Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

"I am a socialist"

rated by 0 users
This post has 199 Replies | 14 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi Posted: Tue, Jan 27 2009 3:42 PM

ama gi:

I'm ami gi, and I am a socialist.

I believe that wealth ought to be put to whatever use will benefit the masses.  I want to see the mechanisms of our economy working for the many, and not for the entrenched interests of a few.

Therefore, I call for the complete abolition of the State, which is the leading cause of our inordinate concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.  Our financial system, our common defense, and all of our public-sector industries should be placed under the control of the people, interacting in free, private sector institutions.

Say what? You want our wealth to be redistributed by the few at the top, who have been ruthless enough (or just lucky) to seize control of the military-industrial complex?

You fascist!

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 110
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 867
Points 17,790
Sphairon replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 3:53 PM

Oh, you're so silly. Don't you see that all we have to do is put the right people into office and things will go just fine?


  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 3:58 PM

You fascists believe in some mysterious "invisible hand" that will put the right people is positions of power over the people.  Such ridiculous ideas have been proven time and again as false.

Statism is a failed policy.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 867
Points 17,790
Sphairon replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 4:07 PM

But won't the strong crush the weak if there is no protecting element in society, even if it can be misused? I mean, sure, the state has been used to kill many innocent civilians abroad, but that's not a point against the state per se, but against an anarchic order of rivaling nation states!

In fact, if we had a global government with an international democratic redistribution mechanism, there would be much less conflict and poverty and thus, global citizens could become more focused on electing the right people. If you don't have to worry about where you water will come from the next day, you can challenge the system! All we need is hope, and change will ensue.


  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 39
Points 750
ecoli replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 4:14 PM

You blame capitalist for being too statist, yet you accept socialism?  Who coordinates resource allocation in a socialist government but the state?

 

Methinks this you are a hypocritical troll.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 412
Points 8,630

You realise that in all situations of voluntary exchange, man is seeking a profit (surplus value for nothing), right?  Private property and profit are natural

do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 4:16 PM

You fascist imperialists are always looking to expand your reach so you can exploit more people.  Statism is based on greed.  Greedy bureaucrats just trying to make a profit at the expense of exploited taxpayers/draftees.

Down with fascism!  Free-market Socialism is the answer!

 

 

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 39
Points 750
ecoli replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 4:24 PM

someone needs to bad this troll

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,511
Points 31,955

ecoli:

someone needs to bad this troll

Or he's being sarcastic.

 

Abstract liberty, like other mere abstractions, is not to be found.

          - Edmund Burke

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 39
Points 750
ecoli replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 4:47 PM

ah... well then joke failed.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 5:56 PM

ecoli:

You blame capitalist for being too statist, yet you accept socialism?  Who coordinates resource allocation in a socialist government but the state?

Methinks this you are a hypocritical troll

Methinks you do not know what you are talking about.

ama gi:

Our financial system, our common defense, and all of our public-sector industries should be placed under the control of the people, interacting in free, private sector institutions.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 4
Points 95

I have nothing to lose but my chains!

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Wed, Jan 28 2009 12:52 AM

Every argument socialists use against capitalism can be used against statism.  Try it!

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 353
Points 5,400
nhaag replied on Wed, Jan 28 2009 2:03 AM

Smiles, this is a worthwhile strategy to denounce the statist utopias, like socialism, merkantilism and communism. I mean after all, it is just what they did with terms as well.

Maybe we should translate our concepts into their phrases :-).

To put weslth to the benefit of the masses, there is a way, it is called division of labor. To have the economy working for the many, there is a way called free markets.

Again, an interseting strategy.

 

In the begining there was nothing, and it exploded.

Terry Pratchett (on the big bang theory)

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Wed, Jan 28 2009 3:15 AM

 

ama gi:

I'm ami gi, and I am a socialist.

I believe that wealth ought to be put to whatever use will benefit the masses.  I want to see the mechanisms of our economy working for the many, and not for the entrenched interests of a few.

Therefore, I call for the complete abolition of the State, which is the leading cause of our inordinate concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.  Our financial system, our common defense, and all of our public-sector industries should be placed under the control of the people, interacting in free, private sector institutions.

Say what? You want our wealth to be redistributed by the few at the top, who have been ruthless enough (or just lucky) to seize control of the military-industrial complex?

