Anti-Neocons

The value of an individual, while not only is it a subjective definition, is near impossible to track even if you get an aggreed-upon standard for measuring someone's value. Seriously, if you consider it a value or a virtue to be good at doing back flips then a lot of us are highly invaluable beings. But even regardless of what the agreed-upon standard is that determines someone's value, the value is at least going to be measured in the realm of how we can augment our environment to achieve a desired outcome. Think about how many BILLIONS of possibilities are involved in that measurement. Augmenting your environment can be as easy as sneezing or as hard as lifting a car over your head. Value (and for that matter equality of individuals measured by that value) is so subjective and impossible to measure that it's best to just find a way in which everyone can at least survive.

Trying to equal people out's ridiculous. If you've got a government, it's crucial that you take away systems that specifically devalue certain demographics, but you can't build up a huge government in effort to equal people out. It's like building a mansion for some ants even though they'd be more content in the pile of dirt you paved over to make the mansion.

_________________
Render unto Cesar that which he has rendered unto you - hardship, imprisonment, torture, and eventual death. Fuck Cesar. Let him be hanged.

ok, your sayin it can't happen right? ever been to canada? they arent the exact aspect i would go from but they are a majority of it. they dont have many people starving and they dont start shit with other countried.. honestly, are you happy with what we live in now? a democratic republic where a bunch of old guuys make our decisions for us? if not, why not try a new system that is already being proven at this very moment to try out?

_________________
Silence, something about silence makes me sick, cause silence can be violent sorta like a slit wrist.-ZDLR (RATM)

stop your silly political bickering people, this topic is for introductions.

i am a libertarian with a tendency towards anarcho-capitalism, but as i maintain my realism, an extreme minarchist. i believe in a huge reduction of government and law, the abolition of the federal income tax and the IRS, an end to social welfare as well as corporate welfare (strongly emphasized), an end to virtually all bureaucracy, all public education, all regulation on the market. i strongly believe in private property rights, freedom of speech, freedom to voluntarily commune coupled with the right to voluntarily trade according to subjective values (real "profit" in capitalist theory), freedom to do pretty much anything as long as you dont kill or hurt anyone unjustly. i strongly believe in the abolition of central banking and the federal reserve, an end to inflation. i strongly believe in putting an end to all forms of force, threat and tyranny and i strongly believe in the right to self-ownership and self-government. i strongly believe in an end to ALL war and militaryism. an end to ALL corporatism. i strongly believe in the right to bear arms.. i am strongly against the prison system and the death penalty.



thank you and goodnight.

I was wondering, how can you be for anarcho capitalism and against corporations and free enterpirse? If there was no government there would be no way to see if someone killed justly or not because everyone has a different perspective on it. but hey, welcome to the board enjoy your stay.

_________________
Silence, something about silence makes me sick, cause silence can be violent sorta like a slit wrist.-ZDLR (RATM)

i haven't come accross a political definition i like yet.

all in all i'd like a true democracy, where people represent themselves by suggesting, debating, refining, voting on and then following and enforcing policy by themselves. that's almost anarchy i think. i'm a communist in that "to each according to his needs", but a capitalist in that beyond those needs people should be able to get/do what they please as long as it harms no one else. i'd be a primitivist if i thought it would stay that way forever without relapsing into technology, but i don't and so i'm not. i think children have a right to decide who and what they are without any outside influences from their parents or social environment. this is on issues like spirituality, "sexuality" (i don't believe in sexuality), "gender identity" (i don't believe in gender identity, each persons behaviour should be a product of their own mind, not indoctrination), and general belief structure.

i think working towards a point where we recycle everything we use, and thereby leaving the environment alone is of the utmost importance (i.e no more destroying it, or trying to "manage" it. as manage means exploit in a minimally destructive way).

i think everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and so should be given equal opportunities to find out what makes them happy from the day they're born.

i think currency should be eliminated as it encourages apathy. for example, would you rather be treated by a doctor who's childhood dream it was to help people, or a doctor who's parents dream was for them to earn a doctor's salary?

this is why pure communism will work, as with no currency, people wouldn't be swayed by income potential but by their dreams and values.

and as said before, we're not born equal. those unable to achieve their dreams should be encouraged to find others, and given every opportunity to do so.

it's not human nature to be greedy, it's animal nature. having said that as humans are biologically animals we have innate greed, but we can choose to override it.

vegetarianism is one of my preferred ideals but as i'm not a fascist i don't impose that on others. however, and the same goes for animal testing, if you want to eat meat, or you're really concerned about researching cures for diseases, you should kill/test on the animals yourself. this eliminates distancing, which is the unfortunate effect agrarian society has had on people in so many areas. this leads to desensitization and again, apathy. for example, using electricity to power cars without using renewable resources would just distance the public from the emmissions problem.

i don't think any of this would work out well if it was instituted now, as the people have been educated in reverse by our politicians to be morons incapable of looking after ourselves, in the hopes that we'll always need them and won't fire them. we're too immature at the moment.

i think it's impossible to know everything, but i think we can get a very good idea on most things through investigation (like science) and a decent idea on metaphysical things through an averaging system, where everyones individual metaphysical ideals are compared and averaged to produce a "code of conduct" type thing. some things like God and spirituality are purely individual though. which is where religion (except maybe the unitarians) is a bad idea.

anyhoo.

