leninist
Marxist leninist
Trotskyist
left communist
anarchist
Other (specify)
Results 281 to 300 of 300
* Anarchism holds that individual autonomy means that no other individual can have a hierarchical position over another and that individuals need to be protected from those who want to asssert hierarchical domination over others.
* Your insane diatribe that this is trumping the family's domination over children is a profound misunderstanding of the concept of autonomy and of the actual arguments which I am making.
* In fact it results in you defending the legal system which actually does trump the bourgeois family and propp laws which actually do ensure children are in fact property of the parents.
* Hugely ironic is that your attack on me as being petit-bourgeois is based on defending the concepts and morality of exactly that class: the petit-bourgeois. Not realizing the legal concepts originated there as well.
* And even more ironic is your inclusion of my arguments stemming from morality when you are the one heavilly relying on morality yourelf in order to facilitate your attack on me. I have however never mentioned morality in any other sense than that bourgeois legal systems enforce petit-bourgeois and bourgeois morality and serve to enforce class society.
* Your assertion that not every action of the state should be opposed is questionable at best. But since I am not opposing actions of the state but the concept of the state and its legal system themselves make these arguments completely redundant and straw man arguments.
* Your argument, or at least your allusion, that challeging the state and its expressions is not revolutionary and in fact petit-bourgeois does make one wonder here what your actual revolutionary position is. So me arguing against class society and all its expressions and actually arguing against bourgeois and petit-bourgeois mentality is petit-bourgeois? When you yourself make a shiny case glorifying the state.
* You are actually arguing for the state to wield more power against society. Of course you do this under the exuse of protecting children. You know...by the very same state which has no problems what so ever to allow exploitation of children, having them starve to death, bombing the shit out of them or subjecting them to incarceration and arbitrarily deciding they are actually adults when they consider a crime big enough.
* And that glorifying the state and state power (the bourgeois version at the very least) is actually a complete negation of communist goals (the disbandoning of the state)
* You are also glorifying capitalism and the capitalist state. Because you know...not everything they do is bad. Really? Nobody said that. I know bourgeois class memembers who spend a considerable amount of their fortune gained through the exploitation of others (including children btw) towards charity. I know those who build schools (on land which their companies has poisoned) to repair some social wrongs (like those resulting from wars they support or withholding medical aid because it isn't profitable and such). Those actions aren't bad. That however doesn't mean we do not oppose the bourgeois class.
So bye bye Rafiq.
Others are guilty of far worse than you. The difference is, they're not moderators.
"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" (Walter Rodney, 1969)
Ok. Thank you for clearing that up.
* Local moderator.
* Mods regularly do not mod threads they are involved in
* Mods can't take actions against users they are debating
Hence why no administrative action or comments have been made by me the entire thread. Not only can't I mod this section of the board, I am denied to do so in this specific thread by the rules of moderation and board administration. It also doesn't make me a nice person.
But be assured that a purple name doesn't somehow magically bestow any kind of special immunization against certain vile accusations. And I will answer them in kind. Nor does it exempt me from the rules.
You misunderstand: I'm less interested in whether you, or some other mod, holds others accountable for their behavior (I take this for granted; that's why there are mods); I'm interested in you, as a mod, being held to a higher standard of behavior. Make no mistake, my post was meant to call you out.
"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" (Walter Rodney, 1969)
I know it was and I don't misunderstand you at all. So I corrected your bullshit.
I think I most definately was acting in the spirit of higher standards and that you calling me out is actually bullshit selectivity.
And I do not see why I should be held to a higher standard in the face of continuous flaming and insults. Should that subsequently mean actions taken against users who flame a mod should be more repressive and severe?
Not to mention that most of my posts actually were full of content which was structurally ignored by flame baits.
Hence why my posts aren't riddled with flames. And when I do flame you manage to mostly get something like "Troglodyte" and "Doorknob". Barring my persoflage response to Rafiq. Which I specifically stated was a persiflage of his way of communicating. I make no claims about other threads though. And more specifically I did not run to my mod buddies to clamor for some legal support here.
But I think you would love administrative sanctions against these uses who have done far worse than me. Incidentally....that statement does actually undermine your entire argument.
Thank you for playing.
I already explained why I believe you should be: Because I can't add you to my ignore list.
There are other reasons why moderators, in general, perhaps should be, which are somewhat less important to me, but perhaps not to others. To give just one example, mods, as authority figures, set the standard for behavior. For good or ill, the level of discourse set by mods will determine what unprivileged members are able to get away with (assuming evenhanded moderation). This matters less to me because I can add unprivileged members, whose posts scrape the bottom of the barrel for content, to my ignore list.
