LifeIsBrief

James Dean... "We trade with businesses because they provide value, and we repay in kind" First... No, that's not how the system works, because we don't live in a capitalist society, and you know that. You give fiat currency, to a state sponsored corporation that gets near zero percent interest loans created from thin air, by the fed. 90% of Apples customers, though possibly not you personally, receive that fiat currency from a state sponsored corporation that gets near 0% interest loans created from thin air... from the fed. Apple doesn't even give that fiat currency to employees... It sends it over to a Chinese company, where they don't even pretend corporations aren't state sponsored communist nonsense. The illusion of banking that we have in the US, is just that, still, I would not recommend giving it up to a nation that actually brags about having a state run economy. When you buy oil, you don't trade value for value either. You trade, somewhat less violent, insane, fiat currency... Directly to an Islamic theocracy, the absolute perfect symbol for insane, violent, fiat currency. This transaction, and the distribution of said currency, makes Islam the fastest growing religion in the world (not to pick on Islam, all religions are corrupt, vicious, power hungry entities that want to tell everyone what to do, this is just the one your oil dollars happens to fund). In both systems, workers are trying to revolt and overthrow these corrupt institutions, but the iron fisted authoritarians murder said workers, with your money. I'm not talking about taxes here, I'm talking about voting with your dollar. If you want China and Saudi Arabia to get your dollar... They're going to use that dollar the way they want to, not the way you want to. If you sent a friend 20 dollars, and it was stolen to buy an underage prostitute once, shame on the thief... If you use the same postage carrier twice and the same thing happens... It becomes your job to stop using that carrier. You are only immune from the morality of your spending patterns, while you remain ignorant. Given that we all know what systems various government sponsored corporations support, it becomes our responsibility to change our spending pattern. Those corporations are evil, so stop giving your money to them... It's not rocket surgery. "It (capitalism) solves problems period"... Yeah, and you know a really cheap way to solve a problem? Chop off the head of the person causing the problem. Who gets to decide what constitutes a problem? People with the money, and power to solve the problem. If consumers continue to give their money to people who solve problems with a knife... People will keep using knives. People with power and money, want power and money. The best way to change their behavior is for consumers to stop giving it to them. You know what the cheapest solution to starvation is? Killing people who don't farm... Don't send your money to the country, or company that proposes that solution, or one day, it will be the "cheap solution", that governs your behavior too. Again, capitalism without self respect, and respect for others, ie personal morality, would be awful. LiveMike "Peoples labor becomes valuable... when there is a high demand relative to supply" So... There's a lot more demand for skilled labor, than there is supply in Africa... So skilled laborers are paid better there right? No, of course not, prices are currently set by statist competition over military resources. Only the localization of those economies will allow them to begin trading value for value. Until then, western governments send money (printed from thin air) for weapons, or weapons, and they send back the one product the warlords can convince children to make. Those weapons stop all progress. It would be nice if capitalism existed anywhere in the world, but it does not, it must be forged. 90% of American jobs are in the servant industry... I mean the "customer service sector of the economy"... 80-87% in Europe, Canada, and Australia. Western governments do not crank out value, they crank out violent statism, with a side of smiles. You know all of this though. "Corporations are created and enforced by state power", "Half your money goes directly to the government"... any of this sounding familiar. This is what I mean by double speak. On the one hand, people talk about how obvious it is, that we don't live in a capitalist, free market system, then a minute later... "The price of labor is set by the market". No, it's not, you just told me it wasn't. That's the problem with the "libertarian republicans" that I'm talking about. It's not the majority of libertarians, but it is the vast majority of Republicans. Corporations cannot be both created and sponsored by governments, and victims of government taxation, at the same time. The government is either seamlessly integrated with corporations, ie fascism (also known as what we have)... or it's not, and maybe some of them can claim some degree of theft. GE pays a negative tax burden in America, despite being profitable. Every major Western nation currently has "protected" industries, and it's violent evil nonsense. The only solution to this particular brand of violent evil nonsense for an individual, is to choose to be an educated consumer, and purchase as few fascist products as possible. Every time you shop fascist, you vote fascist.... again, not rocket surgery. The Walton family, did not invent the general store... They just got the biggest fascist loan to put one everywhere. Do you want more Edison, or more Tesla in this world? If the Koch brothers didn't finance a chemist, then in a capitalist system, the chemist could have gotten a loan from a local bank, or venture capitalist, and started their own business, becoming wealthy... Ie the capitalist/American dream... Instead that chemist makes 40k a year with no pension so the brothers can be billionaires. Booooo! "that's rubbish", is not an argument... Do you know you're buying Nike shoes from children in Africa? Yes. You have to take moral responsibility for your actions. Is it now common knowledge that diamonds mostly profit African warlords who use child labor, and the De Beers family? Okay, if you want to get married, and you want a diamond, instead of some other shiny rock, that's a moral decision. While you're ignorant, in theory, one cannot blame you for supporting warlords, but being an educated consumer is important. Shop somewhere adults are paid to live in houses, or one day you will not be able to afford a house. "I've never been in the military"... Do you pay their salary? Or have you chosen a life of poverty? Those are your options. The violent, aggressive nature of primates, combined with thousands of years of evil governments have forced you to have only those two, but there is still a choice there. Resist... The only thing fascism needs to control the world is "Your sanction"... The only way to stop being governed is to resist. If you don't resist, you're a supporter. Alright, I'm getting a bit too Ayn Rand. If there's anything I love more than complaining, it's rambling incoherently about individualism, objectivism, freedom, and Amurica... but it's Saturday night, and I gotta get out of here. Peace and love friends... PS... The Amish, are crazy religious zealots... but they've never been drafted, don't pay into the federal safety net, and the ones who choose a life of poverty, never have to pay for a war. It's a darn good start. Resist! Refuse! Recycle!

