abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Well, where did I say i believe in well funded central planning?
If I didn't say it, it is a strawman.
IRS gave extra scrutiny to liberal groups as well
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
Well, where did I say i believe in well funded central planning?
If I didn't say it, it is a strawman.
SlaveNoMore
Active Member
Guys help me out here.
I thought that anarchists believed in self-governance? To me it seems more of a "tribal" type mindset where people organize their own communities. That doesn't mean there is no leadership it just means that everyone does what they are good at and exchange goods and services.
What stands out the most about the anarchist mindset is the objection to the ownership of natural resources. Yes I understand the ,"well someone has to maintain the water and sewer lines" arguement. However, it is one of the ideas put forth by the anarchist philosophy that I agree with. Feel free to disagree...
Do my thoughts ring true with the anarchists here?
I thought that anarchists believed in self-governance? To me it seems more of a "tribal" type mindset where people organize their own communities. That doesn't mean there is no leadership it just means that everyone does what they are good at and exchange goods and services.
What stands out the most about the anarchist mindset is the objection to the ownership of natural resources. Yes I understand the ,"well someone has to maintain the water and sewer lines" arguement. However, it is one of the ideas put forth by the anarchist philosophy that I agree with. Feel free to disagree...
Do my thoughts ring true with the anarchists here?
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
well you didn't of course, you haven't really said anything that makes sense.
So are you against austerity AND well funded central planning? That doesn't really make sense either does it?
I understand anarchy the way SlaveNoMore describes it. Central planning really doesn't make sense in a philosophy that emphasizes self governance.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
So I never said anything about central funded planning but you're still attacking it and then saying, "therefore you're inconsistent and you don't make sense."
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
You are saying Austerity = Bad. It's not rocket surgery.
If you had said "I'm against austerity, but I'm also against central planning" it wouldn't make sense would it? Being FOR central planning is the logical conclusion, do you see why?
You also call yourself an anarchist. You can say I'm an anarchist and I'm against central planning. This makes perfect sense.
Therefore, "I'm an anarchist, I'm against austerity" is very inconsistent.
If I had said I am against the wars and the size of our military complex but I am against cuts to defense spending you'd think I was a bit confused I hope. Being FOR cuts to our military budget shouldn't have to be said.
Unless of course you are a Keynesiananarchist, then everything makes perfect sense in it's nonsense. This would give you superpowers to just say shit without any proof or logic.
If you had said "I'm against austerity, but I'm also against central planning" it wouldn't make sense would it? Being FOR central planning is the logical conclusion, do you see why?
You also call yourself an anarchist. You can say I'm an anarchist and I'm against central planning. This makes perfect sense.
Therefore, "I'm an anarchist, I'm against austerity" is very inconsistent.
If I had said I am against the wars and the size of our military complex but I am against cuts to defense spending you'd think I was a bit confused I hope. Being FOR cuts to our military budget shouldn't have to be said.
Unless of course you are a Keynesiananarchist, then everything makes perfect sense in it's nonsense. This would give you superpowers to just say shit without any proof or logic.
Rak on Tur'
Active Member
While I'm not a anarchist, I do think self governence is something we need more of. We got rid of our police department all together, guess what, crime dropped.
On natural resources I'm not following, I guess I'm missing it? What if the profits from resource development are shared by the citizens? Like the PFD for example.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Makes perfect sense. Why think inside the box?
SlaveNoMore
Active Member
The point about natural resources is that no one has the authority to lay claim to a resource that is here for everyone. Why pay for water, why pay for a fishing liscense, hunting liscense, and so on. These are "god" given things that everyone should have equal access to. Some anarchists believe that owning land is a violation against humanity. How can a person "own" a piece of the earth? This is how I understand it.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Capitalism = Cancer
Stimulus = Chemo and Radiation
Austerity = Death
Anarchism = Cannabis
Stimulus = Chemo and Radiation
Austerity = Death
Anarchism = Cannabis
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Is changing the definition of austerity and central planning thinking outside the box? Come back in the box and explain if you don't mind.
