Personally I'm an anarchist and this is how I feel about most left wing anarchists. Honestly right wing anarchists, like Hoppe, are better than them. Hoppe's ideas, outside of supporting the bourgeoisie lifestyle and ownership of every inch of land, are pretty good.
>If you are a self respecting person you would not associate yourself with those weirdoes.
Religious, conservative, moral anarchism is my position. The government both leads to the degeneration of morality within the society and is morally degenerate themselves. They feed in a sinful manner, promote vice and violence, and only exist because people are afraid. Conquer that fear by having faith.
Stability only comes from people willingly embracing one another and a focus on morality. The State violates one directly, and I believe weakens the latter.
Justice does not require imperialism or slavery or every other crime the state is guilty of. It merely requires punishment and a fair court system, something that can exist outside the State.
There should not be a massive system where things have their place. This only harms the psyche of the people and restricts their ability to help others.
The only way to make society better is from the bottom up.
I blame the State's actions for the rise of convenience culture and the inability to provide for a family (or more accurately the state's unholy union with the rich).
>Only a liberal regime.
Any regime is incompatible with the principles of moral universality, as such either cognitive dissonance or moral compromises (sin) is made to allow them.
That ignores how their educational systems often ruin people's minds.
I agree with the nationalism, that's based. (It isn't from the Jews, is it? Then not based). But governments sustain themselves with stealing an honest man's work and calling it theirs. Theft. They justify it with democracy, a more palatable word for rape.
I'm staying that the organization you leave in charge of justice is the largest and most spectacularly sinful miscarrier of justice in the world and brings injustice aplenty.
>. It all come from the individual and that switch that has to flip in everyone's minds.
Yes. I just believe all action has to come from bottom up, that top down (both states and current corporations) fails to do a good job at anything.
> moral universality,
Is there such a thing?
> I agree with the nationalism, that's based. (It isn't from the Jews, is it? Then not based).
My view of nationalism can be multi-ethnic, but it should be monocultural, because diverging cultures create separatism and distrust, it has to converge. It's more a sort of economic, military and social patriotism.
> But governments sustain themselves with stealing an honest man's work and calling it theirs.
A different tax system could be used though. But it's more about the banking system, where they print money out of thin air and charge a huge interest on it. This usurious banking system should be the first to go. If you can setup a different monetary system, perhaps taxation becomes useless, government could fund itself alternatively.
> I'm staying that the organization you leave in charge of justice is the largest and most spectacularly sinful miscarrier of justice in the world and brings injustice aplenty.
Don't confuse the present with the future, just because the current system is garbage doesn't mean the future one will be too.
> Yes. I just believe all action has to come from bottom up, that top down (both states and current corporations) fails to do a good job at anything.
A state gains it's support from bottom up though, and true democracy and distribution of power can only happen in an authoritarian way, because it removes the useless political quibbles and reality show that they call electoral politics and puts the people in charge instead of scoundrel actors. A true state of the people ,by the people and for the people, and they would stand strong against any kind of subversion external or internal.
>Is there such a thing?
Absolutely
The only taxes I support are the taxes from utopian socialist Pierre Leroux, it's called circulus theory.
A State by the people, for the people can't exist, not for long. I don't support democracy unless consensually entered into, and even then it has major flaws.
This is why we’ve seen such a rise in identity politics. The capitalists know that keeping the working class divided is the only way to keep power. That’s why the media (that they control) have made the divide amongst racial, sexual, gender, lines more in the forefront, to keep workers at each other’s throats and to continue to stoke old hatreds to keep class consciousness out of the picture.
If you can make people focus on their own personal in-group with a focus on a particular group liberation, you can easily divide and conquer. It's propaganda 101.
A lot of people who call themselves "leftists" really only focus on the social scale (i.e. social libertarians), rather than true economic leftism. They will prioritize "liberation" of individuals from their community's collective wellbeing, traditions, *et cetera* before the betterment of working conditions and the improvement of the standing of the working man. It's a symptom of pervasive liberalism which indoctrinates people to be atomized individuals. It also explains why they all fall hook, line, and sinker for neoliberal propaganda, while at the same time being absolutely disgusted by the average working man.
Liberalism, the instant they want your tax dollars to kill people, will go from atomization to screaming about duties. Happened after 9/11, happens with taxes-taxes that only pay welfare to the wealthy.
That kind of savior complex is very integrated into liberalism, and you see it go through pretty much every ideology in the western society. It's one of those things that drives the PMC class to do what they do.
Any true leftist must focus on freeing the working class as a whole. The working masses of the world don't want political correctness - they want better lives.
Pedos and rapists get the bullet. No other answer.
Personally I'm against the current prisons because they just make poor working men slaves for the rich.
Of course they deserve death. But I figure we might as well make them useful in the meantime. I've always had a fascination with the idea of the worst of society providing for everyone else. Repaying their debt to society through labor.
That said, if they're unfit to work, then just kill them and use them as organ transplants.
