I believe that both sides are fucking retarded. Shit in general needs to be overhauled. Im more leftist, and while i believe in the objective and freedom all that shit i also think we need to do whats best for society in terms of how we treat our citizens and help the needy. The problem comes from overreach, which comes when anyone gets their way and wants more. We need to cut that shit out on both sides.
>>5664444 generally i just do this with people though
>>5664457 what about the fact that minimum wage has historically helped. If workers have more money they can put more in the encomnomy which makes more places hire and more places make more stuff. The peoples ability to buy is what drives capitalism
>>5664470 Well my understanding is that in an idealized market economy, market forces set wages at the point where the total wages paid (i.e. average wage per worker x number of workers) is maximized. Raising the minimum wage above the wage set by the market would result in fewer total wages - individual workers are paid more, but fewer are employed, and the total wages being paid are lower.
>>5664390 Some sort of left or center-left. I think socialists have good ideas but I feel like really committing to an ideology like socialism or libertarianism gets you into that whole "every problem is a nail" deal.
>>5673636 Not even edgy. I just can't vote for everyone's best interests without fucking up my own.
I want guns and I want to be a rug munching dyke. I'm voting Trump because he'll let me keep my guns. He might not like what I'm doing in the bedroom but that's not really his business so I don't care.
>>5664390 Civil Libertarian/Left(?) libertarian >>5674104 They are though, just look at the policy the soviets and other Marxists took on lgbt people, exactly the same policies the authoritarian right took. Sending people off to re-education camps is typical of both.
Or just look at radfems and other far right religious loonies and tell me that way they both vilify anyone who's different, find scapegoats and blindly push a dogma where every other is evil, isn't the same. Hell they're both calling fags pedophile rapists who are coming for everyone's wife and kids.
Fundamentalism of either stripe can't ever coexist with anyone "different" .
>>5678295 The horseshoe theory just assumes that far-left = corrupt, authoritarian governments. It fails to explain anarchism (and presumably any non-authoritarian far-right groups, assuming they exist).
>>5678337 >corrupt, authoritarian That's what zealous movements who see the world through us and them tend to become. It's pretty telling how both social cons and Radfems are now on the same side of the culture war.
>>5678295 >They are though, just look at the policy the soviets and other Marxists took on lgbt people, exactly the same policies the authoritarian right took. Sending people off to re-education camps is typical of both. They're really only at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to economics. Both groups you're discussing are authoritarian and rather socially conservative. And everything they have in common falls under that.
>>5678465 Yes, but there are plenty of non-authoritarian far leftists. And plenty of libertarianistic far-righters. You're really talking about two different spectrums like they're one and the same.
I'm a Communist when I have to interact with centrist liberal democrats I'm a Nazi when I have to interact with Obamabots/Tumblrites/Feminists And to top it all off, reddit neoliberal STEMlords call me insane, illogical and 'unscientific' like that means anything.
Poz me up and send me to an early grave bby. This life is constant pain.
>>5678561 >But they're not on the same side of the culture war http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/27/the-guardian-promotes-discredited-debunked-book/201327 https://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/international-baby-business_992195.html You're in denial. Not only do they collaborate for every major cause save for abortion (despite both opposing bodily autonomy), but they even publish in each others rags. They both lobby against groups like the ACLU and Amnesty too.
And that's not even getting into how both of them have spammed places like Houston with pamphlets about how their boogie men are predators out to rape everyone's kids.
More centrist/civil liberties and individualism respecting groups might fall into the US vs them mentality but you sure don't see them pushing weirmar erra pamphlets about whatever minority they've decided to turn into their jews.
I pity you all. This kind of degenerate thinking is the result of men who listen to the spirit of a boy which lives inside of them. You cry about Rights, but what of your Duty?
You blame the State and its Laws for the present state of affairs. You've remained, by your own accord, in the State - learned in its schools, drank its milk, and benefited from its SECURITY (for without security, man can hardly secure and exercise his natural rights) - and you advocate its limitation?
Your fellow Man is the party that injures you. Not the State. Man's brutish propensity for dominance over his fellow Man is the patent reason that the State needs to exist in the first place - the absence thereof would see a return to prehistoric state of war that pits every man against every man, devoid of industry, agriculture, and cooperation.
Advocate for the State which allows a Sovereign power to weigh the Will of all its citizens and carry out that collective Will with absolute authority. Whether you agree with the actions of the Sovereign, it would be unjust to oppose it, as it carries out the collective Will of all its citizens.
"It is not Wisdom, but Authority which makes a law." Thomas Hobbes
"But as it is you leave us, if indeed you depart, having been done an injustice not by us, the laws, but by men. If you return the injustice, however, and repay the harm and flee in shame, having violated your agreement and contract with us and harmed those who least of all should be harmed, yourself, your friends, your homeland, and us, we will make life hard for you while you're alive, and then our brothers, the laws in Hades, will not receive you favorably, knowing that you also tried to destroy us as far as you were able." Socrates
>>5681349 >Whether you agree with the actions of the Sovereign, it would be unjust to oppose it, as it carries out the collective Will of all its citizens. is a good start literally just because a majority is implied to agree with the sovereign he's rightfully ruling over you?
>>5681291 anarcho-communism >step one: make a state >step two: don't call it a state But answer me this. I suspect you're an middle class gentry kind of guy or at the very least of that cultural group. Why would you want a society in which the collective culture and ruling was up to the lowest, basest, worst part of our society? That being the lower classes.
