Gee, I was right. Browsing with JS not enabled, in Opera 12, was a much smoother and much more enjoyable experience.
Are we talking about something other than the active threadlist thing? Because if not you literally might be browsing with a toaster.
I'm talking about this page.
It can be anything your heart desires, but it's probably sfur.
Literally a toaster. Consider spending more than $50 on your next computer.
that new 64$ Pentium is suppose to be a great for the price, better than i3s
It's not a toaster, dude.
AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 965 Processor, 3400 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
And 8 GB memory.
Why do you hate freedom?
Not exactly, no. In a perfect society where there is no corruption, I believe that National Socialism would be best. But that would never happen, so I settle for Libertarian Socialism. I like freedom, but there is such a thing as too much or too little. The people must have a say in things, but too much is just as bad as too little.
flash is satan
thank you adobe
common economic protocol and microclaves
I've seen okay uses of JS before, it's just more rare to find than uses of JS that visibly slow down the tab or browser for me.
I only know HTML, no CSS or JS.
It's also closed-source, so I can almost never use it anyway.
I see. Why do you think freedom is not an inherently good thing: that there is a thing as too much freedom?
Then why should they be alive rather then dead?
Again, sounds like a you problem. Because at least 90% of the web today uses JS.
>I only know HTML, no CSS or JS.
"I know a markup language, that's like programming". Classic. Now I think you're just messing with me.
That's an entirely different argument. Some people are born to lead, and others are born to follow. That's just how it is. If we're talking about their value and contribution to society, those who refuse to work for their community in one way or another inherently have less value than those who do. But again, that's something else entirely.
myself, i just get out of the way
He's not messing with you. This guy has said multiple times that he wants to die, but doesn't want to kill himself. He literally tried to tell me to kill myself instead of taking meds. He has some problems.
>Again, sounds like a you problem. Because at least 90% of the web today uses JS.
And 90% of web pages have severe problems.
>"I know a markup language, that's like programming". Classic. Now I think you're just messing with me.
Woah dude, I don't even know HTML that well, and I know it's not programming.
I program in C. Used to program in Java. Also know some shell scripting and awk.
It's not an entirely different argument. When, in a married couple, one is in a coma and doesn't know what's best, the other member of the marriage can pull the plug.
Why shouldn't euthanasia be applied to people who "don't always know what's best"?
>doesn't want to kill himself
That's a lie. It's rude to lie to people.
True. There are those who fall outside of that. However, a true "lone wolf" is few and far between because it's an inherent trait to work with others. The need to be a part of society is innate within the human psyche, and very, very few people can truly live without some kind of aid. Take currency for example. We need currency to survive in this society. That doesn't mean that we can't literally live without it, but living off the grid as it were, is technically illegal as far as I know, and the vast majority of people need income. Those who can live without some sort of aid are very rare. To sum it up, my point is that most people need to be either a leader or a follower. They can be a "lone wolf", but very few are true to that in this day and age.
As soon as I have a foolproof, 100% guaranteed way, I will. I want to die, I just don't want to fail when I try, so I succeed on the first time.
individual freedom is necessarily tempered by communal strictures
Life is a series of compromises between the individual ego and a given societies' demands of it's citizens
you never know if you don't try
True. But I'll try with something as close as possible to certainty.
National Socialism, not Nazism. National Socialism, at its core, means to support the people by means of leaders giving to the followers, and in turn the followers work for the leaders.
Of course, this is assuming that the leaders are 100% correct in their leadership, and lead without corruption. And that would never happen because power itself corrupts people. That's why I'm not a true National Socialist, but a Libertarian Socialist.
How do you have libertarian socialism without people in power?
people lead themselves every day
every small/rural/backwoods community effectively practices self-governance
The powers of an overarching "federal" governments largely deal with killing people in elaborately contrived ways or trading money/goods over long distances
This has been the traditional draw of the United Sates, and why there have been so many utopian/alternative governmental experiments. cults, religious governance groups (mormons, etc.)
No one really gives a shit how you live your day to day life as long as you cough up to the tax man now and then - really this is mostly for city folk, as they're the most likely to be shot/bombed
The people decide what's best for each other. The community comes together, forms ideas, and works towards those ideas coming to fruition. The popular vote decides what stays and what goes rather than an individual. Yet that by itself can also lead to incorrect leadership. That's where the chosen individuals come into play. Both National Socialism and Libertarian Socialism have their pros and cons as with any form of society. That's why I generally stay neutral in politics.