You fascist!


It goes to show Socialists are just a very deluded branch of the Utilitarians.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Wed, Jan 28 2009 12:56 PM

nhaag:

Smiles, this is a worthwhile strategy to denounce the statist utopias, like socialism, merkantilism and communism. I mean after all, it is just what they did with terms as well.

Maybe we should translate our concepts into their phrases :-).

Exactly.  I don't know why we've never thought of it before.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 3
Points 90

If there is no incentive to be your best and produce the most, even the lazy drug addicts deserve what a doctor gets, you promote people dumbing themselves down so we are all equally miserable.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 1:01 AM

I believe in, from each according to his ability, and to each according to his need.  I believe the best way to affect this phenomena is by free and voluntary exchange, unfettered by the demands of the military-industrial complex.  Only then will we see change in the right direction.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 22
Points 500

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of exploited taxpayers.  Workers of all lands: untie!

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 24
Points 515
Luna replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 7:52 AM

ama gi:

ama gi:

I'm ami gi, and I am a socialist.

I believe that wealth ought to be put to whatever use will benefit the masses.  I want to see the mechanisms of our economy working for the many, and not for the entrenched interests of a few.

Therefore, I call for the complete abolition of the State, which is the leading cause of our inordinate concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.  Our financial system, our common defense, and all of our public-sector industries should be placed under the control of the people, interacting in free, private sector institutions.

Say what? You want our wealth to be redistributed by the few at the top, who have been ruthless enough (or just lucky) to seize control of the military-industrial complex?

You fascist!

 

That's very good. Why dont you move to Cuba. That country would surely be a paradise for you.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 867
Points 17,790
Sphairon replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 8:01 AM

You guys, ama gi is using socialist arguments and rhetoric to point out that it's us who actually want to fulfill the socialists' dream of empowering workers, not them.

He's not advocating communism.


  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 279
Points 4,645

Luna:

ama gi:

ama gi:

I'm ami gi, and I am a socialist.

I believe that wealth ought to be put to whatever use will benefit the masses.  I want to see the mechanisms of our economy working for the many, and not for the entrenched interests of a few.

Therefore, I call for the complete abolition of the State, which is the leading cause of our inordinate concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.  Our financial system, our common defense, and all of our public-sector industries should be placed under the control of the people, interacting in free, private sector institutions.

Say what? You want our wealth to be redistributed by the few at the top, who have been ruthless enough (or just lucky) to seize control of the military-industrial complex?

You fascist!

 

 

That's very good. Why dont you move to Cuba. That country would surely be a paradise for you.

Epic fail Luna, epic fail. Read the rest of the thread. The point of the story is that we can sort of mad libs the entirity of socialist rhetoric and fill in our own blanks, thus effectively turning our arguments against them and confusing them. 

Like when Rothbard and his friends took up half the audience and repeatedly asked the then Gov. of NJ how and why he believes in the novel idea that public schools could effectively educate students. (I hope that stories not apocraphyl). Smile If only there had been youtube in those days the size of the libertarian movement would have immediately quadrupled after that video was seen. Big Smile

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 22
Points 500

I think this is a great thread.  I'll be borrowing a few of ama gi's parodies of marxist arguments for sure. 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 5:21 PM

Thoughts on The Internationale

After watching a documentary on the heroic protesters at Tiananmen Square, my curiosity turned to the song, The Internationale.  I read the lyrics (apparently it was written by a French anarchist) and couldn't find anything I disagreed with (except perhaps the part endorsing atheism).  I have never read a poem that describes total freedom better.  Read them for yourself.

What's ironic is that this subversive, antiauthoritarian song was the official anthem of the Soviet Union.  Tearing down walls of hatred and of stone, soldiers laying down their arms--all of this was diametrically opposed to the policies of the Soviet Union.  Eventually, the irony was too much for the Soviets themselves, and they changed their anthem to the one about an unbreakable empire.  (Of course, that, too, turned out to be mistaken.)  LOL!


So, what should we do?  Should we try to salvage this song whose history has been tarnished with such bad company?  Or should we just leave it in the trash heap of communist garbage?

"The little book, which you recite, is mine, O Fidentinus; but when you recite badly, it begins to be yours".  Marcus Valerius Martialis

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,651
Points 51,325
Moderator

ecoli:

ah... well then joke failed.

