Protests in NYC!!!

[Dr Kynes]

Sure, I take ideals from Anarchism, like not having faith in government or private industry, but I'm not an anarchist. That's what you can't understand, that not everyone is a purist. Second, Democratic socialism does NOT include a dictatorship of the proletariat, it's a reformist ideology through parliamentary means. It's not revolutionary socialism. What it shares with Marxism, is the idea that those who create the wealth should own the wealth. In other words its the idea that workers should band together so that they are not exploited for their labor. The idea of public ownership of industry and resources is where teabaggers like you get their panties in a bunch because they think that private property doesn't exist.
As for that Green Party portion, it's a party under the umbrella of ecological protection. You'll find socialists, capitalists, etc. There's a ten point policy they adhere to, which doesn't embrace an economic philosophy for that reason.

so, you havent read the Communist Manifesto, Das Kapital, Trotsky's works, Mussolini's works, Mao's Quotations From The Chairman, the resolutions of the first through third COMINTERN or really anything but the wikipage on Anarcho-_________ism and you presume you are not only competent to argue what is and is not Marxism, but you seem to be asserting that you are an EXPERT on the subject.

i dont usually go off on Appeals to Authority, but you sir are Ignorant.

Marx is the authority on Marxism, and until you familiarize yourself with the works of Marx, Engles, Lenin, Trotsky, Mussolini, Mao, and yes, even Hitler, you are incapable of arguing for or against any form of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Fascism or Capitalism.

 

[abandonconflict]

so, you havent read the Communist Manifesto, Das Kapital, Trotsky's works, Mussolini's works, Mao's Quotations From The Chairman, the resolutions of the first through third COMINTERN or really anything but the wikipage on Anarcho-_________ism and you presume you are not only competent to argue what is and is not Marxism, but you seem to be asserting that you are an EXPERT on the subject.

i dont usually go off on Appeals to Authority, but you sir are Ignorant.

Marx is the authority on Marxism, and until you familiarize yourself with the works of Marx, Engles, Lenin, Trotsky, Mussolini, Mao, and yes, even Hitler, you are incapable of arguing for or against any form of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Fascism or Capitalism.

Even if the list of names you spewed here were somehow an acceptable list of authors who works could be researched, as in a library, it is still evident that you aren't familiar with them. That you would lump such a wide range of names (wide ranging politically) and then insist that simply researching them would lead anyone to being well informed on such a wide range of political philosophies doesn't only imply that you are clueless. It clearly implies that you have no interest in reality. You aren't even trying to sound sane anymore.

 

[UncleBuck]

You aren't even trying to sound sane anymore.

i've noticed that lately too.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Even if the list of names you spewed here were somehow an acceptable list of authors who works could be researched, as in a library, it is still evident that you aren't familiar with them. That you would lump such a wide range of names (wide ranging politically) and then insist that simply researching them would lead anyone to being well informed on such a wide range of political philosophies doesn't only imply that you are clueless. It clearly implies that you have no interest in reality. You aren't even trying to sound sane anymore.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

ohh you are such a clown.

marxism has been modified, altered, re-worked and re0tooled for so many different national cultural and social groups that it may seem like these guys are all totally different, but at their heart they still rely on the framework developed by Marx and Engles in Das kapital and The Communist Manifesto, as well as the various Cominterns.

lenin and trotsky were NOT rejected by marx, they were both true believers who wanted to follow Marx's plan from capitalism to socialism, and eventually to True Communism, but stalin stepped in and put a stop to that .

Mao was so enamoured of marxism he nearly destroyed china trying to reform it into the image he imagined from Marx's works.

Mussolini was Marx's contemporary, and until he developed his Socialism Zero of State and Industry co-operation he was aa big part of the evolution of communism, and marxism in general.

Hitler was simply Mussolini's less intelligent, less stable, more radical acolyte, and he took mussolini's Third Way Socialism to the horrifying extreme of despotism, while other european countries have embraced a gentler Velvet Marxism which has been found very satisfactory among their populace, but they can ALWAAYS vote it out and go back to purer forms of capitalism, where most marxist schemes are a suicide pact.

you really dont know what you are talking about, and i feel bad for you.


learn you some book.

reading is Fun-damental.

