Capitalism vs Communism

[Prismatic Sphere]

The legitimate tea party is against taxes and in favor of smaller government --this legitimate movement is very small, and not too powerful. The illegitimate tea party is fairly large, and is about blind obedience to authority and the desire to more heavily misdirect the sheep-like voters with religion, and to use religion as an excuse to introduce more prohibition into government.

The left simply knows nothing of history, so the complexities of some of the anti-collectivist message are lost on them. The right also knows little of history, hence the inane religious signs. Pathetic. Even in rebellion, America has become unphilosophical.

 

[Badbird]

I wish we had Ralph Nader as president instead of George W. Fuck you 2000. We need someone that isn't a Republican or Democrat. He cares more than any of the shit two partys besides Ron Paul.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Nader was always a consummate scam artist. Cobb was a much better Green party candidate(if that's your thing).

Harry Browne was an excellent choice in 2000 and Michael Badnarik(in 2004) is the greatest presidential candidate I have ever seen; and also one of the most truly awesome people I have ever met.

 

[Badbird]

Cobb kicks ass as well. I just wish we had real "liberal" instead of centrists like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of them scums. Harry Borwne and Michael Badnarik aren't bad either even if I'm not the biggest Libertarian. Whatever it takes to get rid of the two party system is fine with me.

 

[Death Aflame]

The left simply knows nothing of history, so the complexities of some of the anti-collectivist message are lost on them. The right also knows little of history, hence the inane religious signs. Pathetic. Even in rebellion, America has become unphilosophical.

I think you overgeneralize and oversimplify. The most obvious example of this is saying that the left, whatever that is, does not know history. The left (or for that matter, the right) is not some homogeneous, monolithic ideology. There are many streams of thought that may be characterized as leftist, many of them are not necessarily incompatible with a philosophy of individualism (individualist anarchism and mutualism come to mind, for instance), nor are they necessarily as simple as being tyrannically collectivist (the favored strawman of many an Objectivist and thin libertarians). What I am saying is that we must account for the idiosyncrasies and try not to get caught in the trap of knocking down strawmen at every turn. For this does not help progress discourse, but only serve to stagnate it.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Now you are just dissenting for the sake of it. As I pointed out before, if you want to buy into the false dichotomy of the left/right paradigm; that's your business; because while there may or not be a left/right among libertarians themselves remains a question which I am open to discuss. But any validity the garden variety left and right once had, much less the left/right of Congress(which both foster an endgame of bigger government), lost any true semblance of any noteworthy validity a long time ago.

This is The Age Of Unenlightenment we have been living in for quite some time and it is imperative that we stop kidding ourselves and wake the fuck up.

 

[Kara-Shehr]

Who or what would you blame for the lack of intelligence in modern America? Be specific Prismatic. I still think your overgenralizing.

 

[Badbird]

Prismatic Sphere, it's not a right/left issue, it's a two party system issue.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Who or what would you blame for the lack of intelligence in modern America? Be specific Prismatic. I still think your overgenralizing.

Well then let me overgeneralize even more and say that it is throughout the entire world; all while giving you a very specific, diagram & chart video presentation that you should all see for yourselves, rather than my usual bitter ranting(but I will expand it later if you wish).

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Prismatic Sphere, it's not a right/left issue, it's a two party system issue.

Folks, I love it when people make my point for me even more simply than I have(although roundaboutly).

Nice work Birdy/Brady!

 

[Kara-Shehr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=player_embedded

I approve of this video. Thank you for elaborating on your points Prismatic. If anyone is reading this thread I strongly suggest that you watch it all the way through you might learn a thing or two or 50.

There were too many interesting and thought provoking points for me to even begin to go into. But if you'd like to go deeper into the topics mentioned i'm game. If you would be so kind to start us off.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Fine, I will.

What he's talking about is tailor made education, an education which panders to the individual's strengths and requirements. And what self-respecting government would ever tolerate a society of free-thinking individuals. They certainly wouldn't be employable in the current yes sir, no sir, sit-in-an-office-cubicle-for-8-hours-a-day work environment.