No, the joke is friggin' awesome. It receives krazy kaju approval. Yes

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 901
Points 15,900
wombatron replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 5:53 PM

a platonic charisma:
I think this is a great thread.  I'll be borrowing a few of ama gi's parodies of marxist arguments for sure. 

To be completely honest, I don't think that they are all parodies.  State-socialist ultimate ends really are better achieved by libertarian means.

Market anarchist, Linux geek, aspiring Perl hacker, and student of the neo-Aristotelians, the classical individualist anarchists, and the Austrian school.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Fri, Feb 27 2009 10:15 PM

ama gi:

After watching a documentary on the heroic protesters at Tiananmen Square, my curiosity turned to the song, The Internationale.

Justin Raimondo did some research on the protesters and it turns out that rather than goody shoes Democrats they were actually the hard-core Maoists longing for the days of Cultural Revolution.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 84
Points 3,300

I am a democratic socialist that works to check inflated growth, and eliminate waste. I recognize there will always be systems of governance. So I embrace republicanism and constitutional law. I understand that 10% means something entirely different between rich and poor and so I support progressive taxation (of which I have a friend in Adam Smith).  I believe government exists to ensure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of all mankind.  That means life and health insurance, a well protected bill of rights, contract enforcement, and protections against the unforseen disapearance of my brethrens wealth. I am a citizen and therefore I AM THE GOVERNMENT.

This country is past due for a radical reformation of its system of governance, I long to take part in the new revolution. But I fear your revolt friend. You rebel against brotherhood. You wish to reform against progress. Your ally is the all powerful will of the self and your enemy is all that is righteous.

You dont believe in personal responsibility. You dont want to be responsbily for anyone BUT yourself.  I long to see the libertarian who loses everything and refuses the public assisstance out of principal. But I dont begrudge you that. When the hammer comes down, and you come asking for handout, Ill be there to give it to you; to put a coat on your back, and help you get back on your feet.  And I expect no thanks for it. 

Thank you

Adam E Zandarski

  • | Post Points: 125
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 178
Points 2,440
nameless replied on Sun, Mar 29 2009 5:34 AM

That's one of the most ridiculously uninformed things that I've ever heard.  What are you, 12?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Sun, Mar 29 2009 1:37 PM
whoa.

edit: my whoa was directed at my brother mr Pskapompos

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 279
Points 4,645

Assuming your not a troll luring me to make a donkey of myself:

Pskapompos:

I am a democratic socialist that works to check inflated growth, and eliminate waste. I recognize there will always be systems of governance. So I embrace republicanism and constitutional law. I understand that 10% means something entirely different between rich and poor and so I support progressive taxation (of which I have a friend in Adam Smith).  I believe government exists to ensure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of all mankind.  That means life and health insurance, a well protected bill of rights, contract enforcement, and protections against the unforseen disapearance of my brethrens wealth. I am a citizen and therefore I AM THE GOVERNMENT.

Yes, it's all about the brethern, the community, the collective. Until some members of this community decide they don't like the idea of being forced into submission by your system. Then those who resist must have their lives ruined by the IRS, ATF or, if necessary, some camp in Bumsfrak, North Dakota set up by FEMA.  

I recognize there will always be systems of governance.
Stop begging the question. Why must systems of governance be monopolized into states? Why must they be territorial? Why must they be unvoluntary? Why not panarchy and true freedom of choice?

Pskapompos:
his country is past due for a radical reformation of its system of governance, I long to take part in the new revolution.

And who will read your revolution, friend, the corpse of Trotsky or Mussolini?

Pskapompos:
You rebel against brotherhood.

This charge is entirely backwards, chief. It is your who rebels against brotherhood, not I. I wish for the world to embrace a system of voluntary cooperation while you wish for the world to embrace a system founded entirely upon the might of those in charge. It is you whose revolution would break all the real bonds of brotherhood in this world. After your revolution, brothers will spy on brothers. 

Pskapompos:
You wish to reform against progress.

Again, by my lights this charge is much more fairly leveled against you. You seek to undermine and destroy the greatest engine for prosperity and progress for all of the human race: the market and private property. 

Pskapompos:
Your ally is the all powerful will of the self and your enemy is all that is righteous.

