Your views on...

[True Sounds]

Socialism or Communism or Anarchism or Nihilism?

[.VX]

Nihilism is not a political system.

[Th0r]

Can you tell us your views?

[Antagonist]

Anarchism is misrepresented a lot and actually a great idea. I almost put "a great idea in theory" but I'm not going to kid myself, I think it would be better than what we have now. Some people consider it "total chaos" which is completely wrong and stems from the idea of a "state of nature" which is the lack of government and many believe with lack of government there would be total chaos. I think we live in a pretty chaotic world right now and a lot of this chaos comes from those who hold power over the people. I think we need to encourage individualism and allow individuals to stand up and defend themselves.

Socialism...sounds okay I don't fully understand it/am too lazy to read the whole wiki page.

Nihilism...I've been pretty nihilistic in the past, I still think a lot of things a pretty pointless. I have found out the meaning of life though.

[Th0r]

With Anarchism humans cannot be trusted.

World leaders may cause chaos Antagonist, but imagine the chaos without an infrastructure and without laws.

[.VX]

Th0r, what do you mean by 'humans can't be trusted'? Because that's a pretty easy statement to make.

I agree with Antagonist. Anarchy wouldn't work with the people of the present. People have been brought up in a world where the government decides what is wrong, and delivers punshment accordingly for them. Anarchy could only work if everyone was a vigilante, which most people wouldn't be able to do today.

We'll get there one day hopefully.

[Th0r]

The people of the present cannot be trusted with the lack of laws due to the restrictions placed on them in the present. We simply would not know what to do.

[.VX]

Yeah, but if we're given more freedoms over a period of time then we'll eventually learn to think for ourselves. I also tink that it wouldn't work with a lot of today's religions and other institutions.

[crazy white guy]

I have found out the meaning of life though.

Please share. If I had a leading role, I'd be a totalitarian socialist. Everything would be paid for except for things that is the citizen's responsibility to earn certain things like luxuries and a home past the community homes that are available to the very poor.

[odin_dax]

Please share. If I had a leading role, I'd be a totalitarian socialist. Everything would be paid for except for things that is the citizen's responsibility to earn certain things like luxuries and a home past the community homes that are available to the very poor.

The meaning of life is... Well, I could tell you, but you wouldn't understand if I told you. You'll have to discover it yourself. :fest06:

[Th0r]

I'll probably keep my thoughts on the meaning of life to myself.

However keeping with the thread I disagree with both Communism and Socialism.

[darkangle]

anarchism -in theory is almost perfect ,but in reality i think most people are just to dam uncooperative to make it work

[crazy white guy]

I'll probably keep my thoughts on the meaning of life to myself.

However keeping with the thread I disagree with both Communism and Socialism.

No elaboration? This is a discussion!

[Th0r]

No elaboration? This is a discussion!

DJ Poppinfresh's Signature explains my views on Communism.

"ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL -
BUT SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS"

Comrade Napoleon (Animal farm)

[.VX]

I think he wanted to know your thoughts on the meaning of life.

Also, look at Cuba. All Communism needs is some leaders who aren't greedy bastards.

[MrKant]

I'm quite happy with our goverment in the U.S. now.
Just these pussy faggot democrats/liberals(and W.) keep fucking everything up.

[DJ Poppinfresh]

I think he wanted to know your thoughts on the meaning of life.

Also, look at Cuba. All Communism needs is some leaders who aren't greedy bastards.

You can't just HAVE communism. If you had flat out communism - even with a perfect leader - The country would go to shit. People are left with no reson to work, or show any initiative, and there are no government funded benefits (That means goodbye to all your free medical Canada). Also, no pension. Biggest problem with Cuba, I feel, is that everyone works for the government. If Cuba could just merge some factors of Free Enterprise into it's economy, it would be much better off.

But yes, They do need a new dictator.

[.VX]

You can't just HAVE communism. If you had flat out communism - even with a perfect leader - The country would go to shit. People are left with no reson to work, or show any initiative, and there are no government funded benefits (That means goodbye to all your free medical Canada). Also, no pension. Biggest problem with Cuba, I feel, is that everyone works for the government. If Cuba could just merge some factors of Free Enterprise into it's economy, it would be much better off.

But yes, They do need a new dictator.

Communism worked in Cuba. And I'm not sure that you know how Communism works.


And they just got a new President.

[DJ Poppinfresh]

Communism worked in Cuba. And I'm not sure that you know how Communism works.

Cuba's a shithole - It didn't work



And they just got a new President.

