-
Hello again! It's been a while, but i'm back! :p I've just published a text on my blog wich might interest you. I think we could translate the title this way : " Sketch of a liberal-egalitarian, how to overcome the modern paradigms." Here is the original link in french : http://unionrevolte.blogspot.com/2011/03/esquisse-dun-programme
-
@Smiling Dave : "winning many of us over" I am not trying to convince anyone from here, there are other people wich are alot easier to convince. I think, for most of you, your 'opinion is done already' (if we can say that in english). I am explaining what is socialism, since I have read alot of confusion from the libertarians between
-
@Anarcho : "Will someone who's productivity is many times greater then someone else's recieve the same salary as the much less productive person(s)?" Of course, why would a gold seeker would be paid more than a forester? Because gold is more expansive than wood you think? And what about the person who is trying to invent a machine
-
@Terrigan : You say "direct democracy can't possibly work without significant division by geographic area". Please explain why. If you give equal economic power to each people, they are free to invest it in whatever they want, no matter the geographic area. This is direct democracy : all economic power to the individuals. Direct democracy
-
@ z1235 : C'mon, I am starting to think you just don't want to understand our point (when I say 'we' or 'our', it is the liberal-egalitarists). Look, the VIA-RAIL in Canada was built with asian slaves. I am not pretending we should get all the names and pay our dept, I am saying we own asia an historical dept. Not to some individual
-
@Felipe : "What is "historical copyright"?". I thought it was clear. Presently, the copyrights are of about 70 years. We will expand this to the last 30 000 years of human history. The "historical copyright" is for the use of universal human knowledge (writing, molding, numbers, mathematic formulas, etc.). "Only if
-
@z1235 : I will try to explain the best that I can, even if I am not sure to understand you question (sorry, my english is not perfect, mayne you could try in french?). What we have against private property is that it uses PUBLIC historical knowledge and ressources to create PRIVATE profit and economic influence. For example, Bill Gates, to invent Windows
-
@Aristippus : Look, you are free to do what you want, when you want. But if you refuse to help the society by doing the minimum work that no one whan to do, then I don't think you should benefit of the society. If you refuse to do the littering, then you will simply wont get your social salary and you will be invited to take care of yourself alone
-
@Felipe : I am aware that libertarians are not the same as anarchist and I am also aware that they do not defend the status-quo. I think we (neo-marxist) are closer than libertarians that you think. We share the same wish to limit (and even eradic) the economic power of the State to maximize individual economic emancipation. The only difference is that
-
@Aristippus : "What if they freely negotiate to do only 1 job each?". Look, it is simple, the workers are FREE to do as they want, so if they all want to do 1 job each, they can! But wich one will do the littering if no one want to do it? The answer is all of them. The littering will be equally seperated between each 3 workers, even if they