[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "Antifascists Have Become the Most Reasonable People in America”



On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 21:50:33 -0500
bbrewer <bbrewer AT littledystopia.net> wrote:

> 
> > On Feb 7, 2017, at 9:20 PM, juan <juan.g71 AT gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 	Your first statement is plainly wrong. 
> > 	
> > 	Anarchism is a political philosophy that rejects
> > 	government BECAUSE government is a criminal enterprise.
> > 
> > 	http://www.dictionary.com/browse/anarchism?s=t
> > 
> > 	"a doctrine urging the abolition of government or
> > governmental restraint as the indispensable condition for full
> > social and political liberty. " 
> > 
> > 	People who claim they are against gov't but don't respect
> > 	rights are NOT anarchists. For example, all the 'anarcho'
> > commie clowns are not really anarchists. 
> > 
> 
> I was curious about your stance on this matter, actually. I happen to
> agree with you here; share the wealth away, if you wish… But forcing
> someone to belong to such an agreement seems so not anarchist at all
> — It is curious to me as to why so many ‘old tyme’ anarchists thought
> this way. 


	If you are thinking about 19th century anarchists, I don't know
	how many were anti property. Maybe many were, but I can't say
	for sure. At any rate, people like Bakunin had interesting
	ideas apart from their (not so good) economic analyses.



> For what it’s worth, my license plate reads: “Agorist”. I
> believe in it, and unlike so much writing, I believe the doing is
> what matters. 

	Yes, true. But the theory needs to be worked out sometimes...  
 

> One can only write so much. (Yes, I realize paying the
> state for such a plate is ironic, but it’s a double edged sword of
> irony, and it costs $25 a year for this pleasure…).

	What may be more problematic is that tagging yourself with such
	a plate sort of gives the game away?


> 
> Juan, would you define yourself as ‘anarchist without adjectives’? 

	Not sure. Probably not, because there are some substantial
	differences in what different people consider true anarchism. 
 
> 
> > 
> > 2.   A 'Libertarian' is not NECESSARILY an anarchist.
> > 
> > 	Of course WRONG AGAIN.
> > 
> > 	Libertarianism is based on rights to life liberty and
> > property. Government violates those rights, by definition.
> > 	
> > 	So yeah, the only real libertarians are the ones who fully
> > 	reject government. Advocates of  so called 'limited'
> > government on the other hand are frauds and dangerous criminals. 
> > 
> 
> The notion, and fact, that there are self proclaimed ‘minarchists’
> makes me very very sad and confused indeed. Actually, the ‘party’ of
> libertarianism probably most aligns with this term, no? 

	More than likely I guess. The serious and academic people who 
	get invited to cocktail parties are all Respectable Statists.


> 
> Core underlying insane problems here? a) minarchist. Uhhhh. b)
> everyone has their own pieces of the pie that they like; group them;
> guess what? Entire pie. So, useless functionally, and useless
> conceptually.
	
	Yes, exactly. Just like some minarchist 'libertarians' believe
	in the divine right of the state to control the courts and
	police others believe in 'free' state-controlled 'education' or
	'healthchare' or 'science' or whatever. And of course the
	result is state control of everything.



> 
> 
> > 
> >>  (example:  A person who is opposed to violations of the NAP, but
> >> who has no problem with a 'government' which doesn't employ
> >> violations of NAP.
> > 
> > 	That's pretty much absurd. Governments by definition violate
> > 	the 'nap'. Governments are based on the "obey or die"
> > 	'philosophy'. 
> > 
> 
> 
> Yup. This is what I said in an earlier post, but far more succinct.
> If you or your group are not forcing beliefs on others who do not
> fully align, well, you ain’t no ‘government’, are ye?


	Right. Even the talk about groups doesn't make much sense to
	me. Seems like a case of "if you don't like porn, don't watch
	porn". One can say that there's a "group of people who don't
	like porn" but it's mostly an abstraction. If a member of the
	group one day decides that he now likes porn, the porn-haters
	have no 'jurisdiction' over him.


> 
> Side note: I find it funny, amusing, depressing, and perhaps
> regretful that so many post from un-attributable accounts. This is my
> name; This is my domain; Domain is registered to the house in which I
> am sitting in, in which my children are sleeping.

	Well, you can find my surname in the archives =P

 
> Accountability in belief goes a long way.