first transhumanists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) as well as one most prominent members of the non-racist part of the eugenics movement. He was also the first director of UNESCO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO), but was replaced before his term ended -- likely due to his left wing, humanist views.


So how do you view the utopia of Brave New World? Outside of the "savages," is that the end all be all (basically)? What do you think would be different?

[Ele'ill]

Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?
My name is Mariel. Seriously, it is.


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".

I am 23 years old. I will be 24 in April.


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?

I live in Philadelphia Pennsylvania. The mom's of most of the members on this board would not allow their children to run around outside with their airsoft guns. Which is why so many of them are isolated to their basements.


Hobbies: Everyone has them.

I play computer games, mainly Tribes. (the first one). I am a writer so I write a lot.


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.

I am a beer conasiour.


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.

I think about life a lot but I am not religious. I have fond memories of church retreats in the mountains where we didn't talk a whole lot about god but we did talk a lot about life. I'd like to think that there is nothing after life. Or at least a little time out.


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.

I am a part time reformist and a part time zombie invasion economic collapse gun nut, although I generally believe that the first would be more practical.


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?
Believe it or not I actually enjoy breaking the rules. If there were very few rules I would feel empty and my daily tasks at work would be less fun. The other day I put 3x5 sticky notes with artwork on them all over the building, in very obscure and hard to reach places. I would miss this.



Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?
Earth and our ecosystems.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.

My biggest gripe with the left right now is their lack of movement. The left seems content with showing up at demonstrations and getting arrested. I thought that n30 (seattle) was kickin-rad but I have not seen much of anything since then. The idea of waiting for the prols to be ready to begin an upheaval of the system is essentially saying 'when the revolution starts the revolution will have started'. It may have no trace of leftist influence at all and I think many on this board see themselves giving great speeches behind podiums to starry eyed factory workers. I don't think this is realistic.

[Jazzratt]

I am a beer conasiour.

:scared: Get away! Really? What kind of beers do you generally prefer? Lagers, stouts, ales, bitters - or something more exotic?


My biggest gripe with the left right now is their lack of movement. The left seems content with showing up at demonstrations and getting arrested. Radical unions are something that happen to other people then?

Also, is Mariel an uncommon name or something?

[Dr Mindbender]

Most of the communists on here are won't be in 2 years. Or when they get a girlfriend, whichever comes first.

and the prize for the most pretentious condenscending post goes to...

I've been married in the time since I joined, and I'm still here.

[Bud Struggle]

and the prize for the most pretentious condenscending post goes to...

I've been married in the time since I joined, and I'm still here.

Well, my wife's been threatening to divorce me since I start spending so much time here. ;):D

[careyprice31]

Well, my wife's been threatening to divorce me since I start spending so much time here. ;):D

Tell her to piss off. You like internet forums, so do we all. You've got to have time for your hobbies. If she's a good person, Tom, she will understand.

[Bud Struggle]

Tell her to piss off. You like internet forums, so do we all. You've got to have time for your hobbies. If she's a good person, Tom, she will understand.

Thanks Svetlana,

I was kind of joking a bit. My wife actually is quite a lovely women. We've been married, in abiding faith for lo' these last 24 years.

Thanks for caring, though.

Tom

[careyprice31]

Thanks Svetlana,

I was kind of joking a bit. My wife actually is quite a lovely women. We've been married, in abiding faith for lo' these last 24 years.

Thanks for caring, though.

Tom

You're welcome. :)

[RNK]

Take your friendliness elsewhere, fuckbags.

[Bud Struggle]

Take your friendliness elsewhere, fuckbags.

RNK: so you do your drinking on Friday night. :D

[Killfacer]

hello people. Im restricted.

killfacer

[Die Neue Zeit]

That was indeed 'something weird'. Very interesting to have an actual capitalist here. It's quite rare, the average right-winger we get here is an idiot who merely supports capitalism, against their own class interests..

Maybe there are some petty-bourgeois restricted users as well, but that's about it.

Welcome.

I read his stuff about making soaps and cleaning products, but I think he's still merely an overly proud yet "charitable" petit-bourgeois (because the scope of "small business" has expanded way past the scope of mom-and-pop shops).

This conclusion of mine is derived from my once having an actual bourgeois in-law in another corner of the world (an elderly but BIG-TIME real estate developer). I can't reveal more info for security reasons. :p

[Bud Struggle]

I read his stuff about making soaps and cleaning products, but I think he's still merely an overly proud yet "charitable" petit-bourgeois (because the scope of "small business" has expanded way past the scope of mom-and-pop shops).

This conclusion of mine is derived from my once having an actual bourgeois in-law in another corner of the world (an elderly but BIG-TIME real estate developer). I can't reveal more info for security reasons. :p

You my friend are so freaking wrong--WRONG! :cursing:

I'm MSI!!!! (That's Multiple Streams of Income!)

And anyway I can buy and sell you brother-in-law for chrump change!

I'm not only Bourgeoise, I'm GRAN bourgeoise!!!!! :tt2:

[edit] And anyway--why would you ever assume where I had "workers" is where I make my money?

DAMN GODLESS COMMUNIST! :D

[Die Neue Zeit]

Three houses + luxury car + factory + "Multiple streams of income" (I'm assuming you're into parasitic short-selling, derivatives exchange, currency speculation, etc.) = Bourgeois? Riiiiight. :rolleyes:


I'm GRAN bourgeoisie

Business magnate, then? Carlos Slim Helu, Li Ka-shing, Lawrence Ellison, Roman Abramovich, and the Walton family?

Swallow your pride, pal. You're not in their league, or even in the league of my former in-law. At best, you're probably slightly "better off" than my petit-bourgeois partner-bosses, who operate a national business (but still "small business" in scope).

[Bud Struggle]

Three houses + luxury car + factory + "Multiple streams of income" (I'm assuming you're into parasitic short-selling, derivatives exchange, currency speculation, etc.) = Bourgeois? Riiiiight. :rolleyes:

Nope. Commercial real estate.


Business magnate, then? Carlos Slim Helu, Li Ka-shing, Lawrence Ellison, Roman Abramovich, and the Walton family?

Swallow your pride, pal. You're not in their league, or even in the league of my former in-law. At best, you're probably slightly "better off" than my petit-bourgeois partner-bosses, who operate a national business (but still "small business" in scope).

Nope not in that class with Slim and Ellison. Skip the "Gran." :D

But, might do better than you boss and maybe less so than you brother-in-law...maybe somewhere in between.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Thanks for the info (even though my class case still stands, I'd have a lot less general "respect" for you if you were into the kind of financial markets crap that I outlined earlier ;) ).

And it's not "brother-in-law" ("elderly but BIG-TIME real estate developer"). ;)

[Peacekeeper]

Hello. I hate to associate myself with the people restricted for being anti-communist in some way, but I decided to fill this out.


Name: Damon

Age: 17

Location: Seattle will have to be good enough for you.

Hobbies: Reading, hanging with friends, writing prose when I get the chance.

Something Weird: I abide by the Hadith about cleanliness, meaning that I have no pubic or armpit hair, trim my nails regularly, and am circumcised. :D

Religion: Shi'a Islam

Economic View: Communist. The means of production should be seized, through revolution, by the working class.

Social Views: I, personally, would like to live in a nation with Islamic law, as well as socialist governmental practices. The Libyan Jamahiriya, for example, would be nice. In general, I think everyone should be able to do what they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else or hoarding wealth.

Political Influences: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hoxha, al-Qathafi.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Nothing. The Leftists in Seattle are pretty great, and accepting of my Muslim view of things. RevLeft is the first place I've encountered opposition.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Name: Robbie. Soon to be Mr. Senator.

Age: 19

Location: Texas

Hobbies: I play drums, enjoy backpacking, and smoking pot.

Something Weird: I'm allergic to hops. It sucks.

Religion: None.

Economic View: Liberal Left

Social Views: Libertarian

Political Influences: Hunter Thompson

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Lack of appeal

[Killfacer]

welcome

[Bud Struggle]

Something Weird: I'm allergic to hops. It sucks.



Now THAT sucks! Welcome to the freedom of Revleft, you've made some interesting posts, keep it up.

And there's no need to ever go back on the "other" Revleft--here's all you need to know about that place: Stalin=bad guy.

Tom

[Captain Morgan]

Age: A spring chicken.
Location: Southern Finland
Hobbies: History, science fiction, politics et cetera
Something Weird: I reeally hate wearing socks. Especially walking around with socks.
Religion: Agnostic.
Economic View: Social liberalistque centrist.
Social Views: On social side of thangs I'm very libertarian and pro-choice - usually. There are a few expections, eg. my relation to narcotics.
Political Influences: All kind of stuff here and there. From Keynes to Popper and in very minor scale even people like Nordberg.
Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics:
* Elitist nature is not the best possible trait for ideology like Communism aimed to unite the working class under common goal and ideals
* Lack of practice. Sure, there are individuals who are interested about practical socialism and communism but still I'd see lack of practical applications to all those fancy theories at least as a minor problem.
* Especially Marxist-Leninists have bad habit of ignoring history. It's damn easy to close your ears and sing "lalala no there were no purges or terror i'm not going to listen your bourgeois bullshit lalalal". But no matter how much they sing - they can't change the past. It really horrifies me how ignorant some Stalin-fanboys are when it comes to true nature of their hero. Sure Western media is exaggerating things a lot but it's only barely - if at all - worse than some people's blatant ignorance and belittling attitudes.

[Killfacer]

your not restricted?