The majority often makes terrible decisions. And what exactly do you think the pros are for National Socialism, a system of government that completely relies on terror and complete obedience.
Since it supports a state, how is is libertarian, then?
All my images are too big to post under this 2 MB limit. I have almost nothing anymore.
it's that time
that time when I get to get high
Yep. Sadly, the federal government has enough power to control what even small societies do. And the rich capitalists control the federal government. I do wonder how society would be without currency. The cities I mean. I feel that they would all collapse, and only the small societies would remain as they had little to do with the cities.
Precisely. But the pros are that the leaders lead, and the followers follow. And National Socialism isn't about "terror and complete obedience". Again, it's about working back and forth between the leaders and the followers, the former being elected by the latter by means of a popular vote. It's really a republic system of government. At least that's what I wish for. But anyway, what you're thinking of is Authoritarianism, not NatSoc.
I envy the chick in that pic.
Looks like way more fun than the work I'm doing right now.
>I do wonder how society would be without currency. The cities I mean.
They'd continue manufacturing and designing products, but things would be designed to last. There would be no planned obsolescence, and products would be designed to be more easily repaired by the users, so that users don't have to throw away their products and (((upgrade)))
Don't people supposedly decide things today?
National Socialists only follow the legal process as far as it suits them. Once they have enough power they dismantle the system and replace it with one that allows no dissent towards the leader. There's no back and forth involved, look up how people like Hitler and Saddam Hussein kept their own governments in check by playing different factions out against each other, meaning the ultimate decision and power always remained at the top. It's always a government of a small inner circle making most decisions and locking out any opposition opinions.
But where would they get the materials without currency?
Supposedly, yes. But that obviously isn't true since we have a President. Our form of government (that being the U.S.) is a Democratic Republic.
What's the difference between what we have today and what you want?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. National Socialism no longer is about the people at that point, but those in power; it evolves into Fascism. But again, I'm talking about a perfect society, and not reality. In reality, I would always chose the Libertarian side of things.
But how would our sources for such materials think? Surely they wouldn't be all for it. We trade products for money. Without money, how would we get the products? We'd have to it all ourselves, yet that would be infeasible. We simply cannot attain all materials here in the U.S.. That's why we trade with other countries.
I want the people to lead and decide. Not the people who pay off the government that supposedly leads the people. That's why I hate Capitalism.
I don't go to websites with ads. On the very few occasions I have to, disabling JS disables modern ads that are anything more than plain images.
Well there is no perfect society. Just like communism, national socialism has always ended up as with authoritarian dictatorships, and quite purposefully so. I'm sorry if im pushing this too much, i just got an apologistic vibe for national socialism from your post and i apologize if that's not your intention.
Why wouldn't they be all for it? They get finished products for free whether or not it's made from their sources or other sources.
I see, you're thinking of a situation where money doesn't exist, but statism still exists. Sorry. I don't know how that would work, either.
Isn't libertarianism capitalist? How can you like both libertarianism and dislike capitalism?
How do you feel about tyrannies of the majority?
I understand. I'm aware my beliefs are unconventional. I just try to differentiate between Nazi Fascism and National Socialism. True National Socialism is entirely different than Nazism.
Libertarianism and capitalism aren't even close to the same thing. I don't know where you're making the connection here. Capitalism is about creating products for needs that don't exist, and capitalizing on things that are needed so they can be sold to the people.
Because we are where we due to people thinking outside of the box, and considering new possibilities. Even if it would never happen, it's still worth thinking about and considering. One must consider all possibilities rather than one.
My mistake. And no, it isn't a prerequisite. I still don't know why you would think that. We're talking about the people leading themselves. Socialism makes more sense than Libertarianism in this case.
I'd like to know why you think Nazis and National Socialism are different. Nazi is literally an abbreviation for "Nationalsozialisten" i.e. National Socialists and it was developed by the Nazis in the 1920s and 30s, and stuff like Social Darwinism and racism are integral parts of it.
So you're a socialist. While I dislike socialism, you shouldn't be ashamed of calling yourself what you really are.
Because they masqueraded their Fascism as National Socialism. I'm talking about the literal meaning of Nationalism and Socialism combined as one. Not Nazism.
"Others, notably libertarian socialists, seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production in favor of their common or cooperative ownership and management."
I don't see what the problem is here.
No, I'm not.
"Libertarian socialism (sometimes dubbed socialist libertarianism, or left-libertarianism) is a group of anti-authoritarian political philosophies inside the socialist movement that rejects socialism as centralized state ownership and control of the economy, as well as the state itself."