"I'm against central planning, but we shouldn't cut funding for it". How does this sit comfortably in your mind?
I'm a vegetarian but I still eat meat. You just don't understand.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
if you cannot own the land you work, then why till the land, erect fences to protect livestock, construct a home and a barn, dig a well, and lay irrigation? since you dont own it anyone else can just come over and take it from you.
anarchy is the utopian dream of the dilettante who doesnt want to plow the feild, plant crops, harvest the grain, mill it into flour, or bake the bread but he's always the first to the table for his "fair share" of your bread, butter honey, beef and beer.
if you cannot own a thing you will not work to improve it. if the product of the land is not yours, why would you work to create a surplus to feed others who do NOT work the land but perform other specialist work, like mining or manufacturing or creating musical insturments or making music, etc etc etc.
all of society is based on one simple idea: Surplus Food. every person who does not have to farm hunt fish or ranch to keep his belly full is free to become a specialist in another field, or to just think about shit and advance science. without the surplus food to feed the non-food producing population, society reverts to the pre-industrial age, and with no impetus to create that surplus, it vanishes. thats why we have an economy.
honestly, could you keep yourself fed even if you were given 5 acres of land and told to farm it? could you really be self-sufficient, building your own home, constructing your own tools, taming your own horses, catching your own sheep and planting crops?
and if you couldnt even own any of that shit, why would you bother, since any other lazy asshole can just walk up and take the horse you spent so much time catching, taming, training and fitting with a plow collar you made with your own hands?
owning shit is the only thing that makes society possible, without it, we lose everything.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
What is next, you want to point out that austerity lacks stimulus?
So there is no sex in the champagne room?
So there is no sex in the champagne room?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Recession (brought on by excessive unfunded spending and repeal of Glass-Steagal) = Diabetes
Stimulus = High fructose corn syrup and sugar
Austerity = Insulin
Anarchism = Cannabis still but has nothing to do with central planning
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Live not for what you can acquire, but for what you can leave behind.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
for the wanker who thinks dictionary definitions are all lies created bytt the koch brothers you sure are deceptive.
when i post a dictionary definition i post the WHOLE THING not just the line i like best.
heres the whole entry from the "new Heritage dictionary"
[TABLE="class: sbox1, width: 160"]
[TR]
[TH][/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
aus·ter·i·ty (ô-st
2. Severe and rigid economy: wartime austerity.
3. An austere habit or practice.
and heres the next entry from Collins
austerity [ɒˈstɛrɪtɪ]n pl -ties1. the state or quality of being austere
2. (often plural) an austere habit, practice, or act
3. (Economics)a. reduced availability of luxuries and consumer goods, esp when brought about by government policy
b. (as modifier) an austerity budget
and from websters:
aus•ter•i•ty (ɔˈstɛr ɪ ti)
n., pl. -ties. 1. austere quality; severity of manner, life, etc.; sternness.
2. Usu., austerities. ascetic practices.
3. strict economy.
not a one provides the chracterization you attempted to create with your edited self serving twaddle.
each one refers the reader to "austere" which is defined as follows from websters:
aus•tere (ɔˈstɪər)
adj. 1. severe in manner or appearance; strict; forbidding.
2. rigorously self-disciplined and severely moral; ascetic; abstinent.
3. without excess, luxury, or ease: an austere life.
4. without ornament or adornment; severely simple: austere writing.
5. lacking softness.
so no, austerity is the removal of fripperies and luxuries leaving only the essentials.
you are as impotent and clueless as ever.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
"I'm an anarchist that believes austerity is harmful and I do believe that stimulus is helpful, but that doesn't mean I believe in central planning". Is this right? I really am trying to understand.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
decoding from Chompskese:
"i cant imagine why anyone would not just give me everything i desire.
nobody should every be able to own anything (cept me)"
without ownership and a REASON to produce more than you need there is no specialization of labour, and thus no society for you to fuck up with your idiotic socialist fantasy.
Similar threads