[Captain Morgan]

your not restricted?

Well, true, but I still am an evil cappie and thus I don't belong to the tubes outside this forum.

[Killfacer]

Ahh, okay. Welcome! Enjoy the forum!

[Qwerty Dvorak]

hai guyz

Name: Alan
Age: 18
Location: Ireland - Dublin or Wexford, depending on the time of year.
Hobbies: Reading, law, politics, gaming (poker, blackjack, yahtzee, chess, various computer games--kind of--etc.)
Something Weird: I can't go to sleep in my own bed until I've performed this weird ritual with the bed involving shifting the mattress a couple of inches to the right and straightening up one of the legs of the bed, amongst other things. I don't have this problem in other beds.
Religion: Agnostic
Economic View: Centre-left; social democracy crossed with economic pragmatism; mixed economy.
Social Views: Strongly libertarian
Political Influences: I don't like to tie myself to ideology anymore so I couldn't really pinpoint any one person as a major influence. I guess Marx strongly influenced the way in which I view capitalism. Keynes too. There are others I'm sure, though I couldn't name them now.
Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: You are too quick to oppose any measures proposed by capitalist governments without looking at its contents. This means that you miss many valuable opportunities to secure gains for the working class, and it also damages your credibility by making you look like professional agitators.

[Bud Struggle]

WELCOME to the Isle of Misfit Toys.

With your humor, compassion and intelligence you will make a great addition to the OI Brotherhood.

Welcome, Brother ECU!


Location: Ireland - Dublin or Wexford, depending on the time of year

Country house! Excellent--I have one, too! :D

[Killfacer]

Welcome comrade of the damned.

[PigmerikanMao]

Name: Jameson

Age: 18

Location: undisclosed

Hobbies: Reading, Hiking, etc

Something Weird: I live in a cellar

Religion: Buddhist / Taoist

Economic View: Communism / Great Leap Forward

Social Views: Serve the People

Political Influences: Mao, Lin Biao, Pol Pot, Shubel Morgan

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Not radical enough; unwavering avocation for abortion

[Killfacer]

a pro life maoist. Some crazy shit goin down there.

[PigmerikanMao]

a pro life maoist. Some crazy shit goin down there.


We have the Marxist Leninist weapon of criticism and self-criticism. We can get rid of a bad style and keep the good.

I feel that the understandable though misled pro-choice fanaticism in the revolutionary left must be criticized. Mao was a genius, but he was wrong on many subjects, among them being abortion. Mao has been known to have contradicted himself. In one statement; he seems also to move against family planning:


More people, more help!

~PMao :blushing:

[Killfacer]

you religous?

[PigmerikanMao]

Buddhist / Daoist

[funkmasterswede]

That was indeed 'something weird'. Very interesting to have an actual capitalist here. It's quite rare, the average right-winger we get here is an idiot who merely supports capitalism, against their own class interests..

Maybe there are some petty-bourgeois restricted users as well, but that's about it.

Welcome.


Save us from our false consciousness, oh enlightened Marxist.

[Sentinel]

I had forgotten this thread existed. :) Sorry for the late reply.


Save us from our false consciousness, oh enlightened Marxist.I'm an anarchist, but yeah ok whatever. Now I think I'll forget this thread again.

[Elway]

Damn, Jazzratt!

It looked like a lot of fun, it made me want to play, too!

Wish I were a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever!

[XieJinyuan]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?

Yanhong



Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".


20



Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?


State University of New York at Buffalo



Hobbies: Everyone has them.


Study



Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.


University library system says I have 14 items on loan. I'm a busy person



Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.


Neoplatonist



Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.


Mainstream


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?

Don't really care


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?

I'm pretty much apolitical


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.

Unrealistic, no empirical evidence, excessively high appraisal of human nature

It's not the social policy, it's the economic policy

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Yanhong



20



State University of New York at Buffalo



Study



University library system says I have 14 items on loan. I'm a busy person



Neoplatonist



Mainstream



Don't really care



I'm pretty much apolitical



Unrealistic, no empirical evidence, excessively high appraisal of human nature

It's not the social policy, it's the economic policy
Christ you sound boring.

[Jazzratt]

It's amazing going through this thread and finding out what people think constitutes "weird". ever closer union's was the most interesting in my opinion with XieJinyuan being the least.

[XieJinyuan]

Christ you sound boring.

Well, remember, if I study and work hard, I can become the kind of person whom upper-middle class white Marxists with substantial carbon footprints ineffectually rail against on Internet forums. "To get rich is glorious," in the words of our dear revolutionary comrade, Deng Xiaoping.

Incidentally, I'm not just in it for the money. I was studying computer science before economics. Then I took macro for a bullshit elective and unexpectedly got really, really interested in the field as a whole.


It's amazing going through this thread and finding out what people think constitutes "weird". ever closer union's was the most interesting in my opinion with XieJinyuan being the least.

That description was slapped together quickly and is certainly misleading to some degree ... I would be characterized as 'eccentric' or at least 'unique' by anyone who has known me for a long time, since I have a mild form of autism. A Chinese guy who listens to Suicide Commando, how often do you see that?

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

It's amazing going through this thread and finding out what people think constitutes "weird". ever closer union's was the most interesting in my opinion

I agree. That whole in-bed routine is pretty unique, and'd be quite strange with a women over LoL

Anyway, I agree with him that other peoples beds are more comfortable. I can't seem to fall asleep in mine for hours on end sometimes, while every time I am in a Hotel or at a friend's I have no problem. Though I am often drunk at those places too.

[danyboy27]

what is suicide commando?

[Vahanian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Commando

[Jazzratt]

what is suicide commando?

Fucking great.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

what is suicide commando?

Noise pollution.

[XieJinyuan]

what is suicide commando?

Like Kraftwerk, but from the very bowels of Hell

[LOLseph Stalin]

Wow! I had no idea this thread even existed. It seems interesting to know what other viewpoints i'm arguing against.

[Kernewek]

what is suicide commando?
cliched dark ebm

sort of stuff where every song sounds the same

[Jazzratt]

cliched dark ebm

sort of stuff where every song sounds the same

:lol: I never trust the opinion of someone who talks about all of an artists songs sounding the same, 9 times out of 10 they're talking right out of their arse.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I heart Kraftwerk.

[JimmyJazz]

I want someone to get unrestricted so I can use this smiley:

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc101/vtm20002000/smilie_knast.gif

[Kappie]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?I have so many monikers I like to go by aside from my username it is hard to remember them all


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".26. But I never say "All commies are just damn kids." 99% of them give the rest a bad name.


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?US of fuckin' A


Hobbies: Everyone has them.Not me


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.How about a stupid and pointless anecdote? I once found myself in Fort Erie, Ontario in the middle of the night, trying to get back into the States. Unfortunately, the last bus to Buffalo had already left for the night, so I decided to walk. Oddly enough, walking through Customs in the 2 in the morning with nothing but the clothes on my back I had the least hassles I have ever had crossing the border back into the States (for some reason I always get hassled more trying to get back into my country of origin than I do going into a country to which I am not a citizen). I walked across ye olde Peace Bridge and wandered into downtown Buffalo, realizing rather quickly that A) I had no idea where the fuck I was and B) I had only Canadian currency on me. Fortunately I happened upon a kindly city bus driver who gave me directions to the Greyhound, which was the next stop on my journey. He offered to take me there, as it was not far off his route. I explained to him that I had only Canadian currency to offer him, and he told me that I could ride free of charge. When I arrived at the bus station, the counter was closed meaning I could not get my currency exchanged or buy a ticket. I decided, then, it would be best to take a nap until the counter opened. This I did, at least until some asshole cop decided that I should be awoken from my slumber with a loud rap of his baton on the plastic bus seats right next to my head and then demanded to know what I was doing. I explained to him that I was waiting for a bus, which was why I was in the bus station. For some reason he appeared suspicious, but let me be. I found myself unable to go back to sleep yet it was only 5 o'clock and the ticket counter didn't open until 7. So I meandered around the bus terminal until the counter opened and I was able to exchange my currency and get a bus ticket the hell out of there. I have hated Buffalo and cops ever since (although I do remember fondly the kindly bus driver who helped me out).


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.Fundie Atheist


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.I'll take "Bartering with pretty beads" for $100, Alex


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?Anarchy all the way, baby


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?Hell, I have no fucking idea. I'll say Thoreau, whose work "Civil Disobedience" got me interested in politics in general and anti-authoritarianism in particular back in High School. The only interesting and enjoyable assignment I had in 10th grade history class.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.Considering the wide array of views of radical leftists this is a hard one to pin down. Focusing primarily on those who represent the "mainstream" of radical leftism (oxymoron that it is) I would say its authoritarianism and desire to achieve its social goals through state coercion. The anarchists and anarcho-communists (Is there a difference there?) I don't have too much of a problem with.

[FreeMan]

Name: Frank

Age: Serous unless I am joking around.

Location: TX

Hobbies: surf net, motorcyclist, club goer, book reader

Something Weird: I once called out a waiter so loud and everyone turned to look at me. I was with a date to.

Religion: Atheist

Economic View: SUPER FAR RIGHT EXTREMEIST!!!!!!! LAZIE FAIRY CAP YO!!!!!!!!

Social Views:No coercion unless I am breaking the law.

Political Influences: Ron Paul, Ayn Rand

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: I don't believe 1 min of my life should belong to my fellow brother. EVen when I am helping someone I am doing it for my own purpose. It brings me pleasure to help someone I like. Communism just gets in the way of shit.