This will probably NEVER happen here with this rigged checkerboard. No way will the state ever foot the bill for such a (truly)progressive and forward thinking venture, and no private company would bankroll such a project, as it's simply not viable from a purely economic standpoint.

The only way it would happen is if people form their own collective groups to safeguard, nurture and finance the education of their own children. And that's a brand of collectivism that I could certainly get behind(as it would be utterly voluntary).

Otherwise school is just state run daycare designed to break spirits and manufacture bland people.

 

[Kara-Shehr]

Yes, because why would they want people who know how badly they're getting fucked over? Noone to buy their pointless gizmos and gadgets, noone to elect corrupt politicians, noone to fight in meaningless wars, noone to go the shitty jobs noone wants, noone to max out their credit cards and spend the rest of their lives paying interest fees.

A free thinking,socially,politically,economically aware and objective thinking society interupts the flow of the of the neo-conservative agenda or whatever name you wanna give it. Im not even gonna go into who's fault it is thats an entirely different story.

However that being said, I think what makes it so sad is people who don't even care enough to participate in government by voting ect. People who are single issue voters or who vote for their party just because they have a certain stance on one particular issue. And the people who sit on the fence all the time just piss me off the most.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

If by "the fence" you mean the people who are waiting for whichever of the two "sides" promises them the most or favors more of their special interests, then I agree with you. If you mean the people who are scratching their heads, trying to find a semblance of consistency between economic liberty and social liberty(unaware of libertarian or other options), then I can't. These are the people who you need to rally.

As I said in another thread, those who look at general elections as a horse race and only want their frontrunner to win, what are they winning?
Nothing(more of the same old shit). Nothing attached to nothing.
They might as well just go up to the ticket window to cash in and have the teller rip up their tickets in front of them with a big thumbs up.....
their ass!

The right thing to do is vote for the party that exemplifies their views the most or don't vote at all. If one doesn't like or wish to condone or encourage the destructive duopoly, then they shouldn't.

 

[Kara-Shehr]

What I want meant by "fence sitters" are the people who never take any side or want to make up their minds on anything because they don't want to offend anybody with their opinion. Let everyone else do the dirty work type of thinking. No stance is the best stance this way noone can come after me ect you know what I mean.

As for elections in America, it's probably the biggest catch 22 ever. Look at the last presidential election. Who it came down to was a guy who was basically your run of the mill conservative spewing the same old song and dance to people, "traditional american values" and what not. Then the other guy was so optimistic it was utterly laughable and still is.
Basically his general appeal was...

1. I'm not as bad as the last guy
2. I'm black, electing me will somehow fix everything
3. We're like gonna change stuff

Which was pratically the entire basis of his campaign and everyone bought into it and look where we are now....

And John Mccain supported John Hagee at one point need I say more? "One of the presidential cannidates takes advice from an egomanical religious screwball who thinks God will send terrorists to attack America because of gay people?" (which isn't even his most ludicrous theory) "lets elect that guy." Not. Plus like I said before John Mccain is basically a cookie cutter conservative hung like a christmas tree ornament for all the soccer moms and alcholic dads to salavate over. His appeal to people came in the form of...

1. I'm experienced at like politics and stuff (wasting half of your adult life sitting through 5 day long filibusters doesn't make you hardcore, kill yourself please.)
2. I'm against gay people, abortion and Jesus Christ is my personal saviour just like everyone else (Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity are not everyone kill yourself please.)

So case in point elections suck, we need better choices when it comes voting time. Most people are shocked that theres more than two political parties "GOP whats that lol" true story.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

I'm gonna have to agree with everything you just said. I've had beef with McCain going back years though; and added to this ire- SB 3081 is one of the most hauntingly destructive bills ever proposed and he has cosigned this abomination and more Americans need to know what's in it.

