On June 18 2020 09:36 Loco wrote:
Just exactly what you said, that they are ancap. Whatever that implies. I'd like you to walk me through how they are organized as an ancap society. Do it as if I had never heard of ancap before. Like an "explain like I'm 5" thing. Obviously "there is private property and they do trade" isn't going to cut it, because you're describing nearly the whole world. What makes them ancap?
private property, free markets = capitalism
lack of state = anarchy
This town expelled the state (kind of) and has private property and free markets, so they are anarcho-capitalists... I don't know how to explain it in more simple terms.
What are their private properties? Or in other words, what is it that is privatized? And how are they enforcing it?
What do you mean by they have a free market? Are they not banning corporations from doing business in the town? What about their political organization? Is there not any form of political organizing in ancap? Not having a state doesn't implicate there is no government. You've said in the past that ancap is when people vote with their money, not at the ballot box. Is that what they do?
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Their properties are their houses, land, their stores, their cars, it rarely needs enforcing since its a small town, if somebody is like stealing cars the town will probably beat him up to near death of set him on fire alive or something of the sort. If its something more complex like a dispute over land I assume they would try to go to courts in the state or it would simply become a direct power struggle between families.
Corporations dont want to do business in little poor small towns in a cartel zone in the middle of nowhere, but if that were the case the resistance would depend on the circunstances like if its a clothing factory that employs them they would be happy with it, if it were a foreign mining corporation that is gong to hire foreigners and pollute their land they would oppose it.
what do you mean with political organizing?
They vote for gobernor and president and they are still provided utilities from the state, I know they have a public school but I don't know how its handled I assume its still state-run education as I said they are not truly autonomous, they kicked out the police and politicians
If what you are implying is that they don't consider themselves antcaps, are buying Bitcoin and carring yellow/black flags well obviously not lol, they are just poor people fed up with crime and corruption and took action, their situation isn't driven by ideologues unlike the EZLN.
Loco: My general approach in life is to listen to people with specific issues because I know my own subjective experiences involve built-in biases and extreme knowledge-gaps.
Baal: What we need in México is the corrupt government to get out of the way so that we can enjoy a free market and build our economy to climb out of poverty.
Loco: shut up you white-skin, what Mexico needs is socialism.
On June 19 2020 04:06 Baalim wrote:
Their properties are their houses, land, their stores, their cars, it rarely needs enforcing since its a small town, if somebody is like stealing cars the town will probably beat him up to near death of set him on fire alive or something of the sort. If its something more complex like a dispute over land I assume they would try to go to courts in the state or it would simply become a direct power struggle between families.
Corporations dont want to do business in little poor small towns in a cartel zone in the middle of nowhere, but if that were the case the resistance would depend on the circunstances like if its a clothing factory that employs them they would be happy with it, if it were a foreign mining corporation that is gong to hire foreigners and pollute their land they would oppose it.
what do you mean with political organizing?
They vote for gobernor and president and they are still provided utilities from the state, I know they have a public school but I don't know how its handled I assume its still state-run education as I said they are not truly autonomous, they kicked out the police and politicians
If what you are implying is that they don't consider themselves antcaps, are buying Bitcoin and carring yellow/black flags well obviously not lol, they are just poor people fed up with crime and corruption and took action, their situation isn't driven by ideologues unlike the EZLN.
I think they are autonomous. External powers don't seem to have involvement in their affairs currently. They are legally allowed to be autonomous under usos y costumbres, so that's very helpful. But being autonomous and being completely self-sufficient are two different things. They still do trade with the capital and of course they use currency. They are not communist but we can certainly agree that they are anarchist. So we can set that aside as an agreement and focus on what kind of anarchism they currently are most aligned with.
How is the existence of private property possible if there is no state or centralized governmental body to grant it such a status? If people are holding each other accountable, doesn't that mean that they have personal or communal property? Are you saying that everyone has a little piece of land with their name on it despite the lack of a centralized authority? Isn't the model of an-cap that competing companies hold the rights to all of the land and they are lending/renting it to people? Is that what is happening in Cheran?