I haven't been paying any attention to the world for the past few weeks - When did this happen?

[.VX]

Cuba's a shithole - It didn't work





I haven't been paying any attention to the world for the past few weeks - When did this happen?

They have some of the best Healthcare and Education systems in the world.

Around the start of 2008.

[DJ Poppinfresh]

They have some of the best Healthcare and Education systems in the world.


Are we talking about the same place here? Because Healthcare or not, I certainly wouldn't want to live in Cuba.

Fidel left his mark on Cuba, and still, 80% of employment is public sector.

It's still painfully communist, and will be for a long time.

But, thanks to Raul, things are looking up, seeing as it used to be 92% of employment in public. And more privileges going out to the people (electrical goods - American made crap). Too bad he's an alcoholic.

Also, it turns out I should start watching more recent documentarys/read more up to date books.

[.VX]

Are we talking about the same place here? Because Healthcare or not, I certainly wouldn't want to live in Cuba.

Fidel left his mark on Cuba, and still, 80% of employment is public sector.

It's still painfully communist, and will be for a long time.

But, thanks to Raul, things are looking up, seeing as it used to be 92% of employment in public. And more privileges going out to the people (electrical goods - American made crap). Too bad he's an alcoholic.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Education

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Public_health


Cubans have only recently been given Electrical Goods?

[DJ Poppinfresh]

Cubans have only recently been given Electrical Goods?

Yeah, things such as DVD players and stereos. I giggled.

[True Sounds]

ADDRESS OF LOUIS LINGG.
"COURT OF JUSTICE! With the same irony with which you have regarded
my efforts to win, in this 'free land of America,' a livelihood such
as human kind is worthy to enjoy, do you now, after condemning me to
death, concede me the liberty of making a final speech.

"I accept your concession; but it is only for the purpose of exposing
the injustice, the calumnies, and the outrages which have been heaped
upon me.

"You have accused me of murder, and convicted me: what proof have you
brought that I am guilty?

"In the first place, you have brought this fellow Seliger to testify
against me. Him I have helped to make bombs, and you have further
proven that with the assistance of another, I took those bombs to No.
58 Clybourne avenue, but what you have not proven--even with the
assistance of your bought 'squealer,' Seliger, who would appear to
have acted such a prominent part in the affair-is that any of those
bombs were taken to the haymarket. A couple of chemists also, have
been brought here as specialists, yet they could only state that the
metal of which the haymarket bomb was made bore a certain resemblance
to those bombs of mine, and your Mr. Ingham has vainly endeavored to
deny that the bombs were quite differenent He had to admit that there
was a difference of a full half inch in their diameters, although he
suppressed the fact that there was also a difference of a quarter of
an inch in the thickness of the shell. This is the kind of evidence
upon which you have convicted me.

"It is not murder, however, of which you have convicted me. The judge
has stated that much only this morning in his resume of the case, and
Grinnell has repeatedly asserted that we were being tried, not for
murder, but for anarchy, so that the condemnation is-that I am an
anarchist!

"What is anarchy" This is a subject which my comrades have explained
with sufficient clearness, and it is unneccessary for me to go over
it again. They have told you plainly enough what our aims are. The
state's attorney, however, has not given you that information. He has
merely criticized and condemned not the doctrines of anarchy, but our
methods of giving them practical effect, and even here he has
maintained a discreet silence as to the fact that those methods were
forced upon us by the brutality of the police. Grinnell's own
proffered remedy for our grievances is the ballot and combination of
trades unions, and Ingham has even avowed the desirability of a six-
hour movement! But the fact is, that at every attempt to wield the
ballot, at every endeavor to combine the efforts of workingmen, you
have displayed the brutal violence of the police club, and this is
why I have recommended rude force, to combat the ruder force of the
police.

"You have charged me with despising 'law and order.' What does
your 'law and order' amount to? Its representatives are the police,
and they have thieves in their ranks. Here sits Captain Schaack. He
has himself admitted to me that my hat and books have been stolen
from him in his office-stolen by policemen. These are your defenders
of property rights!

"The detectives again, who arrested me, forced their way into my room
like house breakers, under false pretences, giving the name of a
carpenter, Lorenz, of Burlington street. They have sworn that I was
alone in my room, therein perjuring themselves. You have not
subpoenaed this lady, Mrs. Klein, who was present, and could have
sworn that the aforesaid detectives broke into my room under false
pretenses, and that their testimonies are perjured.

