Tea baggers love feudalism.

[GOD HERE]

you cannot argue the issue, and instead resort to whimpering cries, stale ad hominems and accusations of psychosis.

but you still do not know anything about the socialist, capitalist or communist systems save what you read on wikipedia.

so laughable.

at least abandonconflict defends (albeit inexpertly) his misconceptions and mischracterizations.

you dont even bother to assert that youre correct, you simply insist that everybody else is wrong (despite their citations p;roving the contrary) and smugly declare victory.

what a cunt.

Keynes what do you do for a living? If anything?

 

[lifegoesonbrah]

It's pretty bad when somebody who knows nothing about socialism tries to tell a socialist what is and isn't in socialism. Also called "being an ignorant ass".

You'll notice in your link that the word "revolutionary" is present before the word "socialist". I'm not a revolutionary socialist. I'm a democratic socialist. It's like comparing east and west. Those are two VERY different systems. But you're too dumb to be bothered with details..

You said that socialist don't have communes, which is stupid, but whatever you gotta tell yourself. Thanks for the sig.

 

[ChesusRice]

You said that socialist don't have communes, which is stupid, but whatever you gotta tell yourself. Thanks for the sig.

What socialist country runs communes. I am intrigued

 

[abandonconflict]

Anarchy is not revolutionary. It is continuous rebellion. A revolution implies replacing authority.

 

[abandonconflict]

How do you define freedom?

In the context of society:

Egalitarian anarchy.

 

[nitro harley]

In the context of society:

Egalitarian anarchy.

Do you like it in mexico?

 

[Dr Kynes]

Keynes what do you do for a living? If anything?

i grow and sell vegetables and herbs at the farmers market as my avocation, and work in a shop to keep cash flowing during the off seasons between harvests.

in other words i am a petty bourgeois capitalist counter-revolutionary pig-dog, who oppresses the proletariat by not embracing the foolishness of marxism, through the intellectual, industrial, agrarian or corporate vanguards.

as you now claim to be a democratic socialist, you should therefore be well versed in the Third Way Socialism of Mussolini, and it's place in classical marxist thought as an initial non-radicalized movement to ease the proletariat into classic socialism as a stepping stone to full Utopian Communism.

but you dont see that. you see only the democratically elected socialism of the modern socialist movement without recognizing that it is, and was designed to be, the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, with slowly escalating levels of socialism using the capitalist system's own mechanisms as the driving force.

thats why Obama is in fact a socialist, the mildest form of socialist, but still a marxist at heart.

your comments and stated opinions clearly display that you believe socialism is the source of "Goodthings" but do not recognize that it is based on the foundation and ideology of Marxism, despite the simple and undeniable fact that all forms of socialism are just steps on the path to Marx's Communist Utopia, the Worker's Paradise, and of course dont believe that even the soviet union was based entirely on Marx's philosophy and ideals, corrupted by Stalin for his own personal power.

marxism is by it's very nature a cult, since everybody must accept the premise, and join in the hymns or be branded a heretic. Marxism cannot work when there is dissent, so dissent must be eliminated.

in a capitalist system you can run off and form a commune, or a co-operative, or a collective, and theres nothing to prevent it. communes and co-ops can neatly slip into a capitalist society, as proved by the Blue Diamond Growers, one fo the largest agricultural co-ops of independent farmers in the world. in a marxist of coimmunist society you cannot run off and form a capitalist organization, since that is a Black Market which would destabilize the entire system.

logically if you love freedom and liberty, a capitalist system with it's fexible and accepting nature is the 0only real choice, since all other economic systems require enforcement to keep out any competing ideas.

markets, capital, and private industry are the solution to oppression, not the cause. the inherent inequity of the system is not a problem, it is the motivation for hard work to better your lot in life, while socialism requires chains, and communism lives only in dreams.

 

[abandonconflict]

Do you like it in mexico?

Do you like it on Earth?

 

[abandonconflict]

in other words i am a petty bourgeois capitalist counter-revolutionary pig-dog, who oppresses the proletariat by not embracing the foolishness of marxism, through the intellectual, industrial, agrarian or corporate vanguards.