As for you personally, on the whole, in my opinion, even when you're not setting the bar on the bottom rung, you nevertheless manage to come across as belligerent, which, again in my opinion, is unbecoming of authority. It may be that you're frustrated by the way others treat you, and I can't blame you for feeling that way. But I believe moderators ought to be selected based on their ability to resist being goaded into reaction.
As for me being selective, again, the sample of belligerent moderators was one.
"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" (Walter Rodney, 1969)
Cry me a river. Is somebody forcing you to actually read my posts? I don't think so. I like how, after 10 days as a member of this forum you think you can properly assess somebody and their abilities. Ever think of the possibility I am simply an asshole who doesn't like people?
I called you a doorknob in response to a completely stupid analogy by which you were missing the point entirely. You however were threatening physical violence earlier in the thread actually participating in the lynch mob mentality. So how do you equate your own behavior and to what standard do you hold yourself?
I noticed how you specifically direct your attention towards me. Probably because your sensitivities were hurt by being called a doorknob. You did not call out any other users previously. So I assume you are pretty ok with their behavior since you absolve yourself from the obligation to call on your fellow "non privileged" users to regard the rules or call them out on their reprehensible behavior. Or do you regularly just hand over any form of responsibility to the "authorities"?
I also noticed you dodging my question. Do you think attacking a mod warrants sterner reprimand and repercussions? Or is your little venture here simply opportunistic one sided moralism?
I like to use the ignore feature to approximate face-to-face conversation, where I'm able to ignore those I don't wish to converse with, while still maintaining conversation with those I do. Not being able to ignore someone on a forum is like having to deal with an unwelcome person sputtering in your face while you try to have a conversation, or someone dancing in front of the movie screen while you try to watch. It isn't the end of the world, but the least a person in your position should do, in my view, in not make a pest of your unavoidable self.
I didn't need 10 days to decide I'd enjoy the forum more with you in my personal gulag.
If you're simply an asshole who doesn't like people then perhaps you shouldn't hold a position of authority where dealing with people and mitigating conflict are prerequisites.
I don't care so much which names you called me, or anyone else. It's the fact that you, as a moderator, are calling anyone any names. I've already explained why this is not conducive to the forum environment.
Tell me who I threatened, specifically (no need to quote me, I know what I wrote and I stand by it), and I'll apologize.
The standard I hold myself to is higher than the one I could hold myself to, as set by belligerent moderators such as yourself.
As I've stated several times now, you're the only belligerent moderator in this thread. I turned my attention toward you because I can't turn my attention away from you by adding you to my ignore list. But this is getting repetitive.
To quote myself: "I believe moderators ought to be selected based on their ability to resist being goaded into reaction." This has no reflection on how unprivileged members ought to be reprimanded for their own behavior.
Since your repetitive questions can lead only to repetitive answers, I think we're done. I've made my point. I don't expect you to change your behavior one iota, in fact I expect you to double down out of spite, but I knew I risked making an enemy when I raised my objections. Obviously I'm not about to let fear of repercussions keep me from calling out an unfit moderator.
"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" (Walter Rodney, 1969)
I hope you do understand of course that this comparison to real life is complete and utter bullshit...again. You seem to be prone to make bullshit comparisons.
Here is how your participation in this thread would actually equate to real life:
You come into a group having a conversation (your entry in the thread in post #230...so pretty fucking late). You then make some inane general threat thinly aimed at some of the participants in that group (your post). Then you start making stupid comparisons and prsonal attacks which totally miss the point of the conversation to a specific member of the group (your post to me). You then are not very happy with the reply. You then of course proceed to try and gag the member (because as you say actually using the ignore function is approximating face to face conversation)....instead of...you know...what you actually have to do in a face-to-face conversation: walk away. Face-to-face conversations lack a ignore function completely. The only thing you can actually do is walk away. But instead rather than chosing to step away and after you already made threats and insults you now decide it a very good idea to don the hood of righteous indignation and go on further personal insults and attacks.
Also you do realize you entered into a conversation that was already in progress (for 229 posts) and members who were already in that conversation (for 229 posts) are not actually dancing in front of the show you are trying to watch but actualy are the show you are trying to watch. Not to mention that unwelcome sputtering in your face is actually initiated by yourself...by inserting yourself into the conversation and addressing the people who you do not like first by making threats and then by questioning their common sense. And you of course blame others rather than yourself for this and the reply you get.
So you are actually dishonest as fuck.
I have the perfect solution for this that really approximates face-to-face conversations. I think you would like it: walk away or request a self ban. Or stay and learn to deal with the fact people you do not like exist. I don't particularly care which one you chose.
I think it is fairly obvious that you were pretty riled by me calling you a doorknob and your little ego was pretty dented by it. Which is infact the whole foundation of your little moral superiority spiel here and charging me with being belligerent when you yourself are nothing but.