Aye, this is almost close to a description of your self, once again. Your ally is the all powerful will of the collective and your enemy is all that is righteous. You seek to forestall civilization and stagnate mankind under the State. This is the path that America hath followed for seven or eight decades. And now America, one of the few noble countries in history founded on the principles of individualism, is now near the abyss which damned well may rip her apart limb from limb. 

Pskapompos:
You dont believe in personal responsibility.

How so, Adam? I believe individuals ought to have all repsonsibilities which come from free contract. You don't. You believe in the nanny state. You believe in paternalistic government. You endorse both mob rule and socialism while expecting people to take you seriously when you assert the existence of civil liberties.  How can man have civil liberties if he has no title to the walking corpse from which his free expression came? If he has tittle to his walking corpse, then why is he too incompetent to engage in free exchange and free contract (i.e capitalism)? And if he has these rights do not responsibilites fall naturally on him? In capitalism, who pays the medical bills of those who take risks and drink or smoke? The drinkers and smokers. In socialism, who pays the medical bills of those who take risks and rink or smoke? The state. At which point, the state usually stamps out the personal freedoms of the risk takers to some extent or another. It is capitalism, the system in which risk takers pay the full costs of their risks, that provides for the most personal responsibility.

Pskapompos:
You dont want to be responsbily[sic] for anyone BUT yourself.  I

You want to be responsible for everyone everyone BUT yourself. You want to manage the lives and welfare of all those who live in the realm of your government. You want control. You want power. You want to manipulate power. All I want is to be left alone. All I want is to deal with other men on the basis of mutual interest, voluntary cooperation and kinship. If that makes me the selfish one, if that makes me the evil one, if that makes me a despicable character, if that makes me a creature whom you are morally superior to, fine. Make the most of it, compadre.

 

EDIT: I hope perhaps, you can see the error in your ways and look around this site to discover a more complete and moral viewpoint.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 5,455
Felipe replied on Sun, Mar 29 2009 2:46 PM

ama gi:

Thoughts on The Internationale

After watching a documentary on the heroic protesters at Tiananmen Square, my curiosity turned to the song, The Internationale.  I read the lyrics (apparently it was written by a French anarchist) and couldn't find anything I disagreed with (except perhaps the part endorsing atheism).  I have never read a poem that describes total freedom better.  Read them for yourself.

 

Socialism wanst such a bad set of principles until Marx came in and screw everything up with his "scientific socialism"

 

ama gi:

What's ironic is that this subversive, antiauthoritarian song was the official anthem of the Soviet Union.  Tearing down walls of hatred and of stone, soldiers laying down their arms--all of this was diametrically opposed to the policies of the Soviet Union.  Eventually, the irony was too much for the Soviets themselves, and they changed their anthem to the one about an unbreakable empire.  (Of course, that, too, turned out to be mistaken.)  LOL!


So, what should we do?  Should we try to salvage this song whose history has been tarnished with such bad company?  Or should we just leave it in the trash heap of communist garbage?

"The little book, which you recite, is mine, O Fidentinus; but when you recite badly, it begins to be yours".  Marcus Valerius Martialis

I have always believed that marxists are just misguided libertarians who cant bring themselves to admit that their "freedom"  trough a proletarian dictatorship is plain simple slavery to a totalitarian state.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,914
Points 70,630

After reading all these posts, I'm still trying to figure out what a socialist anarchist is and what the original point or emotional upheaval by the first poster was really all about.  Doesn't mean I must know.  I'm fine with a little freedom to wonder.

"Do not put out the fire of the spirit." 1The 5:19
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 140
Points 1,960

Pskapompos:
I believe government exists to ensure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of all mankind.

And I believe there should be a one-way conveyor belt loaded with chocolate coated page three girls going into my house .. but I don't employ a mafia to force everyone to provide it for me.

Base model cars of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but quarter-mile races.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 304
Points 3,965
Solomon replied on Sun, Mar 29 2009 5:39 PM

Pskapompos:
You dont believe in personal responsibility. You dont want to be responsbily for anyone BUT yourself.

A socialist lecturing libertarians on personal responsibility...Huh?

Such balls!

Diminishing Marginal Utility - IT'S THE LAW!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 743
Points 11,795

Pskapompos:

 I long to see the libertarian who loses everything and refuses the public assisstance out of principal. But I dont begrudge you that. When the hammer comes down, and you come asking for handout, Ill be there to give it to you; to put a coat on your back, and help you get back on your feet.  And I expect no thanks for it. 