Corporations don't want to do business there? Because of the cartels? What... I'm confused. Aren't the cartels reaching pretty much everywhere in Mexico? That doesn't seem to be stopping business involvement. What difference does it make whether the town is poor or small? If anything transnational corporations looking for the cheapest resources and labor that they can exploit would want to get involved there since they have all the bargaining power, no? Wasn't the main motivation for the uprising to counter the illegal logging that was happening there, and the main reason for the logging was so they could grow avocado trees there instead? And we know Mexico supplies nearly half of the international avocado market...
I mean, they have a political structure. They don't take part in state and federal elections, they don't allow ballot boxes, but they have an elected council which is done through neighborhood assemblies. This is a directly democratic process, very similar to what they were doing in Rojava and Bookchin's libertarian municipalism. In your view, direct democracy is compatible with anarcho-capitalism? I thought the whole point of anarcho-capitalism was to avoid "mob rule" which is a defining factor of democracy.
I know that they don't consider themselves an-caps. But an-caps surely don't consider them an-cap either, or else they'd talk about them, so I am trying to figure out why you think they are a good example of an-capism. They're banning transnational businesses, but this is a good example of a free market? Their local businesses seem to all run under a worker co-op model, and that is capitalistic?
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
On June 19 2020 04:18 Baalim wrote:
Loco: My general approach in life is to listen to people with specific issues because I know my own subjective experiences involve built-in biases and extreme knowledge-gaps.
Baal: What we need in México is the corrupt government to get out of the way so that we can enjoy a free market and build our economy to climb out of poverty.
Loco: shut up you white-skin, what Mexico needs is socialism.
I haven't said shut up. I'm asking clarifying questions. That's the opposite of shut up. None of those questions involved a prescription as to what Mexico needs either. Can you please answer them instead of engaging in mischaracterization?
It's also obviously arrogant to say that you speak for all Mexican people. As a factory owner you don't bear the brunt of the most exploitative elements of free market capitalism, so of course I am a lot more receptive to hearing the proposed solutions to the problems of those that are bearing them. They all seem to disagree with you about the solutions as far as I can tell.
Like I said in that quote, I am favorable to hearing people who suffer from issues that I do not suffer from. Incidentally, you seem to be the one who is not able to do this, even in Mexico; you don't seem to be willing to hear what these people have to say first, it seems like you already know what's happening and what needs to be done everywhere.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
On June 19 2020 05:04 Loco wrote:
How is the existence of private property possible if there is no state or centralized governmental body to grant it such a status? If people are holding each other accountable, doesn't that mean that they have personal or communal property? Are you saying that everyone has a little piece of land with their name on it despite the lack of a centralized authority? Isn't the model of an-cap that competing companies hold the rights to all of the land and they are lending/renting it to people? Is that what is happening in Cheran?
What? property isn't owned by the one who directly enforces it, if the cops punish car thiefs it doesnt mean they own cars lol, if the community decides to gather and lynch a thief it doesn't mean they own the car.
Not everyone owns a little bit of land, many don't, others own more land...
Companies owning all land? what in the fuck are you talking about? is this what they teach you in reddit or something? wtf.
Corporations don't want to do business there? Because of the cartels? What... I'm confused. Aren't the cartels reaching pretty much everywhere in Mexico? That doesn't seem to be stopping business involvement. What difference does it make whether the town is poor or small? If anything transnational corporations looking for the cheapest resources and labor that they can exploit would want to get involved there since they have all the bargaining power, no? Wasn't the main motivation for the uprising to counter the illegal logging that was happening there, and the main reason for the logging was so they could grow avocado trees there instead? And we know Mexico supplies nearly half of the international avocado market...
No, cartels are in very specific areas in México, usually when cartel presence starts to grow in an area businesses and people flee, cartels often ask for "protection" fees to business and kidnap business men, so cartel presence usually means the economical death of the area.
No businesses doesn't want to open in poor towns in the middle of nowhere, if you seek cheap land and labor is much better to start it in the outskirts of big cities, if they have resources there could be interest, however most towns arent sitting at the top of a silver mine lol.
The main motivator for the uprising was the cartel, and government corruption, the cartel did set up an illegal logging operation in the area, I've never heard about it being related to avocados, sounds unlikely Mexico can grow a shit ton of avocado we aren't Chile, its basically our national food along with corn and beans, in fact the big avocado farmers had a lot of problems because the cartels started to extort and kidnap them, so it sounds unlikely that you would get the cartel to clear trees so you can build the avocado farms they are extorting lol, also the cartels obv dont do farming.