[MarxSchmarx]

Social Views:No coercion unless I am breaking the law.Yeah... So if "da law" said you should pay higher taxes to support the poor and not drink alcohol, this isn't coercive right :rolleyes:


EVen when I am helping someone I am doing it for my own purpose. It brings me pleasure to help someone I like. So the more people you like, the more helping them brings you pleasure. I like people until they are proven jerks. Frankly it gives me pleasure to help out people who I have no reason to believe are all that much different from myself.

So, amen, Comrade.

[Brother No. 1]

So this is where the capitalist introduce them selfs. I really thought they didnt need a Introduction.

[LOLseph Stalin]

So this is where the capitalist introduce them selfs. I really thought they didnt need a Introduction.


Come on, be friendly. They deserve a right to introduce themselves too even if we do disagree with their politics.

[Brother No. 1]

ok ok comrade I'll be Friendly. But only because you want me to.

[danyboy27]

should have posted that long time ago but well!


Age: 25

Location: quebec, canada

Hobbies: internet, video game, movies, working (duh)

Something Weird: i eat poutine and love it.

Religion: agnostic

Economic View: not sure

Social Views:my freedom stop where your freedom start

Political Influences: nobody famous.

[Bud Struggle]

Poutine!

I had to look that one up. We don't have it here in the States. I think I'd like it, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutine

[danyboy27]

Poutine!

I had to look that one up. We don't have it here in the States. I think I'd like it, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutine


of course you would like it, its greazy, tasty and fat! pretty much like your avearge american fast food!

still, it dosnt beat KFC in term of arteries damages.

[Jazzratt]

Never had cheese curds but I love chips and gravy so it doesn't seem unlikely I'd love Poutine.

[Pogue]

Never had cheese curds but I love chips and gravy so it doesn't seem unlikely I'd love Poutine.

Freak!

[danyboy27]

poutine can be made of virtually anything.

we got chiken poutine, italian poutine, hot chiken poutine.
hell tomk, if you feel for a more sofisticated version, replace gravy with a rosbif sauce and add big chunk of juicy steak, replace the avearge cheese with a more sofisticated, costly cheese and make your own fries.

did that once, it was bloody delicious.

[RedAnarchist]

Gulag prisoner #22761 reporting.

That would only work if we were all pro-USSR and as this site isn't Soviet-Empire.com, it doesn't.

[RedAnarchist]

Don't underestimate yourselves. I'm sure you can build gulags as well as the Soviets did. Forcing communism on a sizable country without the need for gulags - that I don't believe. I for one would resist your violence, most likely by leaving.

Because there were gulags in Anarchist Catalonia and the Makhnovschina, right?


Anarchy without capitalism is an impossibility in the long-term. The parts of the world that abandon capitalism would stagnate, and all the brains and capital would flow to ones that accept natural rights (i.e. self-ownership, including property rights). Anarchy is like evolution: good ideas prevail over bad.

A world without feudalism is an impossibility in the long term. The parts of the world that abandon the class system would stagnate, and all the brains and capital would flow to ones that accept the natural order (monarchism, landed gentry etc).

Evolution is not good ideas over bad, as ideas are not tangible. Evolution is where characteristics of a living organism that improve it's ability to survive are passed on at the expense of characteristics which do not.

[Dimentio]

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=20656.75

Alex Libman, defending an adult's right to touch a child with love :confused:

[RedAnarchist]

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=20656.75

Alex Libman, defending an adult's right to touch a child with love :confused:

Hey, who cares about a child's rights, eh?:rolleyes:

[Dimentio]

Hey, who cares about a child's rights, eh?:rolleyes:

Some Swedish libertarians think that laws on child prostitution should be abolished, because then the children will get "the right" to "earn their own money".

[GPDP]

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=20656.75

Alex Libman, defending an adult's right to touch a child with love :confused:

And this right here proves the bankruptcy of anarcho-capitalists. They go on and on about individual rights, as long as they only apply to those who "work hard" (i.e. capitalists). And apparently parents. Everyone else, including children, can go fuck themselves and buckle under their authority, no matter how much their own "individual rights" are destroyed in the process. But no one should be able to defend their individual rights, because it would infringe on individual rights! That is, the individual rights of the people who actually matter to these wackos.

Isn't anarchism about defying authority?

I think GeneCosta says it best when he describes ancaps as people who think totalitarianism is a better system than democracy, but at a small scale.

[Dejavu]

And this right here proves the bankruptcy of anarcho-capitalists. They go on and on about individual rights, as long as they only apply to those who "work hard" (i.e. capitalists). And apparently parents. Everyone else, including children, can go fuck themselves and buckle under their authority, no matter how much their own "individual rights" are destroyed in the process. But no one should be able to defend their individual rights, because it would infringe on individual rights! That is, the individual rights of the people who actually matter to these wackos.

Isn't anarchism about defying authority?

I think GeneCosta says it best when he describes ancaps as people who think totalitarianism is a better system than democracy, but at a small scale.

That may be true for certain ancaps like Hoppe who desire to mask dictatorship in anarchist clothing. Can't disagree there.

But just like this may be true of rigid ancaps , I think the same is true for rigid ancoms who reject pluralism and markets outright and call it democracy.

[Dejavu]

Some ancoms I've spoken with insist that the commune is the only way to go. They leave very little option for an alternative. For example if there were neighboring communities, one being an anarcho-commune and the other a free market community, these particular ancoms would want to aggressively invade and shut their neighbors down.

[Jazzratt]

Strawman. Point out some anarchist texts or links in support of that claim.

Ity's not a strawman, it's just stupid. There is no way that peace can exist while people are still exploited (i.e living under market economies) - intervening in ancap warzones (or "community" as they inexplicable prefer to euphamise them) is no more tyranical than starting a revolution.

[Dejavu]

Ity's not a strawman, it's just stupid. There is no way that peace can exist while people are still exploited (i.e living under market economies) - intervening in ancap warzones (or "community" as they inexplicable prefer to euphamise them) is no more tyranical than starting a revolution.

Sorry. Friend. I think you have erroneously conflated 'market economies' with (an)cap. But thanks for being an example I'm talking about.

Some ancoms, like ancaps, are very rigid and non-pluralistic. The authoritarian tendencies of these particular individuals very much shows.


Here are some interesting responses to people asking questions on libcom :
http://libcom.org/forums/theory/few-questions-anarcho-communist-theory-11032009

[GPDP]

Quick question, Dejavu. Do you even identify as an ancap nowadays? You seem like more of a mutualist/individualist anarchist in the line of Proudhon and Tucker than in the line of Rothbard and Rockwell. Or am I mistaken?

Revleft doesn't usually restrict the former, as far as I know. Maybe you should apply for unrestriction. ;)

[danyboy27]

Quick question, Dejavu. Do you even identify as an ancap nowadays? You seem like more of a mutualist/individualist anarchist in the line of Proudhon and Tucker than in the line of Rothbard and Rockwell. Or am I mistaken?

Revleft doesn't usually restrict the former, as far as I know. Maybe you should apply for unrestriction. ;)

are you affraid to have dejavu on our side?

[GPDP]

are you affraid to have dejavu on our side?

what

[danyboy27]

what

its just that you seem really into getting him unrestricted.

[GPDP]

its just that you seem really into getting him unrestricted.

I was just making note that he doesn't seem like that much of a capitalist, if at all. I think I saw a thread where he encouraged MMIKEJ to look into mutualism, which is anti-capitalist, though still in favor of market economics. Granted, there's very, very few mutualists on RevLeft, but they have not been restricted AFAIK.

Market economics =/= capitalism, as the mutualists and the market socialists can testify.

Anyway, I'd like to see what Dejavu has to say on this matter.

[Dejavu]

Quick question, Dejavu. Do you even identify as an ancap nowadays? You seem like more of a mutualist/individualist anarchist in the line of Proudhon and Tucker than in the line of Rothbard and Rockwell. Or am I mistaken?

Revleft doesn't usually restrict the former, as far as I know. Maybe you should apply for unrestriction. ;)

No , I am not an ancap.

In terms of the economic spectrum, I used to call myself a free market capitalist until I realized , thankfully, how utterly ridiculous that sounded. I would consider myself a free market anti capitalist now.

In the anarchist spectrum I guess you can call me an individualist anarchist though I think 'individualism' and 'collectivism' are a false dichotomy. I do see the primacy of the individual before the collective in general society but acknowledge that humans prefer to live in social units as opposed to being hermits.

Allow me to quote :

"Much has been said about the respective roles of individual initiative and social action in the life and progress of human societies . . . [E]verything is maintained and kept going in the human world thanks to individual initiative . . . The real being is man, the individual. Society or the collectivity - and the State or government which claims to represent it - if it is not a hollow abstraction, must be made up of individuals. And it is in the organism of every individual that all thoughts and human actions inevitably have their origin, and from being individual they become collective thoughts and acts when they are or become accepted by many individuals. Social action, therefore, is neither the negation nor the complement of individual initiatives, but is the resultant of initiatives, thoughts and actions of all individuals who make up society . . . [T]he question is not really changing the relationship between society and the individual . . . t is a question of preventing some individuals from oppressing others; of giving all individuals the same rights and the same means of action; and of replacing the initiative to the few [which Malatesta defines as a key aspect of government/hierarchy], which inevitably results in the oppression of everyone else . . .

-Maletesta

[Dejavu]

Market economics =/= capitalism, as the mutualists and the market socialists can testify.Precisely. I concur.