 

[abandonconflict]

until you familiarize yourself with the works of Marx, Engles, Lenin, Trotsky, Mussolini, Mao, and yes, even Hitler, you are incapable of arguing for or against any form of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Fascism or Capitalism.

Even if the list of names you spewed here were somehow an acceptable list of authors who works could be researched, as in a library, it is still evident that you aren't familiar with them. That you would lump such a wide range of names (wide ranging politically) and then insist that simply researching them would lead anyone to being well informed on such a wide range of political philosophies doesn't only imply that you are clueless. It clearly implies that you have no interest in reality. You aren't even trying to sound sane anymore.

 

[ChesusRice]

Fuck Ronald Reagen he's just another big government dbag. It makes since to me, that if you limit the power of government to regulate businesses then lobbyist will lose their usefulness in controlling markets. Wouldn't you agree?

Libertarian socialism is dumb, goodnight.

No it will make it even easier, since the lobbyists can do it at the local level which is much cheaper and effective

 

[Dr Kynes]

until you familiarize yourself with the works of Marx, Engles, Lenin, Trotsky, Mussolini, Mao, and yes, even Hitler, you are incapable of arguing for or against any form of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Fascism or Capitalism.

Even if the list of names you spewed here were somehow an acceptable list of authors who works could be researched, as in a library, it is still evident that you aren't familiar with them. That you would lump such a wide range of names (wide ranging politically) and then insist that simply researching them would lead anyone to being well informed on such a wide range of political philosophies doesn't only imply that you are clueless. It clearly implies that you have no interest in reality. You aren't even trying to sound sane anymore.

much in the way one cannot have a reasonable discussion on the virtues of fuel injection vs carburation, or electronic ignition vs old school points and condenser with an amish farmer, one cannot discuss Marxism (neither for nor against) with those who think Marxism is just shorthand for villainy, or "anarchism" is a synonym for Goodthings.


youre posts on the nature of marxism, communism and socialism are as pointless and empty as an ethiopian cookbook.

 

[longdogin]

This is the most confusing stuff about polotics ive ever read. But its funny to watch people arguee about stupid shit.
i want to just say that alot of the things u guys are calling eachother wrong and stupid over are just opinions. Ive noticed most things with politics is all bassed on opinion. Noone is the n necessarily right and noone is necessarily wrong. I think you should all come to the realization that what makes 1I person happy is just gunna piss someone else off. And the same thing the other way around. I think you sgould all just go smoke a bowl and find funny pictures of t-rexes to post and stop argueing. I mean comeon look at that mutherfukers arms, why are they so short.
Ready go....

 

[longdogin]

This is the most confusing stuff about polotics ive ever read. But its funny to watch people arguee about stupid shit.
i want to just say that alot of the things u guys are calling eachother wrong and stupid over are just opinions. Ive noticed most things with politics is all bassed on opinion. Noone is the n necessarily right and noone is necessarily wrong. I think you should all come to the realization that what makes 1I person happy is just gunna piss someone else off. And the same thing the other way around. I think you sgould all just go smoke a bowl and find funny pictures of t-rexes to post and stop argueing. I mean comeon look at that mutherfukers arms, why are they so short.
Ready go....

here you go this is number 1

 

[Canna Sylvan]

 

[lifegoesonbrah]

It's exactly what you are. You're not an anarchist, you're a neoliberal. Your philosophy is a page right out of colonialism and imperialism and it's called neoliberalism. The word anarchist was never a good description for it. Neoliberals have stolen the word libertarian. Let's just clear the waters and use words properly. You're not an anarchist. You're a feudalist.

I never said I was an anarchist, I said I respected the idea of true anarchism and spontaneous order, not what you call anarchism a.k.a. majority rule. It is really sad that you won't even discuss your own philosophy, you just deflect and try to have little petty arguments about definitions. Libertarian Socialists are a ridiculous bunch of people, who can't even muster out an explanation of the practicality of their own beliefs. Pathetic. You all pull the same stunt, its like a cult. A very sad cult full of pseudo-intellectuals, which sounding intelligent is their only purpose. You just go around accusing people of not understanding philosophy, but can't even manage to pull together a logical argument for your own beliefs.