I mean, they have a political structure. They don't take part in federal elections, but they have an elected council which is done through neighborhood assemblies. This is a directly democratic process, very similar to what they were doing in Rojava and libertarian municipalism. In your view, direct democracy is compatible with anarcho-capitalism? I thought the whole point of anarcho-capitalism was to avoid "mob rule" which is a defining factor of democracy.
I think they are allowed in federal elections and indeed they have their own council which is definitelly not aligned with an-cap however I've said before the reason I'm for anarchy is because I dont know an instance where a government have de-scaled without some kind of big war, so I don't neccesarely think its more functional than a small state like libertarianism, so anarchy sounds reasonable under the assumption that the state will always grow, but if that is not true, libertarianism sounds more effective to me
I know that they don't consider themselves an-caps. But an-caps surely don't consider them an-cap either, or else they'd talk about them, so I am trying to figure out why you think they are a good example of an-capism. They're banning transnational businesses, but this is a good example of a free market? Their local businesses seem to all run under a worker co-op model, and that is capitalistic?
Because as I said, they aren't an-caps ideologically, they arent progressive lefties either they would put a tire on your neck and lit you on fire if you pushed for gay marriage, they are simply an indigenous community fed up with crime and the way their society is structured is technically some form of libertarianism (now that you pointed out their assemblies).
I think a rift in how we see things is due to scale, you've talked about the atomization of the individual and I think you are mistaking into thinking that is what I want, and I don't think that is the result of capitalism and I think its mostly a problem of scale, (plz dont explain to me how capitalism atomizes ppl for the 100th time), I think a small community of libertarians or socialists will be closely knit, but in a huge metropolis is hard not to be atomized and fucked by the system whichever it is, these kind of huge societies are absolutely new to us as a species, it isnt hard to see why it has been challenging, we don't have the solidarity of ants.
On June 19 2020 05:33 Loco wrote:
It's also obviously arrogant to say that you speak for all Mexican people. As a factory owner you don't bear the brunt of the most exploitative elements of free market capitalism, so of course I am a lot more receptive to hearing the proposed solutions to the problems of those that are bearing them. They all seem to disagree with you about the solutions as far as I can tell.
Like I said in that quote, I am favorable to hearing people who suffer from issues that I do not suffer from. Incidentally, you seem to be the one who is not able to do this, even in Mexico; you don't seem to be willing to hear what these people have to say first, it seems like you already know what's happening and what needs to be done everywhere.
BULLSHIT, "I listen to the poor" pathetic virtue signaling, you fucking don't, you only do if they happen to say what you already believe, the millions of cubans who had to flee their country and denounce the horrors of the socialis regime you don't hear those do you? no you are a Castro apologist, you've probably never even talked with a Cuban refugee in your life, well I happen to talk with 2 of them this very sunday and they told me how taking a picture of the food lines is a crime punishable by years in prison btw.
Latinamerica has been destroyed by socialist dictators, countries like Argentina that were at a time the 5th richest country in the world now are shitholes because of peronismo, the entirety of the continent is scared shitless to become Venezuela and Chavez is the boogeyman used in every election, do you listen to that or do you think Venezuela is amazing and Chavez was great and he even has a fucking honest face.
What you are listening aren't the whispers of the sufferers, what you are listening are the echoes of your own dogma inside your head
I've never pretended that I listened and accepted what other told me as truth and the best way to improve society, most people are aboslute idiots and have no idea whats best for them... let alone society yet I believe they should have a right for self determination, but they don't have a right to impose anything on me as I have that same right.
On June 18 2020 14:30 Spitfiree wrote:
You keep throwing the term "logical fallacies" out there all the time and its easy to do for literally anything anyone says, but without backing it up it's nothing more than a waste of internet space.
Baal generally cherry picks in a lot of his responses e.g. on the fallacy topic where Loco apparently falls under the authority fallacy for believing doctors would generally have much more to say around.. the very work they are trained to do after 10 years of education and who-knows how many experience. In theory, it could fall under the appeal to authority fallacy, only if a doctor's opinion is not based on hard data, which is an "edge" case.....It's very hard for a doctor to say anything without providing hard data.