I oppose the ancaps which seek to establish private tyrannies using 'individualist' rhetoric and I oppose the ancoms which seek to abolish all markets and (just) property.

[GPDP]

Thank you for your input, Dejavu. It's certainly enlightening.

[Dejavu]

I don't think I'll get unrestricted though. But that's alright. OI forums are probably the most exciting anyways.

[GPDP]

I don't think I'll get unrestricted though. But that's alright. OI forums are probably the most exciting anyways.

Whether that happens or not will probably hinge on the answer to this question:

What is your position in regards to the labor and capital markets? Should they carry on? Or should they be abolished, leaving only the consumer goods and services markets?

[Dejavu]

What is your position in regards to the labor and capital markets? Should they carry on?

If this means should the capitalist system carry on, then no. Absolutely not.


Or should they be abolished, leaving only the consumer goods and services markets?

If this is indicative of the capitalist system, then yes. Get rid of it.

[GPDP]

Interesting responses. Expect a good word from me in the CC. :)

[Dejavu]

I think I see what you mean though. 'Labor market' is a misnomer since it implies that human beings and human labor energy is an alienable resource that can be traded on the open market. I don't believe it is.
However, the products of labor , i.e. alienable resources , could be traded and, clearly, these would have to be moved around to get to the people that need/want them. I hold both capital and finished or consumer goods/services to be products of labor. I don't see a problem with a capital market in this sense but clearly there can't be any real labor market.

[Nulono]

So you're a cappie/primmie/homophobe/misogynist/whatever and you've been placed here to argue your point of view with us, but who are you? If you feel the need to, you can tell us about yourself in this thread.


Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username?I prefer Nulono.


Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids".Not telling.


Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now?Galactic Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha


Hobbies: Everyone has them.Blogging.


Something Weird: Just some random fact about you.I can get off on any fetish porn as long as it has vagina.


Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene.Antitheist.


Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate.Communist.


Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy?Anarchy.


Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics?I decide my own politics, then find groups to fit.


Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef.Too hypocritical.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Too hypocritical.

Oh hell to the yes.

[Rosa Provokateur]

NAME: Chris

AGE: 18

LOCATION: Texas

SOMETHING WEIRD: I have a huge crush on Nick Jonas but really, really, cant stand his music

RELIGION: Christian

ECONOMIC VIEW: Laissez faire

SOCIAL VIEWS: Anarchist

POLITICAL INFLUENCES: Emma Goldman, Malcolm X, Harvey Milk, Ron Paul

BIGGEST CRITICISM OF CONTEMPORARY LEFTIST POLITICS: The idea that private property must be involuntarily abolished and that the individual is subserviant to the collective. Also the idea that I cant be christian because I'm gay and I cant be an anarchist because I believe in a free-market.

[Kronos]

Also the idea that I cant be christian because I'm gayBoy are you mistaken.

Observe these passages from Deuteronomy 22:


Thou shalt not see thy brother's ass or his ox fall down by the way, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again.Clearly this means that you should not let your brother's ass become lowered before you in such a position that his face is hidden from your sight, and that should he desire so, you should lift him off his knees and encourage him to take a wife instead.


neither shall a man put on a woman's garmentThis one is obvious.

I support you right to putt from the rough if you choose, but you have to come to terms with the fact that God does not approve of that. Very well then. Fuck God. We don't need him.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Boy are you mistaken.

Observe these passages from Deuteronomy 22:

Clearly this means that you should not let your brother's ass become lowered before you in such a position that his face is hidden from your sight, and that should he desire so, you should lift him off his knees and encourage him to take a wife instead.

This one is obvious.

I support you right to putt from the rough if you choose, but you have to come to terms with the fact that God does not approve of that. Very well then. Fuck God. We don't need him.

Gotta love the King James Version; "ass" meant donkey. If another persons animals are injured on the side of the road you're supposed to help get them back to their owner instead of running of and hiding from the situation. Points for creativity though.

I dont do drag that often and when I do it's only for my boyfriend... thats another story though lol :blushing:

God approves, He told me so. Nice to meet you by the way.

[Bud Struggle]

Quote:
Thou shalt not see thy brother's ass or his ox fall down by the way, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again.

Clearly this means that you should not let your brother's ass become lowered before you in such a position that his face is hidden from your sight, and that should he desire so, you should lift him off his knees and encourage him to take a wife instead.

I'm something of a Biblical Scholar and Kronos is right---This verse is definitely homophobic. It's saying that you shouldn't look at your brother's ass and get and "ideas" if you know what I mean. If his face is hidden and all you see is his ass well you might want to do the dirty on him and not be interested in women and this of course would be wrong--according to the Bible.

Glad I could help.

:)

[Rosa Provokateur]

I'm something of a Biblical Scholar and Kronos is right---This verse is definitely homophobic. It's saying that you shouldn't look at your brother's ass and get and "ideas" if you know what I mean. If his face is hidden and all you see is his ass well you might want to do the dirty on him and not be interested in women and this of course would be wrong--according to the Bible.

Glad I could help.

:)

Doesnt matter hun, I prefer to catch instead of pitch if you get my drift:cool:

[Kronos]

"ass" meant donkey.

You're kidding.

See this is what I mean. Nothing is ever certain in that frickin book. I would of thought that God would have his biography written with more clarity, you know.

[Bud Struggle]

You're kidding.

See this is what I mean. Nothing is ever certain in that frickin book.

So what GA is talking about is beastiality not homosexuality.

Now it all makes sense. :thumbup1:

So I guess this is "donkey drag"?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_RTswKzWDHeM/SWpTkgGSr3I/AAAAAAAAFwY/yWDiTfjdCLg/s320/donkey+costume+by+gnotalex.jpg


If that turns you on--to each his own. :)

[RGacky3]

I'm something of a Biblical Scholar and Kronos is right---This verse is definitely homophobic. It's saying that you shouldn't look at your brother's ass and get and "ideas" if you know what I mean. If his face is hidden and all you see is his ass well you might want to do the dirty on him and not be interested in women and this of course would be wrong--according to the Bible.

Being a gay christian is as logical as TomK trying to join the IWW.

[danyboy27]

Being a gay christian is as logical as TomK trying to join the IWW.

he is a member of the IWW.

[Bud Struggle]

he is a member of the IWW.

Well I was. There was a big campaign by HLVS Presley and Gacky to get me to resign. :(

[Ele'ill]

I think I am going to fill this out again.



Name: Mariel.

Age: 25

Location: Philadelphia.

Hobbies: I write. I speak poetry.

Something Weird: I recently quit smoking.

Religion: Individualist spiritual paths. God is many.

Economic View: Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome/Water World.

Social Views: It really depends on the issue.

Political Influences: The oak in my front yard when I was growing up.

Biggest criticism(s) of contemporary radical leftist politics: No organization. Too split. Too critical of other leftist groups even if they have the same exact Sociopolitical goals. No individual drive. Hive mentality. Unwillingness to violently reform certain aspects of the system so that revolution could become possible. No sense of humor - Inability to laugh or make fun of one's self and ideology (this is a big one for me and its fucking dangerous).

This is it for now.

[Richard Nixon]

Name: Casey Please don't post your full name on the forum for your own safety. Thanks, RedAnarchist

Age: None of your business.

Location: Orange County, California

Hobbies: Politics, History, Alternate History, Science Fiction

Something Weird: I'm Korean-American

Religion: Conservative Protestant

Economic View:Roosevelt Capitalist-we need more regulations then now.

Social Views: Something like today's USA.

Political Influences: American politicians, intellectuals. Some of the most notable: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, John McCain, Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln, James K Polk, Alexander Hamilton

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Impractical, there is no true leftists society, vast majority are dictatorships and poor. China, Vietnam etc is only getting wealthy by encouraging capitalism

[Bud Struggle]

Hiya RN, glad your here but don't leave your real name.

[Jazzratt]

Biggest criticism(s) of contemporary radical leftist politics: No organization. Too split ... Hive mentality.

Hives aren't split or disorganised. Just so you know.

[Ele'ill]

Hives aren't split or disorganised. Just so you know.

Hive life is brain dead. Meh.

The hives as a group are disorganized.

[Lynx]

Disambiguation page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hive_mind)

[RedAnarchist]

Hiya RN, glad your here but don't leave your real name.

I've removed his surname.

[Richard Nixon]

I've removed his surname.

Learned my lesson. Has there be any actual case of there being incidents against restricted members?

[RedAnarchist]

Learned my lesson. Has there be any actual case of there being incidents against restricted members?

I don't think there has, but it's a forum-wide policy.

[Ele'ill]

Has there be any actual case of there being incidents against restricted members?

Maybe some toilet papered trees :lol:

[Jazzratt]

Learned my lesson. Has there be any actual case of there being incidents against restricted members?

No. But it's not a sensible personal saftey policy to hand out full names willy nilly and, as RA pointed out, it is forum-wide policy to minimise the amount of personal information people reveal.

[MikeSC]

Learned my lesson. Has there be any actual case of there being incidents against restricted members?

In the UK, there are organisations that blacklist people- it's illegal, but it happens, a few months ago an organisation was found to be keeping a blacklist of construction workers to sell to companies (having done so for decades), for reasons like being a member of a leftist party or attending anti-war rallies, or making a health-and-safety related complaint at a previous workplace. If such an organisation, or even just an employer, googles your name and finds that you belong to a leftist website (I doubt they'll care about being restricted or whatever) you could yourself unemployed for a very long time.

