Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

abrasivesaint

VIP Member
  • Posts

    6,642
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

abrasivesaint last won the day on June 11 2020

abrasivesaint had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

abrasivesaint's Achievements

Collaborator

Collaborator (7/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare

Recent Badges

3.1k

Reputation

  1. Why $600? edit: cant help but find it an odd number given that the stimulus checks were a minimum of $600. Could just be a magic number, the fuck do i know, just thought that was odd at face value.
  2. I mean, all of that shit was easily accessible through the internet long before Facebook… The “chans”, Reddit, Limewire.. Even here back in the day exposed me to visuals that are equally as horrible. edit: Facebook can still suck my balls though. Had that shit for like 3 months and got rid of it. Dont want it, dont need it.
  3. Under Socialism people can still own property. As i stated, it is not Socialism, because… … neither system allows for individuals to freely trade, the goods are managed by an elected government, aka the central authority that i mentioned. You literally took what i said, reworded it, and passed it off the same statement as me being wrong. There’s differences between the 2 systems? No shit.. There was nothing technical about it, it was a pretty broad statement, and not inaccurate. You’re simply just hurling insults here. First, let’s state that there is no distinction between “we each” in the meme. It does not specify that “we each” means individual. It could, but it does not specify that. We could assume that “we each” means literally “we” a collective of people growing on a farm, aka, the workers. So.. - If you would like to stick to the individual interpretation, Anarcho-Capitalism, and free markets, fall under exactly what i said, “Anarcho-“ - If you would like to interpret the “we each” meaning groups of farm workers, it could fall under Anarcho-Syndicalism, where the workers are in control of their goods. - In Communalism, there is a confederation of communes working together. So, if one commune in the confederation has better means to grow X, and another has better means to grow Y, logically you could assume that at some point these communes would trade X and Y, or “share” if you prefer. If they openly share, and they do not trade 1 X for 1 Y, then it is not Capitalism. I understand the differences. You wrongfully don’t think that i do, much like you wrongfully think that i am a Socialist. If you think i am a Communist you have absolutely lost your mind. I may play devils advocate, and toy with certain tenets in certain conversations, but that doesn’t make me a fucking tankie. I can believe in Socialist tenets and programs, and not believe Socialism is the end all be all. Much like how i can believe Capitalism has its merits, but is not the end all be all, and should not be unchecked.
  4. “Municipalization, in effect, brings the economy from a private or separate sphere into the public sphere where economic policy is formulated by the entire community — notably, its citizens in face-to-face relationships working to achieve a general “interest” that surmounts separate, vocationally defined specific interests.” Murray Bookchin - “Municipalization - Community Ownership of the Economy”. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-municipalization Murray Bookchin - “Libertarian Municipalism” https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-libertarian-municipalism-an-overview Murray Bookchin “What is Communalism?” https://www.democracynature.org/vol3/bookchin_communalism.htm
  5. What? Haha. In both Socialism and Communism those farmed goods would go to the centralized authority and distributed “equally”. Communism being a more “extreme” version of Socialism, as some put it. The writing on that board states everyone would grow their own food and trade with each other on their own accord. Which based on the limited information, sounds like some form of “Anarcho -“ or Communalism to me.
  6. https://www.khou.com/mobile/article/news/local/texas/satanic-temple-challenges-texas-abortion-law/285-edf8b1f8-8605-4e6d-9331-afeefe1e5352
  7. killed for being a typical lying, cheating, child touching Catholic pedophile.
  8. https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-chicago-auto-mechanics-strike-20210810-yzif4dvrpndr7p5xqky3lreuta-story.html
  9. This is why laws were put in place, to try to stop it before it happens.. Monopoly laws were put in place in 1890, after years of worker strikes that resulted in bloodshed. Plot twist, many of the companies didn't want to supply better wages even though the companies were doing incredibly well, and some held monopolies in their respective industries. These companies used hired guns to break these union strikes that resulted in deaths. Again, look at modern day China, it’s happened. Do you not think this still happens, with or without the state? Mexican cartels do not give a fuck about a state, for example. They kill anyone who remotely interferes with business. I whole heartedly believe US corporations would be doing this much more in the open if they could. Instead they use the state to punish them through other various legal means. Removing the state in the scenario just leaves them at the mercy of the corporations, which has no such mercy. And you think free market corporations would be any different? I don’t know what schools you went to, but i don't remember hearing anything to that effect from my schooling. These are all ideas i’ve concluded on my own. In fact, despite my school teacher arguing against me. Sell their products to billionaires and corporations, leaving us with a worse existence than we have now that you could write a plot for the next Robocop movie with. That wasn’t the point though. You said.. To which i replied that the people who died on the Frontier may disagree with you. They in fact, sometimes fought and died, for a paycheck. Some of the Homestead strikers fought and died, for better wages. The Pinkertons, were hired, and fought and died, for a paycheck. I agree. I will add though, that this means that the laws shouldn’t exist. Yes, currently. Remove the protections from workers and you may no longer have that choice, and we will have slavery.
×
×
  • Create New...