The field is corrupted by politics, they run a peer-review circle that destroys the scientific process proven by the "grievances studies" hoax these clowns published, there aren't seriouis scientists discussing scientific data, they are ideological academics with an agenda, even Drone acknowledges that the field has a political bias, this is blatantly obvious to anyone who isn't Loco.
We were talking about sociology as a whole, and I gave an example of racial socio-economic inequality studies, and you're now talking about the "grievances studies" hoax as representative and proof of the uselessness of sociology today, as if that debunks the example I gave. One small problem: All of the papers that were accepted for this hoax had to do with gender and sex in some feminist papers, with one exception being "fat studies" (whatever that is). So it has nothing to do with it. And speaking of fallacies, isn't this a perfect example of the fallacy of composition? That because you can find some sub-sub-fields within sociology that publish rubbish papers, that this discredits sociology as a whole?
If you have some science literacy you understand that this hoax doesn't prove anything. They didn't have a control group. They didn't try to publish other stuff in other journals in other fields. As such we have no idea that these standards are not more or less the same everywhere (due to power relations). We can certainly assume that they are more prevalent in gender studies for example, but assumptions are not what "serious scientists interested in serious data" base their knowledge on.
As a matter of fact, we simply don't have the data to make this claim you are making. The researchers know this. Isn't it also pushing an agenda to reduce sociology to this, and then to assume that this is the only field that is bad or "hijacked by politics" without data to support it? I can point to poor scholarship in a lot of fields. Evolutionary psychology and race and IQ studies for instance. Why would you make the assumption that other fields or sub-fields of sociology are not interested in pushing an agenda? We've even just established a couple days ago that one of the papers that you have continually defended and which was very influential to your worldview was poor scholarship which the authors had to publish a correction for.
I'll be the first to admit I have political and cognitive biases, I don't pretend to be completely neutral. I have no problem saying there is a lot of junk published in university journals. It's easy for me to do because I don't have a stake in this. The power relations that go on within universities don't affect me. I can do my own independent research and not risk being out of a job. You seem to have a tougher time doing that. You are highly selective in what you focus on and what you exclude from your radar, and your overarching point is basically that there is some pseudo cultural Marxism event going on in universities but you don't provide any real evidence for it.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Last edit: 19/06/2020 09:42
1
Stroggoz New Zealand. Jun 19 2020 10:04. Posts 5329
Universities have such a far right bias it's not even funny. You'll find environmental economists recommending we heat the world to 3.5degrees, psychologists teaching students how to use propaganda, public choice theory arguing everyone's a psychopath, and political scientists praising mass murderers like paul kagame!
And the sciences are essentially directed towards inventing technology for the military or corporations.
The problem isn't that the criticism of post modernism is not legitimate, a lot of it is. (Post modernism is terminally ill btw, its been on the decline since the 1990's). It's the massive focus on that while ignoring any of the above bias's i just mentioned.
One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings
0
hiems United States. Jun 19 2020 10:35. Posts 2979
Dunno, but considering Loco supports the riots, in which they burned the laundromat of one of my dad's childhood best friends, a man who is nearing 70 and has been in a wheelchair for most of his life as a result of polio, I think karma is on your side on this one.
I beat Loco!!! [img]https://i.imgur.com/wkwWj2d.png[/img]
On June 19 2020 07:39 Baalim wrote:
What? property isn't owned by the one who directly enforces it, if the cops punish car thiefs it doesnt mean they own cars lol, if the community decides to gather and lynch a thief it doesn't mean they own the car.
In both instances of private or personal property, the person using or owning the property can surely directly enforce it. If I say I need this personal space for X amount of time and someone decides to fuck with me, come in, and start destroying the place, I can kick them out, and the neighborhood assembly would side with me if it was to be brought up in front of them. Same with private property; you don't have to call the cops, but you have that as an added option, and if you use force against someone who goes inside your house without your permission, you will probably win in court.
I asked you here, in the case of Cheran, how is it that they can enforce private property without centralized force backing it? Who is it that issues the status of X land or property being private, versus public?
Not everyone owns a little bit of land, many don't, others own more land...
How does that work? Are the people without land ownership working for those that have land and renting land from them?
Companies owning all land? what in the fuck are you talking about? is this what they teach you in reddit or something? wtf.
Sorry, I meant companies owning the infrastructure of the economy and some of the land. The rest is private property owned by individual actors to do with as they please. That's what we should expect in an-cap, right?