There are lots of reasons for privacy online, I don't think you'd be in any danger from any of the people on here though. :thumbup1:

[Ele'ill]

I think most of the people who are restricted are still pretty far left.

[Richard Nixon]

I think most of the people who are restricted are still pretty far left.

That's quite true however in this forum people seem to be restricted for straying from the orthodoxy even a tiny bit-like say opposing abortion or believing in God.

[Brother No. 1]

or believing in God.

Not really. There are Religious communists on this forum, not alot but still some, but they arent restricted for that reason but a reason we could have seen or didnt see at all. (Example: Green apostole was restricted for being a "Anarcho-Capitalist." oh the irony in that.) But if they justify the over-all things Religion has done or preach then they get restriced for that reason.


For the Abortion Restricion check the Faqs.

[Jazzratt]

That's quite true however in this forum people seem to be restricted for straying from the orthodoxy even a tiny bit-like say opposing abortion or believing in God.

We do restrict people for misogyny but believing in god (even the bloodthirsty christian god) isn't grounds for restriction unless you begin proselytising excessively.

We even have a YEC fundementalist running about on here. He sometimes posts in OI too.

[Richard Nixon]

We do restrict people for misogyny

I find it hilariously ironic that you consider being anti-abortion "misogyny" despite the fact that early feminists like Susan B. Anthony were opposed to abortion.

[Sam_b]

Early scholars believed the world to be flat.

Whats your point, caller?

[Richard Nixon]

Early scholars believed the world to be flat.

Whats your point, caller?

My point? It's that were say Susan B Anthony to be a member of the board she would be restricted immediatly for being "misogynistic". And abortion being morally wrong is not scientifically provable either way like the Earth being flat.

[Sam_b]

[It's that were say Susan B Anthony to be a member of the board she would be restricted immediatly for being "misogynistic"

That and not being a revolutionary anti-capitalist. Seriously, you're comparing someone against abortion who died in 1906 with that same viewpoint today?

You're an idiot.

[Richard Nixon]

[QUOTE=Richard Nixon]

That and not being a revolutionary anti-capitalist. Seriously, you're comparing someone against abortion who died in 1906 with that same viewpoint [I]today?

You're an idiot.

Will you please stop the childish insults, asshole?

Also abortion will always be wrong so whether it's the opinion of someone in 1900 or today it will be the same to me.

[Sam_b]

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/thumb/9/9e/HA_HA_HA%2C_OH_WOW.jpg/500px-HA_HA_HA%2C_OH_WOW.jpg

[danyboy27]

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/thumb/9/9e/HA_HA_HA%2C_OH_WOW.jpg/500px-HA_HA_HA%2C_OH_WOW.jpg
this is getting old

[Gleb]

It never gets old.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Anyone else feel the restricted section has a prisoner atmosphere. Not only is it "restricted" and I'm posting in "Inmate's Introductions," but I feel like "new meat."

I try to express my views, but everyone is ready to pounce on you. The littlest indiscretion or poorly worded sentence is torn apart. It's like if we show how much we hate the other prisoners, maybe we'll get our sentence reduced.

At first I came in with my head between my legs wondering when someone was going to let me go home. Now I'm not sure anyone is coming to get me. I need a prison psychiatrist. Give me some "communist therapy" so I can get out of this place.

Sadly, I'm completely serious. Someone should put together "the essential reading guide" to becoming unrestricted. Maybe they'll let me out early for good behavior.

I also find it ironic that when I was completely dogmatic in my political views, I had fewer problems. However, I think in the long-run, I'm better off. Being restricted is helping me reevaluate some of my perspectives and get a more academic outlook on revolutionary leftism. I just hope I don't end up stuck here.

Aah. Going for ice cream.

[danyboy27]

Anyone else feel the restricted section has a prisoner atmosphere. Not only is it "restricted" and I'm posting in "Inmate's Introductions," but I feel like "new meat."

I try to express my views, but everyone is ready to pounce on you. The littlest indiscretion or poorly worded sentence is torn apart. It's like if we show how much we hate the other prisoners, maybe we'll get our sentence reduced.

At first I came in with my head between my legs wondering when someone was going to let me go home. Now I'm not sure anyone is coming to get me. I need a prison psychiatrist. Give me some "communist therapy" so I can get out of this place.

Sadly, I'm completely serious. Someone should put together "the essential reading guide" to becoming unrestricted. Maybe they'll let me out early for good behavior.

I also find it ironic that when I was completely dogmatic in my political views, I had fewer problems. However, I think in the long-run, I'm better off. Being restricted is helping me reevaluate some of my perspectives and get a more academic outlook on revolutionary leftism. I just hope I don't end up stuck here.

Aah. Going for ice cream.
this is the internet mate, dont take it seriously.

[Havet]

this is the internet mate, dont take it seriously.

i have made it serious. Check OI. There's the essential guide for becoming unrestricted :D

[ThorsMitersaw]

NAME: Darrin

AGE: 25

LOCATION: Chambersburg, PA

SOMETHING WEIRD: I like to drag race and am pretty much addicted to soda

RELIGION: atheist... though that is not a religion. I am not militantly atheist though. Honestly, I would prefer to never hear about god, see a church, or pick up a bible ever again - For the rest of my life. So I do not usually like hanging out with atheists who feel the need to talk about the bible more than Christians do.

ECONOMIC VIEW: Laissez faire

SOCIAL VIEWS: Laissez faire. Though I do lean much towards a "thick" libertarian stance based in Aristotelian liberalism. Honestly I think the dichotomy between social and economic is a false one. It used to be that both views (a laissez faire attitude in social/economic affairs) were BOTH considered left. i can be called a lot of things but Left-Rothbardian seems one of the closest, Agorist is spot on.

POLITICAL INFLUENCES: In no particular order and in no way exhaustive. Though the first two are definitely the first that come to mind:
Murray Rothbard, Samuel Edwin Konkin III, Karl Hess, Lysander Spooner, Robert LeFevre, Roderick Long, Brad Spangler, Ezra Heywood, Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, Wally Conger, Geoffrey Allan Plauche, Benjamin Tucker, Kevin Carson, Henry David Thoreau, William Lloyd Garrison, Thomas Paine, Proudhon

BIGGEST CRITICISM OF CONTEMPORARY LEFTIST POLITICS: The definition of left and what is properly considered left, opposition to laissez faire, Chomsky-esque comfort with using the state to achieve ends. See Roderick Longs critique of Chomsky here: "Chomsky's Augustinian Anarchism" (decentralize.tv/home/2009/05/05/chomskys-augustinian-anarchism/). This is essentially lays out my beef with many who also call themselves "left"

[Jack]

You're a very angry person

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teh3Jru7unY

I'm here motherfucker.

[ThorsMitersaw]

You're a very angry person

I'm here motherfucker.

yes. I am. Though I would call it zeal. Or passion.


Upon being reproached for the habitual severity and heat of his language, Garrison retorted: "I have need to be all on fire, for I have mountains of ice about me to melt."

And you are a coward. You never answered my challenge. Though you DID, it seems, stop littering my videos with your vapid comments.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

this is the internet mate, dont take it seriously.

I've always taken the Internet seriously. I don't know why. I really don't understand how the Internet is different from any other medium. If you mean essential "don't take life so seriously," I should probably take that advice. As for the Internet being somehow less relevant or less serious than other atmospheres, I don't agree there.

Then again, I argue with people over the ethics of killing players in video games so I'm clearly not altogether stable.

[Bud Struggle]

NAME: Darrin


Welcome to OI Thors!

[Jack]

yes. I am. Though I would call it zeal. Or passion.



And you are a coward. You never answered my challenge. Though you DID, it seems, stop littering my videos with your vapid comments.

Because A) I didn't see it for the first month and some odd weeks that it was up, and B) I don't have a camera and have no intentions of getting one. C) I'm not giving some pissed off sexually incompetant asshole my address.

[Bud Struggle]

Because A) I didn't see it for the first month and some odd weeks that it was up, and B) I don't have a camera and have no intentions of getting one. C) I'm not giving some pissed off sexually incompetant asshole my address.

Wow! Can we get a bit of the backstory or do we have to figure it out as the drama unfolds?

Jack Ritter--who would have gussed?

http://ifoughtthelaw.cementhorizon.com/archives/three.jpg

[Jack]

Haha, it's not my last name though, I always get that...

There's a looooooong story behind it, but Full House is somewhat related.

[Misanthrope]

You're a very angry person


I'm here motherfucker.

I love how he has to read off something and had to prepare for such a video as that :laugh:

[Jack]

I guess I'l finally do this, since my appeals are getting ignored

Name: Jack

Location: SECT

Hobbies: BEATING HOMOS!
More seriously, reading.

Something Weird: I've tried to be Hardline like 6 times, but it bored me and I have a caffeine addiction.

Religion: Atheist

Economic View: Anarchist Communist

Social Views: Libertarian

Political Influences: Kropotkin, my own life.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: It's drenched with wolly liberalism.[/QUOTE]

[Bud Struggle]

Hey Jack--I'm from CT myself. Naugatuck, though I'm long gone from there. :(

I kind of miss it though.

[ThorsMitersaw]

I love how he has to read off something and had to prepare for such a video as that :laugh:

Jack is so infuriatingly irrational, I had to have a few phrases prepared in order to control myself and make it at least a BIT of a 'formal' challenge

[Jack]

Jack is so infuriatingly irrational, I had to have a few phrases prepared in order to control myself and make it at least a BIT of a 'formal' challenge


http://canuckjihad.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/crybaby.png?w=300&h=425

[ThorsMitersaw]

more evidence of jacks inability to formulate a response

[Jack]

You called me irrational without providing an arguement, what the fuck am I supposed to say?