No, you're just a republican white guy. That doesn't make you rich.

 

[Dr Kynes]

No, you're just a republican white guy. That doesn't make you rich.

"Petty Bourgeois" the lowest level of capitalist, those who run convenience stores, automotive repair shops, small farms pharmacies etc...

still not reading marx i see.

the Petty Bourgeois are the closest to the proletarians, and can be swayed by revolutionary zeal and their affection for the workers and their plight.

they are also the first line of defense against communist thought and the proletarians since they are the first rung on capital's ladder and thus tempting to the Lumpen Proletariat as an example of the possibility of success within the corrupt system.

these petty bourgeois are the most numerous, and thus a powerful voting bloc which Third Way Socialism attempts to woo, with promises of just a little socialism, and a "Level Playing Field" and making the big time bourgeois pay their "Fair Share"

but in the end classic marxism failed to woo the Petty Bourgeois, so they were declared the enemy of the workers.

Third way Marxism has had more success with the Petty Bourgeois, but most are still Counter Revolutionary.

also, my whitness is under review being about 1/4 cheyenne, and 1/2 irish with the balance in dutch, scots italian and germanic stock.

why does my alleged whiteness appertain to anything? are people who are too white going to be disenfranchised under your new regime?

nah, youre just racist.

 

[nitro harley]

Do you like it on Earth?

Yes I do..

 

[NLXSK1]

i grow and sell vegetables and herbs at the farmers market as my avocation, and work in a shop to keep cash flowing during the off seasons between harvests.

in other words i am a petty bourgeois capitalist counter-revolutionary pig-dog, who oppresses the proletariat by not embracing the foolishness of marxism, through the intellectual, industrial, agrarian or corporate vanguards.

as you now claim to be a democratic socialist, you should therefore be well versed in the Third Way Socialism of Mussolini, and it's place in classical marxist thought as an initial non-radicalized movement to ease the proletariat into classic socialism as a stepping stone to full Utopian Communism.

but you dont see that. you see only the democratically elected socialism of the modern socialist movement without recognizing that it is, and was designed to be, the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, with slowly escalating levels of socialism using the capitalist system's own mechanisms as the driving force.

thats why Obama is in fact a socialist, the mildest form of socialist, but still a marxist at heart.

your comments and stated opinions clearly display that you believe socialism is the source of "Goodthings" but do not recognize that it is based on the foundation and ideology of Marxism, despite the simple and undeniable fact that all forms of socialism are just steps on the path to Marx's Communist Utopia, the Worker's Paradise, and of course dont believe that even the soviet union was based entirely on Marx's philosophy and ideals, corrupted by Stalin for his own personal power.

marxism is by it's very nature a cult, since everybody must accept the premise, and join in the hymns or be branded a heretic. Marxism cannot work when there is dissent, so dissent must be eliminated.

in a capitalist system you can run off and form a commune, or a co-operative, or a collective, and theres nothing to prevent it. communes and co-ops can neatly slip into a capitalist society, as proved by the Blue Diamond Growers, one fo the largest agricultural co-ops of independent farmers in the world. in a marxist of coimmunist society you cannot run off and form a capitalist organization, since that is a Black Market which would destabilize the entire system.

logically if you love freedom and liberty, a capitalist system with it's fexible and accepting nature is the 0only real choice, since all other economic systems require enforcement to keep out any competing ideas.

markets, capital, and private industry are the solution to oppression, not the cause. the inherent inequity of the system is not a problem, it is the motivation for hard work to better your lot in life, while socialism requires chains, and communism lives only in dreams.

There are many parcels of property that are organized as a co-op in Arizona. You can buy them through the MLS system. They are pathetically cheap because you are assuming the financial responsibility for the property as a group and thus any individual who does not pull their weight must be adjusted by the other co-op owners stepping up and paying the difference.

Kind of like a time share with much less of the benefits and much more of the responsibilities.