A little too late now isn't it? "Ow...I stand by it but I'll apologize". But you were in fact flame baiting and throwing oil on the fire in a very loaded debate topic. Hardly constructive behavior now is it?
No it isn't as pointed out to you.
You are one of those people who stand in the crowd to participate in riling up the crowd and then act completely indignant when they are called out on their bullshit and when they are held accountable for the results of their participation. You are what is called an "intrigant" (in Dutch) and an instigator.
As I have explained to you you came into this debate after 229 posts and then entered the debate with a onliner threat (both the one liner and the threat are against forum rules). The you attacked a specific poster (me) by questioning their common sense (you know...while also defending the state against being bourgeois but again...these personal attacks are against forum rules). But I like how you threatening people and insulting them is so easilly glossed over in order to legitimize your little morality play.
So again. Technically and realistically you are dishonest as fuck here.....again
As I said you have the option to walk away.
Nope. As I said....don't focus on the people worse than me. Those are the ones you actually rile up. This says a lot about your character.
Ow how dramatic of you. I especially like the: "omg when I get banned this is because I angered PhoenixAsh and not because I am a dishonest flaming, flame baiting and threatening unfit user"-twist at the end.
You should have taken this route of us being done several posts earlier. But one is never too old to learn I guess.
The moment I saw a thread about tendency I knew it was gonna be some hot drama.
I'm not disappointed in the slightest. Please proceed.
FKA LinksRadikal
“The possibility of securing for every member of society, by means of socialized production, an existence not only fully sufficient materially, and becoming day by day more full, but an existence guaranteeing to all the free development and exercise of their physical and mental faculties – this possibility is now for the first time here, but it is here.” Friedrich Engels
"The proletariat is its struggle; and its struggles have to this day not led it beyond class society, but deeper into it." Friends of the Classless Society
"Your life is survived by your deeds" - Steve von Till
As I put it in another thread: "That's what the ignore feature represents: walking away."
Indeed, and that's the point: you are the one dancing. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wishes you'd sit down.
"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" (Walter Rodney, 1969)
Less talking and more walking
I see your are very steadfast in your claim that we were done and have already broken your promise. How very surprising.
Conveniently leaving out all comments that pertain to your rule breaking and anti-social behavior which discredit your self proclaimed high standards. Also not surprising.
And completely missing the point again. Also not very surprising
So I will spell it out for you in easy to understand quotes and explanations. Your assertion about my conduct in this thread and saying I am...
...is fucking hillarious considering the movie screen you are watching is actually the thread I have been participating in and am an integral part of since page one and in which you only hold a very small and very questionable cameo from post 229 on. If you didn't like the movie then you shouldn't have come to watch it...much less try to star in it.Originally Posted by doorknob
Let me make this clear: YOU were the one starting with a threat and then adressing me with an insult. I didn't adress you. YOU were the one getting in my face and explicitly seeking me out with an insult. You didn't like the answer you got which called you out on your bullshit argument. You were pretty well aware what you were getting into.
So as it is your little cameo which started extremely late into an already heated argument by threatening people directly progressed in directly adressing me with a personal insult. And then in your 3rd post in this thread you attacked me personally again. Then you continued to do so in all your subsequent posts in this thread also derailing it with your little venture here which could have also been accomplished by sending me a PM or writing me a visitor message. But no...you wanted to be a hero.
The grim reality however is that NONE of your posts (except for one) were anything else than insults or flame baits. Yet you asininely argue that you consider that you hold yourself to a high standard but have continued to whine about me for the last 6 posts. Which makes you a whining dishonest, lying hypocrite. This isn't actually an insult. It is a statement of fact and a very accurate labeling of your character. I can quote definitions if you like.
You should do something about that.
P.S. Also...really? 6 posts? Frankly your obsession with me is getting worrying. Maybe you should seek professional help.
Last edited by PhoenixAsh; 22nd June 2014 at 02:54.
This thread is an example of why the Left is a joke.
"I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur
I like how we can say that about almost every thread.
"We have seen: a social revolution possesses a total point of view because – even if it is confined to only one factory district – it represents a protest by man against a dehumanized life" - Marx
"But to push ahead to the victory of socialism we need a strong, activist, educated proletariat, and masses whose power lies in intellectual culture as well as numbers." - Luxemburg
fka the greatest Czech player of all time, aka Pavel Nedved
It should be adopted as the RevLeft motto.
"I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur
This thread is not about tendency, its about how phoenixash has to be repremanded for breaking the site rules: arguing against age of consent laws. Same goes for the sparts.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
Revleft's motto should be "postmodernism, pedopheaelia apoligy, complete irrelevance"
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
...and yet you choose to waste your time posting here.
Anyway, I'm closing this thread. If an admin or mod wants to re-open it, be my guest, but I think it's run it's course.
"Win, lose or draw...long as you squabble and you get down, that's gangsta."