[Bud Struggle]

You are both decent guys--any chance of you just taking a break and maybe forgiving or ignoring each other?

[Jack]

I pissed him off enough that he made an entire video and posted in on Youtube calling me out.

It's fucking fun, why quit now?

[Bud Struggle]

I pissed him off enough that he made an entire video and posted in on Youtube calling me out.

It's fucking fun, why quit now?

Welcome to OI---EVERYBODY calls you a dick. :rolleyes:

[Manifesto]

Yeah drag it on til it gets boring thats what I do with those people.

[ThorsMitersaw]

You called me irrational without providing an arguement, what the fuck am I supposed to say?

the proof is in your ridiculous comments on my videos and others.

[danyboy27]

the proof is in your ridiculous comments on my videos and others.

what about leaving the guy alone and, i dont know, challenge him in a proper place, lets say in one of the numerous thread inside the OI?

this is inmate introduction, not inmate bashing section.

[graffic]

Name: Gavin

Age: I'm 19

Location: London, U.K

Hobbies: politics, gambling, socializing, music and I play a lot of tennis.

Something Weird: I smoke cigarettes? I don't know what I would judge as "weird" in my life

Religion: Agnostic, leaning more towards atheism the more I read.

Economic View: I havn't had a "real" job yet but I think we need radical re-distribution of wealth in the UK so that all education is free and ALL healthcare is free. Unions need more power and the super rich need to be taxed to pay for the exploited and suffering lower and middle classes. If they threaten to leave they can fuck off we don't want them here anyway. Quality of life and respect of individuality should come before profit margin otherwise society is fragmented, insecure and unhappy or fake. So I believe in socialism.

Social Views: Workers own means of production. No human should judge others on their actions but their must be a basic respect for common understanding.

Political Influences: George Orwell, Noam Chomsky, Nick Cohen. The failings of Tony Blair. Lot's of influential bloggers and comics dotted around the web and in magazines have influenced how I perceive society.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: WHERE DO WE START?

Liberal/Left apologists for Islamic terror.
Elements of the left who have allied or welcomed anti-semites because they oppose Israel.

The failure of the left to talk seriously about steps to re-distribution of wealth. The left in the UK today is largely looked down on as latte-slurping, guardian reading champagne liberal hypocrites who read too many books. I think people need to start talking more about class again which is happening more and more in the credit crisis, times are changing!

[Jack]

What are you in for?

[graffic]

I'm here to learn and explore and provoke thought. Yourself?

[Ele'ill]

You know- We could start a little OI revolt by openly engaging in random chit chat in THIS thread instead of in the chit chat thread.

What are they going to do? Close the thread? :thumbup1: :D

[danyboy27]

You know- We could start a little OI revolt by openly engaging in random chit chat in THIS thread instead of in the chit chat thread.

What are they going to do? Close the thread? :thumbup1: :D

i would say close the thread and eventually ban people.

[Bud Struggle]

i would say close the thread and eventually ban people.

This is COMMUNISM after all. :D

[Richard Nixon]

This is COMMUNISM after all. :D

That would mean sending them to the gulags! ;)

[Killfacer]

Shut up prisoners, no talking after lights out.

[Havet]

Shut up prisoners, no talking after lights out.
:(















Lol :lol:

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

Name: Don

Age: 17

Location: Scotland, United Kingdom

Religion: Scottish Episcopalian Christian

Economic View: Capitalism but regulated for the common good. Also hold some distributist views.

Social Views: I'm a conservative who as a British subject of the Crown supports the monarchy etc.

Political Influences: Conservative scholars such as Edmund Burke, John Adams, Toqueville, Russell Kirk and Roger Scruton. My faith is also influential.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: You are too radical, rationalistic, materialistic and egalitarian.

[Richard Nixon]

Name: Don

Age: 17

Location: Scotland, United Kingdom

Religion: Scottish Episcopalian Christian

Economic View: Capitalism but regulated for the common good. Also hold some distributist views.

Social Views: I'm a conservative who as a British subject of the Crown supports the monarchy etc.

Political Influences: Conservative scholars such as Edmund Burke, John Adams, Toqueville, Russell Kirk and Roger Scruton. My faith is also influential.

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: You are too radical, rationalistic, materialistic and egalitarian.

Someone more conservative then me? Cool.

But why do you call democracy "idolatry" and what's wrong with egalitarianism? Aren't all humans equal?

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

Someone more conservative then me? Cool.

But why do you call democracy "idolatry" and what's wrong with egalitarianism? Aren't all humans equal?
I didn't call democracy idolatry but the worship of it. The Neo-conservatives have a strange tendency to worship liberal democracy and wish to spread it around the world. I disagree with this position and don't consider democracy to be particularly good or bad.

There is a difference with believing in equality before God or equality before the law and believing in the type of equality of the communists or even the liberals. I don't consider equality to be an intrinsic good unlike those two groups.

[Richard Nixon]

I didn't call democracy idolatry but the worship of it. The Neo-conservatives have a strange tendency to worship liberal democracy and wish to spread it around the world. I disagree with this position and don't consider democracy to be particularly good or bad.

I understand your position. I take you're a paleoconservative?


There is a difference with believing in equality before God or equality before the law and believing in the type of equality of the communists or even the liberals. I don't consider equality to be an intrinsic good unlike those two groups.

Well depends. For instance I believe in meritocracy but for instance do you think everyone citizen over 18 and who's mentally fit and have no felonies be allowed to vote?

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

I understand your position. I take you're a paleoconservative?
I have some paleoconservative views but I wouldn't call myself a paleoconservative.


Well depends. For instance I believe in meritocracy but for instance do you think everyone citizen over 18 and who's mentally fit and have no felonies be allowed to vote?
Probably.

[Kronos]

and have no felonies be allowed to vote? I consider this one of the most self-defeating laws American democracy could design. By restricting a felon's right to vote, the institution inadvertently cancels the 'diplomatic' contract between the state and that felon. The state is no longer a 'representative' democracy for that felon, and as such, the felon is, technically, no longer a citizen bound by contract to that state.

I am a convicted felon, and I can never vote again. Neither can I legally possess a firearm. Two of my constitutional rights have been violated by the state that has convicted me. Therefore, the 'laws' no longer apply to me- if I have no right to vote, the state has no right to impose its laws on me.

Ain't that a *****. Rather than increasing the country's level of security, it jeopardizes it even more- in my case. While the point of such restriction is to control criminals, it, in fact, makes matters worse. The state thinks that by placing these restrictions on me I might remain more obedient. Quite the opposite has happened- now I don't give two shits about the 'law', because the law no longer represents me as a citizen.

I wonder if this has ever dawned on the citizens of this country. A felon is one thing, but a felon intelligent enough to understand the contradiction he is subject to, and who then grants himself political amnesty, becomes a supercharged criminal in exile.

That's me, babe. The state thought they would water me down? No, they've made a monster instead.

Fortunately for the citizens of this country, most convicted felons are too stupid to understand these implications, and remain broken, passive automatons. If you vote in favor of the legislation of this law, you are my enemy, no?

[Richard Nixon]

I consider this one of the most self-defeating laws American democracy could design. By restricting a felon's right to vote, the institution inadvertently cancels the 'diplomatic' contract between the state and that felon. The state is no longer a 'representative' democracy for that felon, and as such, the felon is, technically, no longer a citizen bound by contract to that state.

I am a convicted felon, and I can never vote again. Neither can I legally possess a firearm. Two of my constitutional rights have been violated by the state that has convicted me. Therefore, the 'laws' no longer apply to me- if I have no right to vote, the state has no right to impose its laws on me.

Ain't that a *****. Rather than increasing the country's level of security, it jeopardizes it even more- in my case. While the point of such restriction is to control criminals, it, in fact, makes matters worse. The state thinks that by placing these restrictions on me I might remain more obedient. Quite the opposite has happened- now I don't give two shits about the 'law', because the law no longer represents me as a citizen.

I wonder if this has ever dawned on the citizens of this country. A felon is one thing, but a felon intelligent enough to understand the contradiction he is subject to, and who then grants himself political amnesty, becomes a supercharged criminal in exile.

That's me, babe. The state thought they would water me down? No, they've made a monster instead.

Fortunately for the citizens of this country, most convicted felons are too stupid to understand these implications, and remain broken, passive automatons. If you vote in favor of the legislation of this law, you are my enemy, no?

A criminal who has commited a felony has damaged the collective community and therefore should not be able to participate in the community. What felony have you commited BTW?

[Patchd]

Social Views: I'm a conservative who as a British subject of the Crown supports the monarchy etc.
Lol, idiot.

Ah well, am I really surprised that someone who plays slave to that invisible being in the sky wants to kneel in front of an inbred over-privileged shit? Naaaaaahhhhh.

[Richard Nixon]

Lol, idiot.

Ah well, am I really surprised that someone who plays slave to that invisible being in the sky wants to kneel in front of an inbred over-privileged shit? Naaaaaahhhhh.

I can't see what's wrong with a monarchy in the UK as it doesn't exercise any real power.

[Kronos]

A criminal who has commited a felony has damaged the collective community and therefore should not be able to participate in the community.There is a difference between 'rights' and 'privileges'. The right to vote and bear arms should exist unconditionally. Hey, this is your constitution, not mine. I am simply reaching the logical conclusion of your own state's premises.

Privileges can be restricted without violating unconditional rights. Having a driver's license, for example.