Would your society use coercive means to stop people from owning the means of production? Simple question that you will not answer because you have no idea how your ideas would be practical economically.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Life,

We're supposed to be posting amusing t-rex pictures, like this.

I tink he taught a t-wrecks.

 

[undertheice]

Magic leprechaun? Haven't seen any of those since the 1970s, but that's another story.

it was 1977. i was coming out of my tiny apartment and there was this little dude dressed all in green just sitting there in front of the dry cleaners. as his beady eyes followed me, i was sure he was an evil elf. though now that you mention it, he probably was a leprechaun. by the time i came back from the liquor store, having encountered a peculiar orange version of frankentein's monster along the way, he had disappeared along with any pot of gold he may or may not have been in possession of.

 

[abandonconflict]

Simple question that you will not answer because you have no idea how your ideas would be practical economically.

It is not a simple question. It is an asinine question which belies your comprehension. It is private ownership of resources that is coercive. There is nothing more coercive than this in a market.

 

[Dr Kynes]

It is not a simple question. It is an asinine question which belies your comprehension. It is private ownership of resources that is coercive. There is nothing more coercive than this in a market.

which is something a Marxist would of course never say because youre not a Marxist...

Youre a "Libertarian Socilaist", which is totally different yet strangely uses the same rhetoric, espouses the same goals and pursues the same agenda....

but nobody can say what a "Libertarian Socialist" is, not even their "linguist" genius frontman Noam Chomsky.

but it's not an oxymoron, everybody insists that so it must be true.

 

[bundee1]

Next time instead of blowing their brains out, I'll give them a deal. I'll send them to your house to rob, rape and kill you. Sound like an ignorant plan to you? I personally despise rapists, theives and murders. But hey, I'll tell them how much you love them and will even cook a free meal before they do their operation vengeance for the Lord!

who is them?

 

[bundee1]

Oh and the results of the stop and frisk study are in. 97% of all stop and frisk stops in Queens and Brooklyn were performed on minorities. Nope NYPD isnt racist at all.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Oh and the results of the stop and frisk study are in. 97% of all stop and frisk stops in Queens and Brooklyn were performed on minorities. Nope NYPD isnt racist at all.

any action taken in a "High Crime Area" which focusses on suspicious characters in the streets will inevitably effect minorities more than Honkeys. if you walk into brooklyn and hand out free candy to everybody whoo looks like a drug dealer, a gang mamber or a mugger you will only be handing candy out to minorities.

thats just the way it is.

honkeys engaged in dope smoking, drunkenness, and even GANG ACTIVITY almost invariably perform these actions in a private place, such as a home, a bar, a nightclub or The Ravenite Club, while minorities (particulalrly blacks and chicanos) prefer to indulge in these activities "In The Streets" which places them in proximity to the cops.

what the hell do you expect to see from such a policy? a focus on frisking nuns, jehovah's witnesses and mormon missionaries?

 

[abandonconflict]

which is something a Marxist would of course never say because youre not a Marxist...

Youre a "Libertarian Socilaist", which is totally different yet strangely uses the same rhetoric, espouses the same goals and pursues the same agenda....

but nobody can say what a "Libertarian Socialist" is, not even their "linguist" genius frontman Noam Chomsky.

but it's not an oxymoron, everybody insists that so it must be true.

Oh look, a republican who is calling an anarchist a Marxist.

Actually different goals, different agenda and different rhetoric.

Apparently anyone who uses words that Karl Marx used has sworn allegiance to the USSR.

 

[UncleBuck]

if you walk into brooklyn and hand out free candy to everybody whoo looks like a drug dealer, a gang mamber or a mugger you will only be handing candy out to minorities.

are you fucking shitting me?

jesus christ, that has to be one of the most racist things you have ever uttered.

i could walk into brooklyn and point out any number of white people that look like drug dealers or muggers or gang members.

thanks for removing all doubt though.