laminustacitus: Nitroadict: Torsten: nirgrahamUK:The burden is on you to prove that you arent a socialist. you are doing pretty badly at the moment. Socialist? Coercive or voluntary? Also funny: Libertarian Socialists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism Imo, I would add that socialism cannot be voluntary, & that voluntary socialism is most likely a misnomer, since it describes essentially a type of free-market activity (I would label this as mutualist since mutualism arose from one of the original "libertarian socialists", Prodhoun) that while non-capitalist, would not be against free-market principles. Its all semantics.
Nitroadict: Torsten: nirgrahamUK:The burden is on you to prove that you arent a socialist. you are doing pretty badly at the moment. Socialist? Coercive or voluntary? Also funny: Libertarian Socialists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism Imo, I would add that socialism cannot be voluntary, & that voluntary socialism is most likely a misnomer, since it describes essentially a type of free-market activity (I would label this as mutualist since mutualism arose from one of the original "libertarian socialists", Prodhoun) that while non-capitalist, would not be against free-market principles.
Torsten: nirgrahamUK:The burden is on you to prove that you arent a socialist. you are doing pretty badly at the moment. Socialist? Coercive or voluntary? Also funny: Libertarian Socialists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
nirgrahamUK:The burden is on you to prove that you arent a socialist. you are doing pretty badly at the moment.
Socialist? Coercive or voluntary?
Also funny: Libertarian Socialists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
Imo, I would add that socialism cannot be voluntary, & that voluntary socialism is most likely a misnomer, since it describes essentially a type of free-market activity (I would label this as mutualist since mutualism arose from one of the original "libertarian socialists", Prodhoun) that while non-capitalist, would not be against free-market principles.
Its all semantics.
I know, that was partially the point. Semantics can divide & conquer people from agreeing with one another on things rather easily. Focusing on non-coercion & voluntaryism get's more to the point than idiot arguments over preferences of voluntary & non-coercive "capitalism" to voluntary & non-coercive "socialism". We'd be better off calling it free-market commerce or stateless commerce, imo.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
the problem is that socialists view market exchange as something entirely distinct from "mutual aid". for libertarians all voluntary activity is good. there really is no distrinction (ethicly speaking) from a non-profit organization and a deli
Laughing Man: Is the libertarian revolution also a proletariat revolution? Really ponder this question.
I think it is very appropriate that Marx chose this particular word Proletariat to define the working class in a communist society, as it expresses exactly what one is in such a society : a worker with no wealth and all that it implies .....
As far as I am concerned Libertarian and Proletariat are not compatible with one another....and I am behaving....
marquise:As far as I am concerned Libertarian and Proletariat are not compatible with one another....and I am behaving....
Well a proletariat is an individual surviving on subsistence. He/She could possibly be a libertarian, so there is no incompatibility with a worker and libertarianism. And what's this about behaving?
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Laughing Man:And what's this about behaving?
English is not Marquise's first language. You're a literal guy, but you can't read her English literally. Treat it like poetry.
Laughing Man:Well a proletariat is an individual surviving on subsistence.
I have always viewed the proletariat as someone without access to capital and thus without access to capital goods. Subsistence is a function of not being able to accumulate property.
Laughing Man:Well a proletariat is an individual surviving on subsistence
Exactly! Not to mention that you are making a confusion between worker and proletarian.....
Behaving means that I am measuring my words.....
Hello LS.....I am happy to be back....
liberty student:English is not Marquise's first language. You're a literal guy, but you can't read her English literally. Treat it like poetry.
Thank you.....
marquise: Laughing Man:Well a proletariat is an individual surviving on subsistence Exactly! Not to mention that you are making a confusion between worker and proletarian.....
good points. I'll keep this in mind. Thanks for the clarification.
marquise:Exactly! Not to mention that you are making a confusion between worker and proletarian.....
To Marx there are only workers and capitalists.
thats just comfirmation bias of his dialectic philosophy. to fit into that picture he created a worldview were protons and electrons are analogous to social classes
Laughing Man: marquise:Exactly! Not to mention that you are making a confusion between worker and proletarian..... To Marx there are only workers and capitalists.
Proletarians and Bourgeois....
garegin:thats just comfirmation bias of his dialectic philosophy. to fit into that picture he created a worldview were protons and electrons are analogous to social classes
Indeed, basic class antagonism. The purpose of this discussion is to ask the question as to which ideology is truly the proletariat revolution. I feel it would be a rather decisive blow to remenant Marxist class theorist if libertarians show our ideology is more empowering to the individual.