"But let us go further. In Schaack we have a captain of the police,
and he also has perjured himself. He has sworn that I admitted to him
being present at the Monday night meeting, whereas, I distinctly
informed him that I was at a carpenter's meeting at Zepf's Hall. He
has sworn again that I told him that I had learned how to make bombs
from Herr Most's book. That, also, is a perjury.

"Let us go still a step higher among these representatives of law and
order. Grinnell and his associates have permitted perjury, and I say
that they have done it knowingly. The proof has been adduced by my
counsel, and with my own eyes I have seen Grinnell point out to
Gilmer, eight days before he came upon the stand, the persons of the
men whom he was to swear against.

While I, as I have stated above, believe in force for the sake of
winning for myself and fellow-workmen a livelihood such as men ought
to have, Grinnell, on the other hand, through his police and other
rogues, has suborned perjury in order to murder seven men, of whom I
am one.

"Grinnell bad the pitiful courage here in the courtroom, where I
could not defend myself, to call me a coward! The scoundrel! A fellow
who has leagued himself with a parcel of base, hireling knaves, to
bring me to the gallows. Why? For no earthly reason save a
contemptible selfishness--a desire to 'rise in the world'--to 'make
money" forsooth.

"This wretch-who, by means of the perjuries of other wretches is
going to murder seven men-is the fellow who calls me 'coward!' And
yet you blame me for despising such 'defenders of the law'-such
unspeakable hypocrites!

"Anarchy means no domination or authority of one man over another,
yet you call that 'disorder.' A system which advocates no
such 'order' as shall require the services of rogues and thieves to
defend it you call 'disorder.'

"The Judge himself was forced to admit that the state's attorney had
not been able to connect me with the bomb throwing. The latter knows
how to get around it, however. He charges me with being
a 'conspirator.' How does he prove it? Simply by declaring the
International Workingmens' Association to be a 'conspiracy.' I was a
member of that body, so he has the charge securely fastened on me.
Excellent! Nothing is too difficult for the genius of a state's
attorney!

"It is hardly incumbent upon me to review the relations which I
occupy to my companions in misfortune. I can say truly and openly
that I am not as intimate with my fellow prisoners as I am with
Captain Schaack.

"The universal misery, the ravages of the capitalistic hyena have
brought us together in our agitation, not as persons, but as workers
in the same cause, Such is the 'conspiracy' of which you have
convicted me.

I protest against the conviction, against the decision of the court.
I do not recognize your law, jumbled together as it is by the
nobodies of bygone centuries, and I do not recognize the decision of
the court. My own counsel have conclusively proven from the decisions
of equally high courts that a new trail must be granted us. The
state's attorney quotes three times as many decisions from perhaps
still higher courts to prove the opposite, and I am convinced that
if, in another trial, these decisions should be supported by twenty-
five volumes, they will adduce one hundred in support of the
contrary, if it is anarchists who are to be tried. And not even under
such a law, a law that a schoolboy must despise, not even by such
methods have they been able to 'legally' convict us.

"They have suborned perjury to boot.

"I tell you frankly and openly, I am for force. I have already told
Captain Schaack, 'if they use cannons against us, we shall use
dynamite against them."

"I repeat that I am the enemy of the 'order' of to-day, and I repeat
that, with all my powers. so long as breath remains in me, I shall
combat it. I declare again, frankly and openly, that I am in favor of
using force. I have told Captain Schaack, and I stand by it. 'if you
cannonade, us we shaIl dynamite you.' You laugh' Perhaps you
think, 'you'll throw no more bombs;' but let me assure you that I
die, happy on the gallows so confident am I that the hundreds and
thousands to whom I have spoken will remember my words; and when you
shall have hanged us, then, mark my words, they will do the bomb-
throwing! In this hope do I say to you: 'I despise you. I despise
your order; your laws, your force-propped authority.' HANG ME FOR IT!
:moon::AR15firin:nutkick: Also the reason I had pasted/posted this was simply to educate you guys on anarchy.

[Th0r]

Again, explain what you Copy & Paste for the benefit of Rorta!

[thief]

I looked at about 4 lines of that copy and paste and got so fucking bored that I stopped. Worst post I have look at yet.

[Tarnak]

Hey everyone, been a lurker on R0rta for a while (since 2005) abut never posted much... now that totse is gone figured id make a permanent move over here.


I don't know what kind of anarchist the OP is, but it seems like most anarchists have this belief in primitivism. They all seem to think that we were so much better off when you started your fire with flint and steel and hunted your own meat. Having never lived such an existance, they can't imagine the hardship of having to work all day just for food, to not have any medical care... to live in a world without cigarettes.