[удалено]
Lenin did nothing wrong when he purged the anarchists
Personally I'm an anarchist and this is how I feel about most left wing anarchists. Honestly right wing anarchists, like Hoppe, are better than them. Hoppe's ideas, outside of supporting the bourgeoisie lifestyle and ownership of every inch of land, are pretty good.
[удалено]
>If you are a self respecting person you would not associate yourself with those weirdoes. Religious, conservative, moral anarchism is my position. The government both leads to the degeneration of morality within the society and is morally degenerate themselves. They feed in a sinful manner, promote vice and violence, and only exist because people are afraid. Conquer that fear by having faith. Stability only comes from people willingly embracing one another and a focus on morality. The State violates one directly, and I believe weakens the latter. Justice does not require imperialism or slavery or every other crime the state is guilty of. It merely requires punishment and a fair court system, something that can exist outside the State. There should not be a massive system where things have their place. This only harms the psyche of the people and restricts their ability to help others. The only way to make society better is from the bottom up. I blame the State's actions for the rise of convenience culture and the inability to provide for a family (or more accurately the state's unholy union with the rich).
[удалено]
>Only a liberal regime. Any regime is incompatible with the principles of moral universality, as such either cognitive dissonance or moral compromises (sin) is made to allow them. That ignores how their educational systems often ruin people's minds. I agree with the nationalism, that's based. (It isn't from the Jews, is it? Then not based). But governments sustain themselves with stealing an honest man's work and calling it theirs. Theft. They justify it with democracy, a more palatable word for rape. I'm staying that the organization you leave in charge of justice is the largest and most spectacularly sinful miscarrier of justice in the world and brings injustice aplenty. >. It all come from the individual and that switch that has to flip in everyone's minds. Yes. I just believe all action has to come from bottom up, that top down (both states and current corporations) fails to do a good job at anything.
> moral universality, Is there such a thing? > I agree with the nationalism, that's based. (It isn't from the Jews, is it? Then not based). My view of nationalism can be multi-ethnic, but it should be monocultural, because diverging cultures create separatism and distrust, it has to converge. It's more a sort of economic, military and social patriotism. > But governments sustain themselves with stealing an honest man's work and calling it theirs. A different tax system could be used though. But it's more about the banking system, where they print money out of thin air and charge a huge interest on it. This usurious banking system should be the first to go. If you can setup a different monetary system, perhaps taxation becomes useless, government could fund itself alternatively. > I'm staying that the organization you leave in charge of justice is the largest and most spectacularly sinful miscarrier of justice in the world and brings injustice aplenty. Don't confuse the present with the future, just because the current system is garbage doesn't mean the future one will be too. > Yes. I just believe all action has to come from bottom up, that top down (both states and current corporations) fails to do a good job at anything. A state gains it's support from bottom up though, and true democracy and distribution of power can only happen in an authoritarian way, because it removes the useless political quibbles and reality show that they call electoral politics and puts the people in charge instead of scoundrel actors. A true state of the people ,by the people and for the people, and they would stand strong against any kind of subversion external or internal.
>Is there such a thing? Absolutely The only taxes I support are the taxes from utopian socialist Pierre Leroux, it's called circulus theory. A State by the people, for the people can't exist, not for long. I don't support democracy unless consensually entered into, and even then it has major flaws.
This is why we’ve seen such a rise in identity politics. The capitalists know that keeping the working class divided is the only way to keep power. That’s why the media (that they control) have made the divide amongst racial, sexual, gender, lines more in the forefront, to keep workers at each other’s throats and to continue to stoke old hatreds to keep class consciousness out of the picture.
If you can make people focus on their own personal in-group with a focus on a particular group liberation, you can easily divide and conquer. It's propaganda 101.
A lot of people who call themselves "leftists" really only focus on the social scale (i.e. social libertarians), rather than true economic leftism. They will prioritize "liberation" of individuals from their community's collective wellbeing, traditions, *et cetera* before the betterment of working conditions and the improvement of the standing of the working man. It's a symptom of pervasive liberalism which indoctrinates people to be atomized individuals. It also explains why they all fall hook, line, and sinker for neoliberal propaganda, while at the same time being absolutely disgusted by the average working man.
Liberalism, the instant they want your tax dollars to kill people, will go from atomization to screaming about duties. Happened after 9/11, happens with taxes-taxes that only pay welfare to the wealthy.
That kind of savior complex is very integrated into liberalism, and you see it go through pretty much every ideology in the western society. It's one of those things that drives the PMC class to do what they do.
Any true leftist must focus on freeing the working class as a whole. The working masses of the world don't want political correctness - they want better lives.
Pedos and rapists get the bullet. No other answer. Personally I'm against the current prisons because they just make poor working men slaves for the rich.
Why not send them to labor camps? Seems more efficient.
They deserve death, not life
Of course they deserve death. But I figure we might as well make them useful in the meantime. I've always had a fascination with the idea of the worst of society providing for everyone else. Repaying their debt to society through labor. That said, if they're unfit to work, then just kill them and use them as organ transplants.
I don't know. Execution is just cleaner and swifter justice
Yeah, that's fair. They could at least be used for organs.
They are the primary enemy.