>>5681349 This is the degeneracy I spoke of. You would argue based on feelings or emotions? Shameful.
>>5681366 The Sovereign has the right to rule absolutely because all of its citizens are willing participants in a political process that weighs the individual Wills of ALL citizens, not a majority. The Law, while it won't be agreeable to every citizen every time, is just because it is enacted in the best interest of every citizen.
If you don't like it, you have every right, upon maturing, to leave and never come back - to take your chances in the State of Nature. But you won't... You rely too heavily on the Security that the State affords you.
>>5681369 I concede that this would yield a good regime (a la Philosopher King). However, the State's moral justification lies in its consideration of the Will of all its subjects. Without that aspecr, it wouldn't be just.
>>5681376 I'm not sure what you mean by the first part, as anarcho-communism is anti state. The difference between that and marxist communism is that anarchists wouldn't use the state as a tool to establish communism.
This also means full democracy, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. I think you need to educate yourself about what both anarchism and communism is.
>>5681430 >I'm not sure what you mean by the first part, as anarcho-communism is anti state I know what it is. It's an old joke but it holds water. You'd still make what to all people would simply be a state but instead you call it an "anti state" like there's a difference.
>and fwiw I'm a poor mtf. I suspect you're culturally middle class. I don't have a penny of my own but I'm still middle class.
>>5681397 >a la Philosopher King Kill this meme. Just a king thank you
>However, the State's moral justification lies in its consideration of the Will of all its subjects I disagree. The will of the state must be its own. It must be the will of one man. The best of all men. Otherwise you'd simply have democracy. The point of a ruler is to protect the subjects from their own will.
>Without that aspecr, it wouldn't be just What is justice? To me justice is seeing everything within it's correct place. A criminal belongs in jail. That is justice. The husband belongs with the wife. That is justice. The farmer belongs in the field. That is justice. The king belongs at the helm of the state. That is justice. Today we have merchants at the helm of our state. That is not justice and we have suffered for it. Now the communists and anarchist want the working and underclass, respectively, to rule the state and bring the rest of us down with them. Everything in nature looks upwards. The lower classes must also look upward towards the king to find our purpose. THAT is OUR justification for existence. The state needs no justification.
>>5681283 Any good system created with good intentions not only can but is invariably corrupted by men and women who are thirsty for power and control, the State is controlled by men, the said men is elected by the people, who are easily manipulated into putting those that will do anything for this position.
Furthermore what if it's the will of the majority to do something inhuman, hasn't the majority been proved to be wrong again and again?
This system is a dream, would never work, people don't know what's good for them, the majority is thoroughly ignorant in important aspects such as scientific knowledge and completely incapable of taking good decisions.
>>5681486 That politics is bogus, 2000 years ago in rome corruption was rome's biggest problem, right now we face the exact same problem. What changed? Technology.
People have more space to be kind because they aren't struggling for survival every single minute, it's the only thing that changed, we're still the same barbaric people we were before. If technocracy had it's way, there would be no way that either religion or political waste would influence a state's decision on education, health, economics or the military. People who are ignorant about a subject should have no say on what should or shouldn't be done in that field because they simply don't know what they are talking about or what's good for them for that matter.
But then again, even that system would be corrupted with time, that's the human nature.
True democracy is nothing but the tyranny of a stupid majority.
The Sovereign power could be any number of things - a king, an assembly, a number of landed gentry, the wisest people of the day, or what have you. The physical nature of the Sovereign is immaterial.
Nor is this system a Democracy, as several people have been saying. It's a collection of individuals who consent to the Absolute Rule of the Sovereign. Nor is it again, like Democracy, conducive to the "Tyranny of the majority". The Sovereign is an expression of the Will of ALL its citizens, and is obligated to carry out the most ethical course of action with regards to that principle.
The other key aspect, which I stated earlier, is that if you don't like it, you have every right, upon maturing, to leave and never come back - to take your chances in the State of Nature. But you simply won't. You rely too heavily on the Security that the State affords you.
Man is brutish and barbaric without the absolute rule of an ethically superior Sovereign power, which carries out the Will of its citizens with jurisprudence.
>>5681682 This is off topic, but Science is too important to be left to scientists. We've seen what happens in the past when we allow them to run amok, without any ethical bounds.
Read this thread ( >>/sci/7838877 ) to see what I'm talking about - /sci/ couldn't reason themselves out of a cardboard box. Only a couple posts in that thread are remotely cogent.
>>5670717 >tfw classical liberal I'm a libertarian-leaning centrist, a dyke, and generally disaffected with everything politically these days. /lgbt/ people still supporting immigrants from Syria, what gives? Does being LGBT turn you into a self-defeating moralfag, is it your peer group, is it because you also have a tumblr? I seriously want to know. I understand liking many of Sanders's ideas, I get it...but how can any of you throw your arms open and be like "refugees welcome"?
Ethnic Nationalist. Pro regionalism, anti globalism. Generally pro-market, but could see myself supporting aspects of Italian corporatism/syndicalism, and maybe trade protection (especially for infant industries).
>>5685295 >Absolute theocracy of pious men, with God as our ruler. All those who have not made a compact with God are banished until they beg for His forgiveness and are baptised. >America was like this before an assembly of perverts and Jews overthrew the rightful king of the American commonwealth in 1776. King George was a heretic though.
Reactionary fags are ridiculous. KEKstianity is gay, and there's no rational reason to embrace the level of tradition, hierarchy and authority required for feudalism/monarchy/whateverthefuckkindoflarpingyouenjoy
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.