If we get rid of government, slowly or quickly, is the world really going to revert (if it was ever in such a stage) to some kind of paradise where we answer to noone but somehow people dont fuck each other over? Somehow we will coordinate our efforts and amazingly produce a fraction of the wealth that our economy generates in our current system?

I don't know if humans are good or evil by nature, but even if you live in teletubby land there's going to be a couple of individuals who turn out pretty self serving. Those individuals are all it takes to make life absolutely miserable for the many unless the many have some sort of system to remove said individuals from society.

Our system isn't perfect... some of those individuals end up running the country. But we seem to have enough checks and balances that things really don't get too bad for us here in America, much as many of you may bitch, and we enjoy a lot of luxuries that primitive tribal (many peoples idea of anarchist) societies dont.

The fact that you can have a bolt made in a factort in kansas and a nut made in Boston come together in Ohio on a pickup truck is the kind of amazing cooperation that can not be effectively coordinated in a communist or socialist centralized system and is too risky in an anarchist one.

Capitalism works. It works like a machine where the gears don't fit quite right, but it works.

[Antagonist]

whoa, totally forgot about this thread.

meaning of life: you can't live forever, so create something that will. Have fun a long the way, learn, grow, and find out who you already are.

anarchism does not have to be primitive. The thing is, we have a lot of technology, this technology won't simply disappear. It will be utilized more efficiently, if anything. There has been lots of situations where a machine is designed to do a job a human might normally do, but instead of the human who used to do the job benefiting from this, his boss does, so his boss cuts him out and makes even more money. With anarchy, people could build machines and let the whole community benefit from them, and help with whatever the machine does not accomplish.

Also, capitalism DOES NOT work, it is built to not work. People directly benefit from the short-comings of others. Its about working your way up, so you can do less work, but still benefit from the work of many others. This is an absurd system.

The thing is, there will always be violent people, and people who steal, people who do bad things, etc. but it is best to have these people more easily controlled. When you have 1 gang running everything, anyone who gets in the way is disposed of quite easily, and anyone who has a problem with that, isn't going to be able to do shit. But lets say you have a small gang making trouble in a village, people in that village can rise up and eliminate the threat more easily because it is a smaller threat without so many powerful resources.

The problem with government, is that it appoints people to positions of power, which they misuse and abuse. It prevents things from getting done with all sorts of filibusters. The resources are there, they are just restricted by the government. We are made to think we need the government, because they force us to need them.

I think all humans are not equal, but should still have the same rights and opportunities. With any form of government installed, this will never be.

We all have a right to food
We all have a right to shelter
We all have a right to land
We all have a right to rights

edit: I also think money is not as it appears to be. Its a middle man. You can only trade money, you can't eat it, you can't use it for shelter, etc. it is also used as a means to gain great power. You can offer someone a large amount of money, and they will be set for life. Its a lot harder to get someone to kill someone for you, and say "hey, I'll give you a shit ton of food and clothes" but with money, you can essentially give them not only a life times supply of food, but many other luxuries as well. I think it would be better if people traded. Each town should have a trade center, where you can go and offer your skills and labor, or products. This would make it a lot easier for EVERYONE to provide for themselves, without having to go through the unnecessary steps in order to get a job, and wasting a lot of time in doing so.

as far as luxuries go, those aren't going to disappear either. These things will not simply disappear. With anarchy, people will still work, they will just work more freely. Products will still be tossed around, people will trade a batch of home-made computers for a large amount of clothing and food, and then those computers will be traded more and more. A farmer will grow mass amounts of crops using machines, then he will keep what he needs, and trade the rest for anything else he wants. If he grows his own food, has his own home, and maybe his wife makes clothes, or he has enough already, he can still trade to obtain luxuries. He can even trade his labor, since he has machines doing most of his work. He can say "hey, I'll help you load up all these computers and sell them if you let me have one"

[REL0AD]

Socialism

Dictatorship yes? If so I'm all for it... :headbang:


meaning of life: you can't live forever, so create something that will. Have fun a long the way, learn, grow, and find out who you already are.


I like this, some sound advice there Antagonist.

[Th0r]

REL0AD, Socialism is far from dictatorship/totalitarianism. You're confusing socialism with National Socialism.

[REL0AD]

REL0AD, Socialism is far from dictatorship/totalitarianism. You're confusing socialism with National Socialism.

Ah right, thanks for clearing that up... So what is dictatorship classed as? I know National Socialism is nazi. Is dictatorship just dictatorhip?