Moreover, if a felon should not be able to participate in a community, according to you, then either exile him or grant him the right to not pay taxes. Why the fuck would I pay taxes to a state that doesn't let me vote, or let me leave (I am on probation...which prevents me from leaving the country).

I was charged with six felonies after three fourteen year old girls saw me having sex with my girlfriend in my vehicle while parked in a grocery store parking lot.

Three 'indecent exposure' charges, which I was convicted of through strict liability (unintentionally exposed makes no difference), and three 'indecent liberties with a minor'.

The latter three charges, which I was convicted of, were absolutely unwarranted. I did not meet the statute criterion for being convicted of that felony- 'a lewd or lascivious act with or upon the body of a minor.' I TOUCHED NOBODY.

I had a court appointed attorney who didn't give two shits about me, and a corrupt district attorney who was not interested in justice, but only her own tenure, conviction rate, and budget. She used the tactic of 'overcharging' to scare me into accepting a plea bargain so that she could avoid spending money on a trial. I could go into better detail and describe just how corrupt the judicial system is....but you are not interested, I'm sure.

Perhaps you might now understand my unique position. Your 'system' fucked me in the ass, and therefore is my sworn enemy. In no way did I 'damage the collective community'. Those fucking kids have seen worse shit on TV. Moreover, this Christian morality that permeates every aspect of culture, this ridiculous 'fig-leaf' syndrome of shame, this imposed feeling of guilt when being seen naked (God forbid!) is a waste of my fucking time.

And ironically enough, I was living in my vehicle because an employer I worked for refused to pay me what he owed me, compromising my finances and forcing me to remain homeless for a period.

These aspects of your system, and the unique circumstances which were involved in my prosecution, are fundamentally ridiculous.

There is no 'philosophizing' our way out of this.

I wipe my ass with your flag.

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

Lol, idiot.

Ah well, am I really surprised that someone who plays slave to that invisible being in the sky wants to kneel in front of an inbred over-privileged shit? Naaaaaahhhhh.
Fuck off, commie.

Go drown in your own blood from slitting your wrists.

[Kronos]

I'm afraid God won't save your queen, sweetheart. Despotism is soon to be history.

If I were dictator, I'd give your precious queen a job cleaning toilets and get some use out of her yet.

[Jazzratt]

Fuck off, commie.

Go drown in your own blood from slitting your wrists.

You're contributing nothing but flames. If you continue you will recieve an infraction.

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

You're contributing nothing but flames. If you continue you will recieve an infraction.
Sorry, I didn't realise that responding to communist fools was such a bad thing.

[Richard Nixon]

There is a difference between 'rights' and 'privileges'. The right to vote and bear arms should exist unconditionally. Hey, this is your constitution, not mine. I am simply reaching the logical conclusion of your own state's premises.

Privileges can be restricted without violating unconditional rights. Having a driver's license, for example.

Moreover, if a felon should not be able to participate in a community, according to you, then either exile him or grant him the right to not pay taxes. Why the fuck would I pay taxes to a state that doesn't let me vote, or let me leave (I am on probation...which prevents me from leaving the country).

I was charged with six felonies after three fourteen year old girls saw me having sex with my girlfriend in my vehicle while parked in a grocery store parking lot.

Three 'indecent exposure' charges, which I was convicted of through strict liability (unintentionally exposed makes no difference), and three 'indecent liberties with a minor'.

The latter three charges, which I was convicted of, were absolutely unwarranted. I did not meet the statute criterion for being convicted of that felony- 'a lewd or lascivious act with or upon the body of a minor.' I TOUCHED NOBODY.

I had a court appointed attorney who didn't give two shits about me, and a corrupt district attorney who was not interested in justice, but only her own tenure, conviction rate, and budget. She used the tactic of 'overcharging' to scare me into accepting a plea bargain so that she could avoid spending money on a trial. I could go into better detail and describe just how corrupt the judicial system is....but you are not interested, I'm sure.

Perhaps you might now understand my unique position. Your 'system' fucked me in the ass, and therefore is my sworn enemy. In no way did I 'damage the collective community'. Those fucking kids have seen worse shit on TV. Moreover, this Christian morality that permeates every aspect of culture, this ridiculous 'fig-leaf' syndrome of shame, this imposed feeling of guilt when being seen naked (God forbid!) is a waste of my fucking time.

And ironically enough, I was living in my vehicle because an employer I worked for refused to pay me what he owed me, compromising my finances and forcing me to remain homeless for a period.

These aspects of your system, and the unique circumstances which were involved in my prosecution, are fundamentally ridiculous.

There is no 'philosophizing' our way out of this.

I wipe my ass with your flag.

Well your actions certainly didn't warrant a felony and I will agree your conviction was absurd. Also where do you live, because I think indecent exposures even if they are intentional are not felonies. Anyway I think true felons like pedophiles or armed robbers shouldn't vote at all nor should they bear arms. After all do you support allowing a madman to own guns?

[Jazzratt]

I don't quite understand the US ban on voting and gun ownership for convicted felons. Do you seriously continue to punish even after a sentence has run its course? That's fucking insane.

[Kronos]

Also where do you live, because I think indecent exposures even if they are intentional are not felonies.

If the indecent exposure is in the presence of a minor, it is felonious.

Another point I want to make: when a streaker runs across a football field naked, and 10,000 people see him, why isn't he charged with 10,000 counts of indecent exposure?

And yet I was charged with three counts of indecent exposure because three people saw me.


Anyway I think true felons like pedophiles or armed robbers shouldn't vote at all nor should they bear arms. After all do you support allowing a madman to own guns?

Absolutely.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

If the indecent exposure is in the presence of a minor, it is felonious.

Another point I want to make: when a streaker runs across a football field naked, and 10,000 people see him, why isn't he charged with 10,000 counts of indecent exposure?

More to the point, surely there are kids in the audience, so why aren't they charged with indecent exposure in the presence of a minor?

Although quite frankly the idea that kids are somehow harmed by the sight of genitals is utterly absurd.

[Havet]

After all do you support allowing a madman to own guns?

Madmans get guns whether they are restricted, illegal or legal.

[Richard Nixon]

If the indecent exposure is in the presence of a minor, it is felonious.

Another point I want to make: when a streaker runs across a football field naked, and 10,000 people see him, why isn't he charged with 10,000 counts of indecent exposure?

And yet I was charged with three counts of indecent exposure because three people saw me.



As I've said I think your conviction is nonsense.


Absolutely.

Say that to the parents of the victims of the Colombine and Virginia Tech gun massacres.


Madmans get guns whether they are restricted, illegal or legal.

LOL. Are you a leftist or a libertarian gun nut?

[Jazzratt]

Say that to the parents of the victims of the Colombine and Virginia Tech gun massacres.

As far as I am aware the columbine killers either got their guns legally or used guns legally owned by their parents. As for virginia tech I don't believe the student carrying out the attacks had any prior convictions.


LOL. Are you a leftist or a libertarian gun nut?

That isn't an argument. His point still stands, a person who wants a weapon is still going to get one regardless of the law. If I can smoke a fat doob despite the law I imagine someone can pick up a gun dispite it too.

[Richard Nixon]

As far as I am aware the columbine killers either got their guns legally or used guns legally owned by their parents. As for virginia tech I don't believe the student carrying out the attacks had any prior convictions.


Well tests indicated that guy was quite crazy.


That isn't an argument. His point still stands, a person who wants a weapon is still going to get one regardless of the law. If I can smoke a fat doob despite the law I imagine someone can pick up a gun dispite it too.

It's less likely they will get a gun.

[Richard Nixon]

Why did Anti NICE get banned?

[Havet]

LOL. Are you a leftist or a libertarian gun nut?

Does this matter?

restricting gun ownership on any level will only make it harder for average people to get one to defend themselves.

How could one restrict guns ONLY to the madmans? What is the criteria? Most madmans get a gun, commit a hideous crime, and get a life sentence or a very lengthy sentence. What use could this imaginary law have?

[Jazzratt]

Well tests indicated that guy was quite crazy.

What tests? Where they made after the fact, by any chane?


It's less likely they will get a gun.

So? It's also less likely that a person previously convicted of a nonviolent felony will be able to own a gun for self defense.


Why did Anti NICE get banned?

Did you not read any of his posts at all?

[Richard Nixon]

Does this matter?

restricting gun ownership on any level will only make it harder for average people to get one to defend themselves.

How could one restrict guns ONLY to the madmans? What is the criteria? Most madmans get a gun, commit a hideous crime, and get a life sentence or a very lengthy sentence. What use could this imaginary law have?

Only people who are insane I've said after psychological tests have been seen and analyzed. If you're sane you should be allowed to own assault rifles and bombs. Yes the madmen can be arrested but only after killing people.


What tests? Where they made after the fact, by any chane?


Cho was told to see a psychologist.



So? It's also less likely that a person previously convicted of a nonviolent felony will be able to own a gun for self defense.



Nonviolent felonies are an oxymoron in my opinion.


Did you not read any of his posts at all?

He was trollish yes, but a lot of other OIers are.

[Havet]

Only people who are insane I've said after psychological tests have been seen and analyzed. If you're sane you should be allowed to own assault rifles and bombs. Yes the madmen can be arrested but only after killing people.



When will these tests be made? Will they be mandatory for all the population, or only to those who wish to buy the arm? What will be the criteria for sane and insane?

[Richard Nixon]

When will these tests be made? Will they be mandatory for all the population, or only to those who wish to buy the arm? What will be the criteria for sane and insane?