Corporations don't want to do business there? Because of the cartels? What... I'm confused. Aren't the cartels reaching pretty much everywhere in Mexico? That doesn't seem to be stopping business involvement. What difference does it make whether the town is poor or small? If anything transnational corporations looking for the cheapest resources and labor that they can exploit would want to get involved there since they have all the bargaining power, no? Wasn't the main motivation for the uprising to counter the illegal logging that was happening there, and the main reason for the logging was so they could grow avocado trees there instead? And we know Mexico supplies nearly half of the international avocado market...
No, cartels are in very specific areas in México, usually when cartel presence starts to grow in an area businesses and people flee, cartels often ask for "protection" fees to business and kidnap business men, so cartel presence usually means the economical death of the area.
According to this article, "Mexican organized crime has turned to extorting whoever does well in a given sector or taking over businesses directly – be that logging, mining, agriculture, public transport, or even mom and pop tortilla shops." So it doesn't seem that easy to flee from them since they'll just find you again if you are successful. It doesn't make much sense to me that there would be economic death of an area when poor people generally don't have the ability to flee and they are so invested in their current place, and when the cartels benefit from extortion, it's better to do more threatening of farmers than active destruction. The fact that they make a ton of money from non-drug avenues every year also indicates that they must be successful at maintaining presence in a lot of places?
No businesses doesn't want to open in poor towns in the middle of nowhere, if you seek cheap land and labor is much better to start it in the outskirts of big cities, if they have resources there could be interest, however most towns arent sitting at the top of a silver mine lol.
I don't think it's about "opening businesses". If you take Nestlé for instance, they can go everywhere and prey on poor indigenous communities for their bottled water product. We're talking about access to resources.
The main motivator for the uprising was the cartel, and government corruption, the cartel did set up an illegal logging operation in the area, I've never heard about it being related to avocados, sounds unlikely Mexico can grow a shit ton of avocado we aren't Chile, its basically our national food along with corn and beans, in fact the big avocado farmers had a lot of problems because the cartels started to extort and kidnap them, so it sounds unlikely that you would get the cartel to clear trees so you can build the avocado farms they are extorting lol, also the cartels obv dont do farming.
At around 15:00 in this video one of the guys patrolling says the cartel wanted to start growing avocados there, as you'd expect, since Michoacan is one of the absolute best places in the world for this crop.
You can't honestly be saying that the cartel and the corruption is disconnected from global free market capitalist forces?
I mean, they have a political structure. They don't take part in federal elections, but they have an elected council which is done through neighborhood assemblies. This is a directly democratic process, very similar to what they were doing in Rojava and libertarian municipalism. In your view, direct democracy is compatible with anarcho-capitalism? I thought the whole point of anarcho-capitalism was to avoid "mob rule" which is a defining factor of democracy.
I think they are allowed in federal elections and indeed they have their own council which is definitelly not aligned with an-cap however I've said before the reason I'm for anarchy is because I dont know an instance where a government have de-scaled without some kind of big war, so I don't neccesarely think its more functional than a small state like libertarianism, so anarchy sounds reasonable under the assumption that the state will always grow, but if that is not true, libertarianism sounds more effective to me
"'We can’t put a project like this at risk in order to participate” in the federal election, Chávez said. “If we let in an election like this, with polling stations and all that accompanies that, the parties are going to want to get back in here.”
Political parties have occasionally attempted to campaign in the town, only to be escorted out by the local ronda – the citizen-run security force formed after the uprising.
Nope, looks like they don't allow it. Several sources confirm it. (Also looks like they very much like Zapata, which doesn't support your assertion that they are very different ideologically from ELZN.)
I don't really understand your second point, but you seem to be conceding that this is a libertarian socialist experiment, not a capitalist one?
Because as I said, they aren't an-caps ideologically, they arent progressive lefties either they would put a tire on your neck and lit you on fire if you pushed for gay marriage, they are simply an indigenous community fed up with crime and the way their society is structured is technically some form of libertarianism (now that you pointed out their assemblies).
Yeah I'm aware that they have their own beliefs like distrust of modern medicine and such but they have improved on this already and as such I'd consider them more progressive than conservative. I highly doubt they are into public lynching of homosexuals, do you have any source on this?