You can all probably guess what I'm all for... Dictatorship.

[Th0r]

You could class dictatorship as totalitarianism.

And REL0AD, can you imagine what the BNP would do to people like you, the ultimate anti-patriot, benefit fraudster and the biggest pest in the North East of England?

[REL0AD]

The biggest pest in the North East of England?

LMFAO.

Anti-patriot.

Come again?

[Tarnak]

whoa, totally forgot about this thread.

meaning of life: you can't live forever, so create something that will. Have fun a long the way, learn, grow, and find out who you already are.

anarchism does not have to be primitive. The thing is, we have a lot of technology, this technology won't simply disappear. It will be utilized more efficiently, if anything. There has been lots of situations where a machine is designed to do a job a human might normally do, but instead of the human who used to do the job benefiting from this, his boss does, so his boss cuts him out and makes even more money. With anarchy, people could build machines and let the whole community benefit from them, and help with whatever the machine does not accomplish.

Technology may not instanty vanish but it will stagnate and die. It will stop progressing. Anarchism is too inefficient to afford anything close to the R&D our capitalist society can. Machines will rust, because an anarchistm will not be able to maintain them. How will you get a new motherboard when the factory isn't running? That homemade circuitboard just might work... but it sure as hell isn't anywhere near as good as the one i have now. And I could swear the factory made more of them, faster.

I am not a believer in "machines took er jooobs!" Nobody should be doing a useless unnecesary job that could be done by a machine.

Consider this:

Man loses job to machine. Company produces cheaper product. 10 Consumers save $10 on cheaper product. Consumers buy clothes with extra money. Man gets employed at Abercrombie.

Our society is becoming more and more mechanized, which is why our service industry is so much larger than our industrial sector. Unemployment is not higher than it was when factorys where humanized.



Also, capitalism DOES NOT work, it is built to not work. People directly benefit from the short-comings of others. Its about working your way up, so you can do less work, but still benefit from the work of many others. This is an absurd system.

Hold on, last time I checked I got paid for doing my job. I could take that money and buy this computer and communicate on the internet. I could buy a car and cheap affordable food. Despite being at the very bottom end of the working scale, I can afford many niceties like a cell phone or soft drinks imported from India. I can go outside and generally not have to fear for my life. I can generally know that my property is protected and that I am protected.

Yes, there are problems, but how can you say the system of the wealthiest, most comfortable, and most powerful country(s) in the world doesn't work?




People look at the richest and resent their riches. Wealth, in many ways, is just a measure of your conribution to society. Who contributes more? The guy who puts a nail in a board? Or the guy who organizes a national marketing campaign for that board? Who can do the other ones job?

Some people are born in to money. That is unfair. Some people do illegal things to get their money. That is also unfair. But I can't hate anyone who came from the bottom and rose to the top. ANYONE can do that in our system, if you have the determination and a little bit of brains.

BTW, rich people don't "hog" the money. It either gets spent, creating jobs in any number of industries (luxury cars, fancy TVs, construction) or put in a bank, which loans it out to other people and businesses.

The thing is, there will always be violent people, and people who steal, people who do bad things, etc. but it is best to have these people more easily controlled. When you have 1 gang running everything, anyone who gets in the way is disposed of quite easily, and anyone who has a problem with that, isn't going to be able to do shit. But lets say you have a small gang making trouble in a village, people in that village can rise up and eliminate the threat more easily because it is a smaller threat without so many powerful resources.

Which do you think a gang while have an easier time doing: getting together enough manpower and weaponry to take over a small village, or getting enough manpower and weaponry to take over the united states of america?

The problem with government, is that it appoints people to positions of power, which they misuse and abuse. It prevents things from getting done with all sorts of filibusters. The resources are there, they are just restricted by the government. We are made to think we need the government, because they force us to need them.

Our government is top heavy and beauracratic. I fear it will collapse under its own weight. No great empire lasts forever... We spend far far too much on "humanitarian" shit. The governments responsibility should be law and order and the military. Everything else is just vote buying bullshit that costs me, the tax payer, money, and takes away from a true free market.


Liberal self-loathing and apologetic spending will be the death of us.

I think all humans are not equal, but should still have the same rights and opportunities. With any form of government installed, this will never be.

Unequal capitalism: You have 10 sheep to your name, but some have 100.
Equality: Everyone has 1 sheep.