And if you just watch this Arizona debate; it is so easy and I mean so so so ridiculously easy to spot how awfully full of shit the Democrats and Republicans are; especially when you have one of the founding members of the Libertarian Party in the same debate.
(and it's no small wonder that Glassman only allows comments he likes in the comments section, the asshole).

 

[Death Aflame]

So I take it you are a big "L" Libertarian, PS, as in the Libertarian Party?

I would describe myself as an anarchist first and foremost, with secondary terms being libertarian (not a big L Libertarian though), libertarian socialist, left libertarian and mutualist.

I am in favor of free markets, equality, private property (under Proudhon's use-and-occupancy axiom), direct democracy, mutual aid, voluntary association and am against illegitimate authority and hierarchy in principle. I strongly prefer cooperatives (worker-owned and run or consumer-owned and run, depending on the nature of the business) to hierarchical firms as the primarily organization tool within a market econmony, but would not oppose the latter by force or solemn decree. I do believe, however, that hierarchical firms and wage-employment would be far less prevalent in a truly freed market (freed market being defined approximately as a stateless society that dissolved land, money, tariff, patent, and IP monopolies).

My political/economic outlook is informed by a wide breadth of thinkers such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Mikhail Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Karl Marx, John Locke, Henry George, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and Noam Chomsky. Some more recent influences include Kevin Carson of the Centre for a Stateless Society (http://www.c4ss.org), Roderick Long, and Gary Chartier.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

So I take it you are a big "L" Libertarian, PS, as in the Libertarian Party?

I was a "l"libertarian when I developed the capacity to think and have always had a "problem" with authority(which is the healthiest "problem" one can ever have IMO[you would have LOVED me in the schoolroom]). I became a "L" Libertarian officially I guess when I voted for Harry Browne in 2000 and of course voted for the subsequently awesome Michael Badnarik in 2004. Since I haven't voted since, I don't know. You make the call.

On libertarian surveys, I have tested positive as a Libertarian, minarchist, paleo-libertarian, neo-liberal, and as an Individualist Conservative Libertarian.

For the record, I would infinitely prefer anarchy to what we have now.

Going part-and-parcel with that, there's a great article from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute comparing it here: http://mises.org/daily/4784

Lysander Spooner, John Locke, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard,

LOVE these guys.

Karl Marx, and Noam Chomsky.

Utterly DETEST and DESPISE these guys.

Indifferent or only semi-informed on the others.

Ludwig Von Mises is a huge economic influence. Frank R. Wallace is my most immediate philosophical influence. Ayn Rand, of course and Nathaniel Branden. For psychology, Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler, in my early years(though lately I am spotting heavily obfuscated holes of mysticism in their theories). Christopher Hitchens on the inanity of religion, Michael Badnarik and Thomas E. Woods Jr. for Constitutional Law. John Locke on Natural Law. All of the Anti-Federalists: Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Robert Yates, Samuel Adams, George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, James Monroe, etc.
Other literary figures include H.L. Mencken, P.J. O'Rourke, James Bovard, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Guy Gavriel Kay, William Peter Blatty
On the philosophy of art Ludwig Van Beethoven and Frank R. Wallace
On comedy, Doug Stanhope(the best), George Carlin, Howard Stern, Artie Lang, Lisa Lampinelli, Andrew Dice Clay(old shit), Sam Kinnison, Jim Norton,
Penn Jillette, Ozzy Osbourne.


If I could have any 5 living people for next door neighbors, they would have to be:

Doug Stanhope
Michael Badnarik
Hugh Hefner(c'mon- goes without saying)
Michael Romeo
Traci Lords

Who would be yours?

 

[Badbird]

Why do you hate Noam Chomsky?

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Why do you hate Noam Chomsky?

For covering up and making light of the horror and terror of Pol Pot's frightening Cambodia and more recently for defending college campus speech codes, for starters.

And also because he is so widely regarded as the 20th Century's greatest intellectual; which is oh just so complete horseshit. Many of the people that me and Death Aflame mentioned utterly eclipse and eviscerate him. Oh yeah, and then there's that guy Albert Einstein. Please.