I think a rift in how we see things is due to scale, you've talked about the atomization of the individual and I think you are mistaking into thinking that is what I want, and I don't think that is the result of capitalism and I think its mostly a problem of scale, (plz dont explain to me how capitalism atomizes ppl for the 100th time), I think a small community of libertarians or socialists will be closely knit, but in a huge metropolis is hard not to be atomized and fucked by the system whichever it is, these kind of huge societies are absolutely new to us as a species, it isnt hard to see why it has been challenging, we don't have the solidarity of ants.
I don't think that's what anyone wants unless they are clinically anti-social. But it's an inevitable effect of economic liberalisation.
Scale complicates things but the issue is not scale itself, its diversity and competition and hierarchy. If you have plenty of resources and cultural homogeneity it doesn't matter if your group is 100 or 1,000,000, it will have less conflict than a room with 10 random modern americans in it who are used to living in a competitive environment based on artificial scarcity and the creation of new wants and needs.
I don't think huge societies are new. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of people living under a horizontal structure isn't new. It was pretty much the norm for the longest time, and we have examples that show that it is still possible today given the right circumstances.
You can look at any social species and they are all functionally the same: they can all be hijacked or mislead by external factors. If you remove an animal from the environment it is accustomed to thrive in, you're bound to get into trouble most of the time, because the new environment will most likely be hard to adapt to. You can hijack the instincts of an ant or a bee by giving them certain drugs or forcing them into conflicts in a controlled environment. The systems we have created over time to advantage certain groups over others--systems which we accord meaning and importance to and continually reinforce-- just so happen to be that controlled environment.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
BULLSHIT, "I listen to the poor" pathetic virtue signaling, you fucking don't, you only do if they happen to say what you already believe, the millions of cubans who had to flee their country and denounce the horrors of the socialis regime you don't hear those do you? no you are a Castro apologist, you've probably never even talked with a Cuban refugee in your life, well I happen to talk with 2 of them this very sunday and they told me how taking a picture of the food lines is a crime punishable by years in prison btw.
That's obviously false. The last time you accused me of this I posted this article which you obviously didn't read, so I'll quote a part from it:
"The Cuban anarchists, as interested people can confirm, joined the popular struggle against the dictator Fulgencio Batista and, his ouster in 1959 aroused in them the same positive expectations about the future of the island as in the rest of society. As Fernández relates, the anarchist publications of the day, Solidaridad Gastronomica and El Libertario, expressed a favorable and hopeful attitude regarding the new government, while not trusting it unthinkingly. [2] But, in late 1959, any criticism of the government, no matter its source, began to be labeled “counterrevolutionary” in the new language of power. At the same time, the Castro clique began inviting representatives from all the revolutionary tendencies of the world to the island in order to convince them of the regime’s goodness.
Among those invited was the German anarchist Augustin Souchy, who visited Havana in the summer of 1960 to learn about the experiments with land reform. His inquiry resulted in a lengthy article, printed in an official publication, reporting on what he had seen during his visit. Souchy also wrote a pamphlet entitled Testimonies on the Cuban Revolution [3], which was published without going through official censorship, and had a tone different from what the regime had hoped for. In this pamphlet Souchy warned of the authoritarian turn the new administration was taking. Soon after he left Cuba, the entire print run of the pamphlet was seized and destroyed by the government, following a recommendation by the Cuban Communist Party (PCC)."
You think I'm an apologist for this shit? Lmao. I wish you had a Marxist or tankie friend so you'd realize just how out of touch your accusations have been. You'd know what supporting Cuba really means. If you just did a simple google reddit search for what anarchists think of Cuba you'd quickly realize that you have a false idea of what we believe and support, and we are very very far from being unsympathetic to the people who are suffering there, and many anarchists have been to Cuba or lived there. It's one thing to think Cuban anti-imperialism was good and another entirely to think Marxist-Leninist concentration of power is a good thing.
Latinamerica has been destroyed by socialist dictators, countries like Argentina that were at a time the 5th richest country in the world now are shitholes because of peronismo, the entirety of the continent is scared shitless to become Venezuela and Chavez is the boogeyman used in every election, do you listen to that or do you think Venezuela is amazing and Chavez was great and he even has a fucking honest face.