We all have a right to food
We all have a right to shelter
We all have a right to land
We all have a right to rights

Agreed on the first two. Out of human decency we cant allow true darwinism... besides military and law, some money should be spent on shelters and food. You do NOT have a right for these to be nice places.

There is no inherit right to land. You have a right to own things, to possess property, but nobody rates free handouts.

Right to rights? Redundant.

I believe everyone should have the right do whatever they want as long as it does not interfere with anyone else's ability to do what they want within reason.



edit: I also think money is not as it appears to be. Its a middle man. You can only trade money, you can't eat it, you can't use it for shelter, etc. it is also used as a means to gain great power. You can offer someone a large amount of money, and they will be set for life. Its a lot harder to get someone to kill someone for you, and say "hey, I'll give you a shit ton of food and clothes" but with money, you can essentially give them not only a life times supply of food, but many other luxuries as well. I think it would be better if people traded. Each town should have a trade center, where you can go and offer your skills and labor, or products. This would make it a lot easier for EVERYONE to provide for themselves, without having to go through the unnecessary steps in order to get a job, and wasting a lot of time in doing so.

Good point about the not being able to pay a hitman. You also can't pay the true value for, say, a nice car, a diesel generator, a boat, an ocean liner, etc. I sure as hell wouldn't trade my ocean liner for 10,000 tons of clothing. wTF would I do with 10,000 tons of clothing?

Money is simply a representation of a percentage of the sum total of the goods in our country. It simply makes barter go much smoother.

Example:
I have a sheep but I want a cow. Joe has a cow, but joe only wants a chicken. Tom ha
ss a chicken, but he only wants a pig. Jesse has a pig, but she only wants a mongoose.

OR:
I have $10 and I want a cow. Joe has a cow but wants a chicken. A chicken costs $10. Cow sold!

The inherit evil is not in the green piece of paper. The inherit evil is in the hand holding it.



as far as luxuries go, those aren't going to disappear either. These things will not simply disappear. With anarchy, people will still work, they will just work more freely. Products will still be tossed around, people will trade a batch of home-made computers for a large amount of clothing and food, and then those computers will be traded more and more. A farmer will grow mass amounts of crops using machines, then he will keep what he needs, and trade the rest for anything else he wants. If he grows his own food, has his own home, and maybe his wife makes clothes, or he has enough already, he can still trade to obtain luxuries. He can even trade his labor, since he has machines doing most of his work. He can say "hey, I'll help you load up all these computers and sell them if you let me have one"

But they will be shitty shitty computers. The farmers machines will eventually break down and he will jury rig them the best he can because the factory that made the transmission is long since closed down. Hopefully he has enough time to actually grow between fending off theives and gangs that come and steal his crops whenever they feel like it. I wonder if he can look up crop security on rorta? Oh yea... he doesnt have the internet.



Look, we have nice things because of the excellent way our system works. It ain't perfect - nothing is - but it sure as hell is the spiffyist way of doin business out there.

The major problems in our society don't stem from our economic system. They stem from our politcal one... and the way the two interact.

Anyway, that's a different discussion and I'm dne typing.

[death11284]

I'm all for an oligarchy and a very complex capitalistic society with socialist ideals that I'll go into more details about later.

[ComfortablyNumb]

On nihilsim... I wrote this essay today in regards to Nietzsche's nihilism and how he thought was an acceptable way overcome it... gimme a break, I wrote it 2 hours before it was due...without having read any of nietzsche's work... so it certainly isn't my best paper- especially the conclusion- a pure rush job.... Give me your thoughts.

[Vex]

i'm a libertarian marxist, i hate how when someone says "communism" everybody thinks of shitholes like the U.S.S.R., and china (which is now even more captalist then amerika)

[Tarnak]

You can't be a libertarian marxist.

Libertarians believe in very small government.

Marxist believe in making everyone part of the government.

[death11284]

You can't be a libertarian marxist.



Hmm he could mean the economic system of marxists, they libretarians technically just believe in free will. As in regulation on human action is very very small, but not necessarily in free economics.

[blastedforums]

I am by far a libertarian over anything so I obviously would choose Libertarianism over anything else.
However given the forms listed I will choose true Democratic Socialism over anything else. It provides the best benefits for all citizens over the other two listed.

Communism never works for very long, nor provides a real benefit for the masses. Is far too intrusive and far too black and white for my tastes.

Archaism is not really a type of government, is the lack there of. I think what you mean to put there is Libertarian socialism. Where there is no governmental or social hierarchy. Each person is for themselves or a coherent group.

Nihilism is not a form of government, it simply refers to, or more specifically the lack of morals.