 

[Dr Kynes]

There are many parcels of property that are organized as a co-op in Arizona. You can buy them through the MLS system. They are pathetically cheap because you are assuming the financial responsibility for the property as a group and thus any individual who does not pull their weight must be adjusted by the other co-op owners stepping up and paying the difference.

Kind of like a time share with much less of the benefits and much more of the responsibilities.

hmm that doesnt really sound like a co-op to me, blue diamond is a co-op packing house, brand and marketing company run by independant farmers who are paid out by the share for the weight they put in in almonds, walnuts etc...

the company itself is administered by a council of the growers themselves with proportional representation based on their inputs of crop to the system.

 

[GOD HERE]

i grow and sell vegetables and herbs at the farmers market as my avocation, and work in a shop to keep cash flowing during the off seasons between harvests.

in other words i am a petty bourgeois capitalist counter-revolutionary pig-dog, who oppresses the proletariat by not embracing the foolishness of marxism, through the intellectual, industrial, agrarian or corporate vanguards.

as you now claim to be a democratic socialist, you should therefore be well versed in the Third Way Socialism of Mussolini, and it's place in classical marxist thought as an initial non-radicalized movement to ease the proletariat into classic socialism as a stepping stone to full Utopian Communism.

but you dont see that. you see only the democratically elected socialism of the modern socialist movement without recognizing that it is, and was designed to be, the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, with slowly escalating levels of socialism using the capitalist system's own mechanisms as the driving force.

thats why Obama is in fact a socialist, the mildest form of socialist, but still a marxist at heart.

your comments and stated opinions clearly display that you believe socialism is the source of "Goodthings" but do not recognize that it is based on the foundation and ideology of Marxism, despite the simple and undeniable fact that all forms of socialism are just steps on the path to Marx's Communist Utopia, the Worker's Paradise, and of course dont believe that even the soviet union was based entirely on Marx's philosophy and ideals, corrupted by Stalin for his own personal power.

marxism is by it's very nature a cult, since everybody must accept the premise, and join in the hymns or be branded a heretic. Marxism cannot work when there is dissent, so dissent must be eliminated.

in a capitalist system you can run off and form a commune, or a co-operative, or a collective, and theres nothing to prevent it. communes and co-ops can neatly slip into a capitalist society, as proved by the Blue Diamond Growers, one fo the largest agricultural co-ops of independent farmers in the world. in a marxist of coimmunist society you cannot run off and form a capitalist organization, since that is a Black Market which would destabilize the entire system.

logically if you love freedom and liberty, a capitalist system with it's fexible and accepting nature is the 0only real choice, since all other economic systems require enforcement to keep out any competing ideas.

markets, capital, and private industry are the solution to oppression, not the cause. the inherent inequity of the system is not a problem, it is the motivation for hard work to better your lot in life, while socialism requires chains, and communism lives only in dreams.

Not going to lie, I stopped reading this as soon as I saw the first mention of "marxist". But that's a respectable line of work, good for you. I half expected to hear "salesmen" of some sort.

 

[NLXSK1]

It is simply a form of property ownership. Say a 50 building condominium. There are 50 owners but they all share the responsibility.

Which is as you pointed out a great byproduct of a free society. The ability to do what you choose.

 

[GOD HERE]

You said that socialist don't have communes, which is stupid, but whatever you gotta tell yourself. Thanks for the sig.

DUDE!! Thank YOU for the sig. I mean if you're going to twist my words and all.

 

[abandonconflict]

"Petty Bourgeois" the lowest level of capitalist, those who run convenience stores, automotive repair shops, small farms pharmacies etc...

still not reading marx i see.

the Petty Bourgeois are the closest to the proletarians, and can be swayed by revolutionary zeal and their affection for the workers and their plight.

they are also the first line of defense against communist thought and the proletarians since they are the first rung on capital's ladder and thus tempting to the Lumpen Proletariat as an example of the possibility of success within the corrupt system.

these petty bourgeois are the most numerous, and thus a powerful voting bloc which Third Way Socialism attempts to woo, with promises of just a little socialism, and a "Level Playing Field" and making the big time bourgeois pay their "Fair Share"

but in the end classic marxism failed to woo the Petty Bourgeois, so they were declared the enemy of the workers.