For those buying firearms. And psychologists have these tests. I'm not an expert on psychologist so I can't elaborate.

[danyboy27]

hey what about merging all this stuff in a good old thread? this is inmate introduction after all

[Jazzratt]

Cho was told to see a psychologist.

So? I've been to a psychologist and so have a number of people I've know. None of them went out and killed people.


Nonviolent felonies are an oxymoron in my opinion.

Your opinion is not law though, is it?


He was trollish yes, but a lot of other OIers are.

The only other OIer coming close to his trollishness is you, so yeah.

[Kronos]

Say that to the parents of the victims of the Colombine and Virginia Tech gun massacres.

Gun laws are not to blame for those massacres. AC/DC is to blame.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Actually, I think Communism are to blame for those massacre. /sacrasm

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I thought it was D&D? Oh wait, wrong decade.

[Richard Nixon]

So? I've been to a psychologist and so have a number of people I've know. None of them went out and killed people.



Well a psychologist has examined you and determined you were not crazy obviously. However Cho's writings shew he was at least somewhat mad.


Your opinion is not law though, is it?

No but your opinion isn't law either.




The only other OIer coming close to his trollishness is you, so yeah.


:glare::glare::glare:

[OneNamedNameLess]

I can't see what's wrong with a monarchy in the UK as it doesn't exercise any real power.


The monarch has the power to:
Choose the Prime Minister.
Dismiss ministers and governments.
Dissolve Parliament.
Refuse to agree to legislation passed by Parliament.
Dismiss the governments of other countries of which she is monarch.
Pardon convicted criminals.
Declare a state of emergency.
Issue proclamations.
Command the army and raise a personal militia.

Not to mention all that property and land. In addition, their fuckin expenses. £3000000 for Charles alone this year.

[Richard Nixon]

The monarch has the power to:
Choose the Prime Minister.
Dismiss ministers and governments.
Dissolve Parliament.
Refuse to agree to legislation passed by Parliament.
Dismiss the governments of other countries of which she is monarch.
Pardon convicted criminals.
Declare a state of emergency.
Issue proclamations.
Command the army and raise a personal militia.

Not to mention all that property and land. In addition, their fuckin expenses. £3000000 for Charles alone this year.

Yet no monarch in modern times has ever exercised that power, as they have learned their lesson from Charles I.

As for the expenses some reform is needed but monarchy existing is fine.

[Havet]

Not to mention all that property and land. In addition, their fuckin expenses. £3000000 for Charles alone this year.

Exactly.

Nixon, if they really didnt have any power, what would be the point in paying them?

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

Name: What moniker do you like to go by, aside from your username? Oso, or Gramcracker

Age: How seriously should we take you when you say "All you commies are just damn kids". I'm not that immature, all people have a right to a political view

Location: Probably best to be broad here, you don't want a load of AK-47 waving, balaclava-clad thugs at your door, do you now? Tomah Wisconsin, and I'd be holding my 30/30 and my Switch Blade in response <3

Hobbies: Everyone has them. Boxing, COnstitutional Law, fighting the fed

Something Weird: Just some random fact about you. I....LOVE skittles, they're like crack to me

Religion: Which is your opiate of choice or do you abstain from that whole sordid scene. Non Religous with some Mexika theology and philosophies

Economic View: Pretty easy. Most of you will probably give "liberal" or "free-marketeer". Unless you're a primmie in which case "bartering with pretty beads" would probably be most accurate. Free Market, with some NON FEDERAL restriction on the rich, outside of bare taxes for our roads and sanitation, Laizze Fair, or how ever you say it

Social Views: How much coercion do you like in your day to day running of things, are you libertarian or authoritarian? Autocracy or anarchy? Libertarian, and I don't like to be coerced by anyone, especially feds

Political Influences: Who do you consider a big influence on your politics? Ron Paul, Adam Kokesh, and *gasp* Che Guevara

Biggest criticism of contemporary radical leftist politics: Do we not shag enough trees? Too many? Or are we too restrictive? Too liberal? What's your beef. Anarchy - I don't hate it so much as don't trust it, for this to work everyone would have to be a responsible trust worthy person in my opinion, and we're not all. Communism - I like to goal, but, IMO, it would only work if everyone was truly dedicated, and works in small areas, like tribal communism, other wise, seems to fail on large scales. It also breeds laziness on a larger scale do to no incentive to work harder due to equal pay. I find it to be a very capable form of government on a smaller scale though

[Bud Struggle]

Exactly.

Nixon, if they really didnt have any power, what would be the point in paying them?

For "entertainment" purposes. :D

[Robert]

To be accurate in the accounting, they should deduct, from the expense of maintaining the royal family and the palaces, all the money that flows into the UK from foreign tourists with their Euros and dollars and Yen and Renmini who tour the palace and try to make those grim palace guards laugh.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:EwR7rS3X5BigZM:http://www.visitingdc.com/images/buckingham-palace-picture-4.jpg

[RoyBatty]

*renminbi

sup thread

I'm a student studying linguistics at the State University of New York, getting ready for grad school in neuroscience

the reason I'm in opposing ideologies: while I'm not opposed to some degree of "command economy" per se (realistically speaking all countries have it), and I'm not even opposed to things like public health, I am opposed to the excessive degree of collectivism embodied by the left

I intend to expand upon that shortly

[danyboy27]

*renminbi

sup thread

I'm a student studying linguistics at the State University of New York, getting ready for grad school in neuroscience

the reason I'm in opposing ideologies: while I'm not opposed to some degree of "command economy" per se (realistically speaking all countries have it), and I'm not even opposed to things like public health, I am opposed to the excessive degree of collectivism embodied by the left

I intend to expand upon that shortly
yayy we got another social democrat!
take a cookie!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_53oMB4-fxXM/SVZZdJntnPI/AAAAAAAAAAM/vXEtrdBFtqI/s1600-R/cookie.gif

[Module]

Bladerunner is a great movie.

Anyway, why I am here ... well actually I wouldn't be here if I didn't talk about how I felt about things on LiveChat and have somebody say they were going to start a restriction thread on me - so I just asked an admin to do it, myself. Perhaps the fact I haven't been posting in any political threads for ages was a bit of a give away, but still...

This thread by ever closer union (http://www.revleft.com/vb/okay-im-reformist-t84898/index.html?t=84898);

I don't believe in workers' revolution. I haven't for a small while now.

I still agree with socialists in principle; I think capitalism has major flaws and the free market seriously limits the potential of any social policy. I would like to see a reform of public services to bring them more in line with the principles of universality and equality.

But I simply do not see a workers' revolution coming any time in the foreseeable future. I think that we should fight through the democratic system, through the capitalist system, to secure further gains for the working class. Accepting the existence of the capitalist system means accepting that the economy is an important part of any society, that maintaining the economy is an important priority for the state and thus that social policy may at times be restricted in scope and reach by economic policy. I now favour an approach based on pragmatism more than ideology. I am still very interested in politics and may join a more mainstream party in the future. If I do it will probably be Labour or, more probably, Fianna Fáil.

It's hard even for me to tell when this change occurred; I think it only really happened over the last couple of months. A large part of this change was the Lisbon Treaty, the latest EU treaty which Ireland rejected. The entire far left campaigned against the Treaty, but I disagreed, favouring a Yes vote because of the benefits brought by the Treaty and the EU in general. At first I tried to maintain, to myself as much as to everyone else, that this position was reconcilable with socialism. However, this position was based on a trust in institutions such as the EU, national government and the rule of law that socialists and communists do not, indeed, cannot, share.This pretty much explains me perfectly, right now.
I have principles; on principle I agree with communism. Unfortunately...
Communism is irrelevant - its black and white view on socio-economic issues, its cries for a workers revolution that nobody listens to - to the point that it is a waste. It's a waste of one's mind, of what one can do, of how one can really participate in our democracy - a democracy that as I learn more about I have more and more respect for.
And, like ever closer union, I really like the EU. I have done for quite a while and like ever closer union it was one of the main things that really made me realise that I no longer identify with the far left. Like ever closer union I am still really interested in politics and may join a more mainstream party in the future. It will probably be Labour.
I need to learn more before I will feel comfortable with joining any sort of party, however, but learning more is something I am very keen to do, and it has been learning and trying to formulate my opinion on contemporary issues and government that has made me realise that whilst communism satisfied my principles, I have come to a point where it fails to satisfy something far more important - practicality.
I can see more than a few of the people here joining me in that realisation in the future (and I don't mean that in a patronising way, at all). Though I obviously am not going to be posting as often I will pop back now and then if I have something to say. I have emmense respect for (almost) all of you, so I hope you will at least understand where I'm coming from.

[Jazzratt]

:crying: Noo. Not you too Module.

Also:


a democracy that as I learn more about I have more and more respect for.

I took pretty much the same course as you and gained less and less respect for our democracy :blink:

Anyway, you're under my oppressive thumb now so mwhahaha.

[Demogorgon]

a democracy that as I learn more about I have more and more respect for.

The UK? A political system that s extremely undemocratic even by the standards of its neighbours?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Moudle I know you mean well but labour , come on the same people who want to put my friends in reeducation parenting homes as a punishment for having a kid?

Also congrats for being honest.

[Havet]

For "entertainment" purposes. :D

What about people who don't want to have to pay for that entertainment?

Couldn't they, like, organize some fund-raising project to organize "monarch shows"? I just don't see why ordinary people should be forced to pay for that nonsense, regardless if they like it or not.