Don't Take it Seriously...

Lol my IQ drops about 5 points every time I see a video from a tea party rally.

Admin wrote:

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.

I find it heartbreaking to see such a reactionary tendency in my own nation, but it was indeed funny to watch, The ignorance in my so called "great country" shows its self here and i find it unbelievable.

Ridiculous...

Admin wrote:

Unbelievable. Let's briefly go over the various inaccuracies this dipshit spewed in his inane diatribe.

1.) Conflating the propertarian "non-aggression principle" with anarchism.

Throughout the video, this imbecile repeatedly denounces the anarchists involved in the May Day demonstrations for violating basic "anarchist principles." This betrays either a fundamental ignorance regarding anarchist philosophy, or it's a deliberate lie. The original anarchist theorists never accepted the validity of private property, except with respect to possessions for active personal use. Capitalism, and the wealth accumulated therein, was considered to be completely illegitimate due to the exploitation and hierarchy it engenders.

"Anarcho"-capitalism is the perverse brainchild of Murray Rothbard, who formulated the theory over a century after anarchism was established as a distinct philosophical tendency. Thus, to accuse the black bloc anarchists of ideological inconsistency is absolutely absurd.

2.) "Anarcho"-capitalism is emergent?

At some point in the video, this guy essentially argues that, absent state coercion, "anarcho"-capitalism would inevitably emerge—presumably because bourgeois social relations are 'natural'—further revealing his ignorance. The anthropological record on this matter is quite clear: in a state of nature, mankind gravitates toward egalitarian gift economies (as demonstrated in the research of Marcel Mauss, Marshall Sahlins, and David Graeber). Human beings literally had to be forced into conforming with capitalism's exploitative institutional arrangements, as the violent history of primitive accumulation reveals. In no way does Lockean property theory accord with our natural inclinations as a species. (Lockean property theory cannot be ethically defended regardless, for reasons outlined here.)

3.) Inconsistent even by propertarian standards.

What's most amusing is that Adam's denunciation of the actions undertaken by the black bloc cannot even be defended using the very principles he claims to uphold! "Anarcho"-capitalists are quite fond of claiming that the United States is a statist society, and that any faults observed therein can't logically be attributed to laissez-faire. So, since property wasn't acquired by a strict adherence to Lockean property theory, and since the state is heavily involved in economic activity, the current distribution of property and wealth cannot logically be claimed to be legitimate by "anarcho"-capitalist standards, and yet here we find one arguing otherwise. This is a rather common phenomenon, so much so that it even compelled the mutualist theorist Kevin Carson to coin the term "vulgar libertarianism" to refer to the views espoused by such people.

I'm getting in the mix in the comment section. It seems like they have no clue what anarchism is, like you said, equating it to the NAP.

Red Aegis wrote:I'm getting in the mix in the comment section.

You have far more patience dealing with those people than I do. Godspeed.

"Anarcho"-capitalism is a misnomer that stems from the immutable contradictions existing between traditional anarchist principles and bourgeois society. Capitalism, as an economic system defined by hierarchies and dictatorial spheres of influence corresponding to quantities of accumulated private wealth, is simply incompatible with genuine anarchism. True anarchists are socialists.

It appears that I've either confused them or they don't know what to say. I guess that I win

Most arousing.

I saw this on youtube and had no idea what to say.

Red Aegis wrote:I saw this on youtube and had no idea what to say.

A "thank you" would suffice.

why thank you good sir.

That's his actual picture if anyone's wondering.

That sir, is a perfect summery of objectivism