Third way Marxism has had more success with the Petty Bourgeois, but most are still Counter Revolutionary.

also, my whitness is under review being about 1/4 cheyenne, and 1/2 irish with the balance in dutch, scots italian and germanic stock.

why does my alleged whiteness appertain to anything? are people who are too white going to be disenfranchised under your new regime?

nah, youre just racist.

You're a Marxist Kynes.

 

[Dr Kynes]

You're a Marxist Kynes.

yep, a little bit.

he makes some good points, and his philosophy and economic plan works well as long as it is strictly curtailed as soon as it starts to infringe on the freedom of contracts and the freedom of enterprise.

some countries walk the fine line of marxist ideology quite successfully but they always keep the escape hatch of voting the shit out if it turns sour. the modern US system tends to institutionalize shit and turn it into a permanent feature of the bureaucracy with little chance of dismantling it when it turns sour, like the FDA and the Controlled Substances Act, the pentagon, the NSA, the Patriot Act, Jim Crow, and so much more. Homeland Security is gonna be a millstone around our necks for at least 20 years i'm certain.

 

[sync0s]

Lol at creating jobs for poor Africans. The fire dept thing was an analogy. The CIA thing is an example of the fact that the state is acting in the interest of capital. This negates your conclusion, that the state is the enemy. The state is an apparatus to be wielded. You are using anti-state rhetoric to appeal to anarchists, but you clearly wish to replace it with a neofeudalist model. It is absolutely applicable to mention the case of resources and workers in a poor country, their misery is attributable to the opulence of a tiny elite. They CAN'T nationalize resources or unionize labor or anything of the sort because the US empire will not let them. You probably think massive amounts of aid go to such countries, but it isn't massive and it only goes to our puppet regimes. There is no way the masters of corporation who control the US would ever let them enjoy the fruits of their labor and pay a reasonable price for the resources they have to sell.

To answer the bolded question:

It does not in the slightest bit describe a situation of liberty that a hereditary owning class holds the vast majority of the population in subjugation by use of a market. What would be free about a market where a small class controls supply and a large class must purchase commodities necessary for survival from them. In order to make such purchases, they have no choice but to sell thier labor to them. All that the owner has to do is benefit from the work of others. The state exists to protect private property. Protecting private property is an act of aggression, it is saying that a human being does not have the right to the resources of the earth, that it is the right of some individual to profit and bequeath them to his children, that they may have privilege. In such a system, the word property becomes synonymous with liberty. What you clearly advocate, is that some men should have MORE liberty than other m

First off, you and your ideologies argument that wealth in america is hereditary is completely false, and is proven false when looking at Forbes 100 richest Americans. Just because you may be born with more wealth does not mean you have more liberty. You create your own opportunity. Hiding in a shadow of "I can't do it because I'm less fortunate" is exactly the attitude that keeps you where you are. If we were to leverage rich people's money and give it to the poor that would inherently be saying the poor have more right to property than the rich, giving them more liberty.

I don't want to appeal to an anarchist, nor do I support feudalism. You're straw man labeling is demonstrating your lack of effort in understanding a different point of view. I won't argue misery with you, because chances are you define misery with some outlandish hyperbole. FYI: a lot of the federal aid given out is pushed by corporations. It gives them kickbacks from the government here in the US and the rulers in the foreign land.

It's easy to be on your side of the argument. Team up with the majority and appeal to the masses to convict the minority. Win their minds by appealing to their emotional afflictions (point out how poor you are and how rich they are). Win their hearts by offering them more than what they have for the price of nothing but support. Win their souls by forever making them subservient to a government model that will never give you a choice to be apart of the system or not.

 

[sync0s]

Socialists don't have communes. Keep it coming asshat.

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

You accuse me of committing a logical fallacy and immediately commit one yourself.

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

Read what I said, and understand that not every argument is made screaming in your face with a mouth full of accusations. I attempted to build common ground between different ideologies, somehow that flew way over your head.