Why do people continue to make it sound as if libertarians hate charity and the goodwill of others to help one another? Everyone supports that- the only difference is that libertarians wish their charities to earn their money by voluntary means and not by stealing the wealth of others. Wouldn't you agree that's the best option? Why do you feel that its necessary to steal someone else's wealth to help the poor? Why not just persuade people?

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 743
Points 11,795

Pskapompos:

 I long to see the libertarian who loses everything and refuses the public assisstance out of principal. But I dont begrudge you that. When the hammer comes down, and you come asking for handout, Ill be there to give it to you; to put a coat on your back, and help you get back on your feet.  And I expect no thanks for it. 

Why do people continue to make it sound as if libertarians hate charity and the goodwill of others to help one another? Everyone supports that- the only difference is that libertarians wish their charities to earn their money by voluntary means and not by stealing the wealth of others. Wouldn't you agree that's the best option? Why do you feel that its necessary to steal someone else's wealth to help the poor? Why not just convince people to do it? Private charities do all the time.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 142
Points 1,760
Mlee replied on Sun, Mar 29 2009 6:57 PM

First, how does it follow that a system of governance must be a republic? Adam Smith was a smart man, but that doesn't mean that he was always right by any means. 

Government exists to do X is a statement of "is" and therefore relates to why governments form in the real world. They form via murder, plunder, and deciet, they are vice manifest. They exist for the benefit of a small number of criminals. 

Government cannot protect life, it exists to destroy the lives of the majority for a minority. A government has no motivation to protect a bill of rights, therefore it cannot protect one. It will rape it rather quickly. I don't understand what you mean by "the unforseen disapearance of my brethrens wealth" if you mean theft, than since government is founded UPON that very premise, to ask them to protect wealth is idiotic. 

If you mean by government the force of a law making body, to conclude that you ARE the government is a delusion. You do not have the capacity to force the hand of the government, it works the other way around. 

Since when do Libertarians rebel against brotherhood? What is "Progress" What is the evidence for that notion? Unsubstantiated statements aren't arguements, dramatic or no. 

Once again, I should just copy and paste the last part of my statement. Personal attacks are irrelvent. Another irrelvent personal attack. Self-Aggrandizment isn't a sign of goodness, it's a sign of being pretentious. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 84
Points 3,300

Its funny to me that you think if we just get rid of government people wont lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want. That government is the arbiter of immorality. Its really funny that you think government is the problem, when its people. No matter what system, no matter how you order it, people will always seek to corrupt it.

Do you forget that for all their understanding of the inherent corruptness of systems of governance, the founding fathers still created a government... even a national government. But they tried to write it in a way that checked such corruption and allowed for us to change it as we went along. Unfortunately we never instituted the Jeffersonian principle of auditing and rewriting the constitution for every generation.

You people claim to understand interest yet you dont understand progressive taxation (well taxation at all really). But it works on the same principle. 5% means something completely different to the pensioner than it does to the investor. And you know that.

Has there ever been anything in the history of the world a government has done for its people that was for the benefit? I ask you that.

See, you start on the wrong foot by bunching us all as statists. Becuase I think there are things govt can do Im automattically an authoritarian. Thats childish thinking people. Just look around at the parasites that always run to your philosophy when they have nowhere else to justify their blind self-interest. Youll say the same of me but the parasites I protect are the downtrodden. You protect the so-called "winners."

Understand first that most of the poor just never found the right mentor.

Adam E Zandarski

  • | Post Points: 95
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 142
Points 1,760
Mlee replied on Mon, Mar 30 2009 3:20 AM

Look, I am beginning to get the sense that you are a troll, stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that I could eliminate human immorality, I am against the GREATEST example of it. 

The founding fathers were not a unanimous body. You also assume they acted out of pure alturistic concern. 

I never said ANYTHING about interest. I understand why I see all Taxation, progressive or no, as theft. Governments, that is States, DON'T OWN ANYTHING. 

Anyone who holds the position that aggressive violence is a responsible means of achieving goals is an authoritarian. 

I don't think most of the people who run this site are "parasites". So you admit that the poor are parasites, some advocate. And since when are we on the side of the winners? The people here are against mega corps leeching others just as much as hobo's leeching others. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 5 (200 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS