New here, how do you guys feel about libertarian socialism?

[DoomyMcDoom]

This thread is still going on?

Numerous people have already shown how anarchy will not work. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

Yea I think I'm done with trying to discuss things with a brick wall.

I should've known better though, this is the internet most of you guys will be middle/uppermiddle class, so you won't actually have ever seen THAT much oppression to understand. The streets are the best place to talk to people about this, people that can relate to the whole idea.

I'm sorry? I'm a lower low class bastard child of a welfare fed single mother...
I've gone days without food and I've slept on the floor for lack of a better place. I've seen shit that most haven't on the lower end of life. I've had to work my ass off to earn a substandard poverty level existence hell even where I am now is far below the poverty line in the city where I live... I'm the kinda guy who knows he will never become some investment tycoon or business mogul as i would need money in excess of $1200... which is the most money I have had in my bank EVER... that was eaten through in bills in less than a month just living. and though you seem to think, you're a seasoned veteran of the streets, and have seen it all. I doubt you are any worse off since you obviously have access to an internet connection and research materials... so really? are you some starving hobo? no seems you aren't. then it seems, you aren't one to talk either.

by the way, your implied superiority... I've seen it hundreds of times, and the people who stick with that attitude never live a life worth living... generally disintegrate into sorry callous misanthropes who wallow in their own complaining bitterness filled minds untill they die unloved and unknown...

so for your sake i hope you grow out of it.

 

[Lord George]

Snip

What have your brought to this discussion except your hatred and insecurities exactly?

Intelligence and wit. Perhaps you've heard of them?

I pointed out that Ayn Rand's books show how Anarchism is a load of crap and I find it hard to believe you've even read Atlas shrugged so you can't really form an opinion based on what the writer was like at some point in their life just look at Ann Rice for that.

So because I'm not as enamored with her tin-hat sociopath philosophy as you are, I'm completely unfamiliar with it? That's a pretty hilarious fallacy to use, man, even for a Rand-loving creature such as yourself.

As it so happens, Ann Rice sucks too. As does Ann Coulter, while we're on the subject.

Thanks for confirming my view that your a troll. A shame really I would have liked to have had an intelligent argument with someone who wasn't talking out of their ass.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Snip

What have your brought to this discussion except your hatred and insecurities exactly?

I pointed out that Ayn Rand's books show how Anarchism is a load of crap and I find it hard to believe you've even read Atlas shrugged so you can't really form an opinion based on what the writer was like at some point in their life just look at Ann Rice for that.

Well, I did read Atlas. And it was the single worst reading experience of my life. It was dull, malformed, inelegant, and so full of bilious monologues and moral superiority that by the time I got halfway through the book I wound up fantasising about the effect of a nuclear strike on Galt's Gulch and other outright barbarisms simply because it was that unpleasant.

Her entire argument against socialism consists of propping up a particularly ugly-looking strawman and then repeatedly pummelling it in an attempt to show the superiority of her own system. She makes no arguments in regards to the economics of the matter, merely to 'morality'. And the fact of the matter is that morality is a subjective matter, though Rand, instead, chooses to present her morality as an absolute, and others as an incorrectly subjective.

Her 'objectivist' philosophy is also that - the art of dressing up her subjective ideas as absolutes, and disagreeing other people's ideas as the product of moral insanity/imbecility. She then takes this particualar piece of doggerel and applies it to history, making the entirity of human endeavour and reason nothing more than a struggle between the state and entrepreneurship, a rather childish simplification in my opinion, and certainly nothing more than a piece of 'appeal to the masses' dumbing-down, considering how educated she was in this field.

Frankly, while I'd not describe her philosophy as 'sociopathic', it was, on the whole, a very paranoid one and immensely stupid one, and certainly not worth much consideration.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have an Economics lecturer to pester.

 

[Lord George]

Snip

What have your brought to this discussion except your hatred and insecurities exactly?

I pointed out that Ayn Rand's books show how Anarchism is a load of crap and I find it hard to believe you've even read Atlas shrugged so you can't really form an opinion based on what the writer was like at some point in their life just look at Ann Rice for that.

Well, I did read Atlas. And it was the single worst reading experience of my life. It was dull, malformed, inelegant, and so full of bilious monologues and moral superiority that by the time I got halfway through the book I wound up fantasising about the effect of a nuclear strike on Galt's Gulch and other outright barbarisms simply because it was that unpleasant.

Her entire argument against socialism consists of propping up a particularly ugly-looking strawman and then repeatedly pummelling it in an attempt to show the superiority of her own system. She makes no arguments in regards to the economics of the matter, merely to 'morality'. And the fact of the matter is that morality is a subjective matter, though Rand, instead, chooses to present her morality as an absolute, and others as an incorrectly subjective.

Her 'objectivist' philosophy is also that - the art of dressing up subjective ideas as absolutes, and disagreeing ideas as the product of moral insanity/imbecility. She then takes this particualar piece of doggerel and applies it to history, making the entirity of human endeavour and reason nothing more than a struggle between the state and entrepreneurship, a rather childish simplification in my opinion, and certainly nothing more than a piece of 'appeal to the masses' dumbing-down, considering how educated she was in this field.

Frankly, while I'd not describe her philosophy as 'sociopathic', it was, on the whole, a very paranoid one, and certainly not worth much consideration.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have an Economics lecturer to pester.

I would agree with the whole moral issue, it did seem like getting quite a forced outlook, and I don't agree with the ideas Ayn Rand set out in many cases (though I did with the whole no god, no faith, only the individual idea), I was simply using it in this case as outlining how Anarchism would not work, which I think it does well.

Have fun annoying Lecturers .