>"Libertarian socialism (sometimes dubbed socialist libertarianism, or left-libertarianism) is a group of anti-authoritarian political philosophies inside the socialist movement that rejects socialism as centralized state ownership and control of the economy, as well as the state itself."
But you've already said you support authoritarianism: you support voting.
Facism and National Socialism are not mutually exclusive. Nazism is a form of facism and Nazism is National Socialism.
If you want to talk about some other hypothetical state that is both nationalist and has socalist elements, but is not a facist state you should use a different term to avoid confusion.
I don't support authoritarianism. I would only support it if there was no possibility of corruption, but that's impossible. I support voting, yes, but I don't see how that's considered authoritarianism. I mean, I kinda get where you're coming from, but not really.
Probably. I'll admit, I don't know enough about politics or systems of government to really differentiate them exactly. Anyway, my point is that I think there should be leaders and followers, and they should work together.
Watching Gaki No Tsukai right now.
I've been having a rough time with school, just about finished with this grinder of a week. Did a ton of homework today and I got scheduled last minute for work yesterday so things have been busy.
I also got sunburnt today.
>Probably. I'll admit, I don't know enough about politics or systems of government to really differentiate them exactly. Anyway, my point is that I think there should be leaders and followers, and they should work together.
So kind of like in a representative liberal democracy where people vote for people to be their leaders and through their vote exert some amount of influence on the state. The only form of state i know of where there are no leaders is the pure form of communism or anarchism, but neither has ever been achieved or even attempted on a significant scale.
oops, wrong thread, i apologize.
What? Can't a guy make a mistake?
Okay then. What are you gonna do about it?
I'm sorry, dude. Sounds like it's been rough indeed.
Kinda, yeah. I should probably read more about such things. I don't like studying politics because I've been taught to hate them and their negative connotations by my crazy mother who tried to brainwash me into being a "Democrat", and only that, and hate "Republicans". I basically just read up on Nazism and National Socialism out of my own anarchistic attitude towards her trying to brainwash me, so I know a little bit about them.
Yeah, it's just a grinder. After tomorrow I can be free for a half a day
Yeah you should definitely educate yourself more, we're living at the end of an era of stability, things are gonna get worse before they get better.
So it's good to know where you want to stand politically and ethically. I'd recommend you pay special attention to the relation of global capitalism to different forms of state, things like terrorism and the recent re-emergance of nationalism and isolationism are direct reactions to the percieved or real forces of globalism.
She really is. How's it hanging?
You should all read some Plato. Philosophy is the foundation of politics. Platonic philosophy is first-order, every idea that is relevant today can be understood as a logical consequence of Platonics, or of its inversion...
I'm confused. You had to get an ultrasound on your testes because...?
When you go to add a new commission to your in-progress list and see ones you forgot you even paid for.
Yeah, I will. I was also taught to hate reading by the shitty school systems. I'm pretty much an anarchist at heart, but hate the negative connotations of it as well, and mix in other things, so I have my own unique ideology due to never standing exactly by one belief. But yeah, I'll definitely read more about politics and government.
That's a good idea. Thank you for the suggestion, anon. I do quite like philosophy, but I'm not really educated in it. I'll read more about Plato as well.
I had testicular pain. Turns out it's just a bacterial infection in one testis. My self diagnosis based of google searches was 100% correct.
They wanted to ultrasound just to be sure though, which is nice that they're thorough I guess. Still embarrassing as fuck
Just be sure to force yourself to also read things you don't agree with. Don't get caught in a filter bubble.
I don't know much about anarchist philosophy, but it's strange that you say you're an anarchist and also state you think there should be leaders, which is pretty much the opposite of most forms of anarchism.
Christ dude. So what's the deal then, some anitbiotics and taking it easy at the gym?
its nice to be home alone tonight.
could say more, but eh.
Haha no I understand. Dude, that ultrasound gel is very warm, and the second it hit me, oh fuck! I got a little hard, but luckily they have me a towel to hold/cover my fuck with, so it wasn't too bad.
Pretty easy to treat, just antibiotics for a week and half. Yep, shit sucks.
Dude, that's my fucking life though. I really hope it's not riding related. I don't know what I'd do.
Well, I'm not truly an anarchist. I used to be, but at the same time I knew it could never work. I have this thing going on in my head where I have the need to "fight the system", yet simultaneously want to read all about it and make my own decisions. That's how I came to the conclusions that I did. Like I said, I like to mix in other things and form my own opinions based on all the things I've gathered as well as my own innate anarchism.
Sounds nice indeed. I hope you can relax and have a nice night.