_________________
peace, love and anarchy.

I'm not promoting the idea of a democratic republic. I was DEmoting the idea of Socialism, that's all. And Canada is not perfect. At all. I don't know why you wouldn't go for an example like the Netherlands. It seems like they've got the Socialism thing down better than Canada.

I only dabble in Anarcho-Capitalism too (or minarchy like VladimirLollard said). It's not like I hate Socialism or something. I just see a lot wrong with it and it most times doesn't make sense to me. And anyone trying to make everyone "equal" is going to be horribly, horribly disappointed. We just aren't. Who even cares if we're equitable? Let's just make it so there's no systems that discriminate (like slavery, not allowing women to vote, segregation and many forms of affirmative action) and make sure everyone can at least survive comfortably. It certainly doesn't require a huge government.

No matter what, I go for the practical. Socialism just doesn't seem practical.

As for corporate power, I'd say most Libertarians or Anarcho-Capitalists are against it. People see Neoliberalism and Corporate power and they see Libertarians promoting a "free market" and they think they can equate the two when they're so far from each other it's not even funny. Neoliberals put into place trade polcies which have no mechanism to level the playing field or protect the environment.

In an Anarcho-Capitalist world, since all the countries involved in a trade policy would be governed by nothing but workers who are free to move anywhere they like, no matter what the working conditions would be sound. Unlike a Neoliberal world where everyone has to stay within their borders with their oppressive government, like it or not.

Trade policy could solve this by saying "well hey, if you wanna participate in this agreement, you better protect your workers" but that's almost the wrong way to go about it since you're just creating another bureaucratic aspect to your government that can be corrupted. So I think we could probably do best to weaken a central power and just make it so the workers can decide their wage by basically being able to travel into whatever border they want in order to find a good job. Once the oppressed nations are having trouble finding people to work because they want nothing to do with 14-hour work days with no overtime pay, no benefits, and no water breaks, they'll make their worker standards decent so people will return.

All in all, quite different from a Neoliberal approach to power and the market where the government stays strong and nothing is done about a member nations' worker's rights standards. While Neoliberals will make small gestures towards concern for workers rights (to win elections), Anarcho-Capitalists want to set up a border and trade situation in which either factories keep their standards high or they'll have no workers to oppress because people can simply leave.

A couple of things make the idea incomplete like what will happen to the environment and how people will remain peaceful with no strong authority. In terms of the environment we need to act NOW if we're to survive the next couple of centuries and the Libertarian approach has been decidedly weak. No matter how much you'd be limiting pollution by reducing the size of the Federal Government, there still needs to be something with authority that cleans up what we have already done or else forget it, we'll drown. The environment is the LAST thing we need deregulation in. And we need to get rid of many, many, many large weapons so no one group of people attains a strong control over anyone else. And we need to allow small-arms to be readily available and the 2nd Ammendment to stay strongly entact so people CAN defend themselves when necessary (because you're just not going to solve all violence) and not have to rely on a corrupt police force. If it weren't for the environmental and Nuclear weapons aspects figured in I'd be sold on Anarcho-Capitalism and Libertarianism being a precursor to it. But as for free enterprise and workers rights, that will all be solved through nothing but human nature.

Yeah, this is just the introductions thread. But I guess the above introduces me and how I think, so...

_________________
Render unto Cesar that which he has rendered unto you - hardship, imprisonment, torture, and eventual death. Fuck Cesar. Let him be hanged.

In theory, that would work. in reality it cant. the netherlands have socialism down good, but they still have beef with othe countryies. what your suggesting is that we can live in an anarchist environment without violence or greed or prejudice or set wages for work. none of that can happen because there is too much greed here. yes, it woiuld be ahrd at first but overall, i think that socialism in the long run is the best cncept to go for looking at a point of view that is somehow actually possible.

_________________
Silence, something about silence makes me sick, cause silence can be violent sorta like a slit wrist.-ZDLR (RATM)

i am highly against CORPORATISM, not necessarily free corporations to compete in a free market. CORPORATISM is a merging of state and corporations through corporate welfare paid for by our taxes. it is THIS that is the main cause of our bloated polluting corporations. they are OWNED by the government (bet you didnt know that!)... i want the corporations to be owned by free people. competition will limit the power they have now.