There's really not much to say to this kind of either/or thinking. There has been a dialectical tension between capitalist forces and socialist forces (and opportunists on both sides) for centuries, it isn't as simple as saying one side are the good guys and the other are the bad guys. I've said enough about what I supported and what I didn't about Chavez. I also said that I became aware of more issues concerning his administration as I kept learning.
Either way, you are distracting from the main point which was that I said to prioritize listening to the people. When we were talking about Venezuela, you were posting sensationalistic clips and always uniquely from the point of view of the Western narrative. You had anecdotes while I posted actual polls that reflect the reality over there and actual footage from Venezuela including interviews with average citizens several times. I showed that, even though most people didn't like Maduro, they still preferred him over the US puppet Guaido, which you favored. Your first fucking post on the topic was to post a fucking map of which countries supported him in order to support the coup, it wasn't to listen to the people. I was consistent with my principles and you were consistent with your desire to see more economic liberalism everywhere regardless of how people feel about it.
I've never pretended that I listened and accepted what other told me as truth and the best way to improve society, most people are aboslute idiots and have no idea whats best for them... let alone society yet I believe they should have a right for self determination, but they don't have a right to impose anything on me as I have that same right.
I don't assume that what people tell me is the truth just because I support the struggles of minorities and the poor. I just don't assume that I am in a position to solve problems that I don't have in an environment that I don't live in. You make that assumption when you claim a free market capitalist system is the best and people are just too dumb or too authoritarian if they oppose it.
There is no self-determination when you're forced to work a job you hate for most of your awake time and you have no political voice whatsoever because whoever you vote for isn't going to change things. This is true whether you live in either a so-called socialist kleptocracy or a so-called free market capitalist hellhole.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
On June 18 2020 14:30 Spitfiree wrote:
You keep throwing the term "logical fallacies" out there all the time and its easy to do for literally anything anyone says, but without backing it up it's nothing more than a waste of internet space.
Baal generally cherry picks in a lot of his responses e.g. on the fallacy topic where Loco apparently falls under the authority fallacy for believing doctors would generally have much more to say around.. the very work they are trained to do after 10 years of education and who-knows how many experience. In theory, it could fall under the appeal to authority fallacy, only if a doctor's opinion is not based on hard data, which is an "edge" case.....It's very hard for a doctor to say anything without providing hard data.
The field is corrupted by politics, they run a peer-review circle that destroys the scientific process proven by the "grievances studies" hoax these clowns published, there aren't seriouis scientists discussing scientific data, they are ideological academics with an agenda, even Drone acknowledges that the field has a political bias, this is blatantly obvious to anyone who isn't Loco.
I agree, we just have different ways of solving that issue, you'd go towards the free-market argument, while I'd oppose it by saying that it will eventually end up causing monopolies or even worse - oligopolies, which will basically change one hierarchical structure with another, causing people to rely on it and ending up with the exact same problem.
0
hiems United States. Jun 19 2020 21:40. Posts 2979
Loco do u have siblings? If so are they similar to you? lol
I beat Loco!!! [img]https://i.imgur.com/wkwWj2d.png[/img]
I hope he does, maybe there's a few more of them that undermine all your world views in which your only coping mechanism is lame ad hominem.
Loco is really hard to follow mainly because of the wall of text but also because his arguments are structured in a complex way where you'd have to spend a few dozen hours to read on different movements, thinking models, ideologies and etc. just to get the foundations of his ideas (he obviously spent a lot of time and effort into that, and I doubt anyone of us is anywhere near that level). If I were him I'd feel like I'm teaching an elementary school class at this point.
0
hiems United States. Jun 20 2020 00:48. Posts 2979
On June 19 2020 22:49 Spitfiree wrote:
I hope he does, maybe there's a few more of them that undermine all your world views in which your only coping mechanism is lame ad hominem.
Loco is really hard to follow mainly because of the wall of text but also because his arguments are structured in a complex way where you'd have to spend a few dozen hours to read on different movements, thinking models, ideologies and etc. just to get the foundations of his ideas (he obviously spent a lot of time and effort into that, and I doubt anyone of us is anywhere near that level). If I were him I'd feel like I'm teaching an elementary school class at this point.
Oh damn.
I beat Loco!!! [img]https://i.imgur.com/wkwWj2d.png[/img]
Contact Users: 568 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 14:55