I don't know exactly how to respond to this, because I have some conflicting emotions on the subject, but the best advice I can give is... listen to the soundtrack for yourself, or going to see it live at some local productions. More information is a click away I haven't seen the show live, but now... I'm desperate to. I absolutely love the soundtrack, and I've never enjoyed a musical in my entire life. That said, the answer to your question Popular Anti Social Guy, kind of depends on how much you hate faith/religion. 90% of the time, when I see a deeply religious person, I think to myself "Oh... that poor idiot. Isn't his/her misplaced trust in insane magic, and nonsense adorable?"... Then I see a representative of a large group of them trying to force some baffling public policy down my throat and think "Child abusing psychopathic cults". If you can only identify with the latter perspective, then... This might be too polite to faith for your particular taste. It is a bit too polite for mine at times. Still, maybe it's in the actual show, but in the soundtrack, I don't see anything about this play that is pro faith. It's mostly about the folly of narcissism... It's just not scathing and cruel about it. While I might prefer the play to be a bit more didactic, that just wouldn't be fun to watch. I think "The Book of Mormon" is exactly as vicious a critique of religion, and faith, as you can make, while still being both hilarious and entertaining. I think it's absolutely adorable, and it's the first musical I've ever been genuinely excited to see in a theater. "I Believe; that god has a plan for all of us, I Believe; that plan involves me getting my own planet, And I believe that the current president of the church Thomas Modsen talks directly to god, I am a Mormon, And, Dang It! A Mormon just believes"

The problem with Chomsky, is that he's right, about some "anarcho-capitalists", really being corporate shills without knowing it. It's a more accurate indictment of the broader "freedom movement", ie "libertarian republicans"... but it does apply to some people who self identify ancap. The thing is, while making a reasonable critique of many in the "movement", he goes on to argue only against that group, ignoring all philosophy. If you love fascist corporations, but hate fascism... you're a double speaking moron, who supports fascism. "I love the corporations that exist under fascism, but I hate fascism"... wait... what? That said, the exact same argument is true of "liberals", most are actually corporate fascists, who "hate corporations". Liberals tend to despise big companies, but want everyone to have one insurance company for example... Wait... What? Chomsky often tends towards this... He thinks "we", need to work together to overcome the "corporations", ignoring, that any "we"... simply creates a new corporation. Or, more accurately, a power hungry hierarchal system. The reason anarcho capitalism is superior to anarcho syndical/social ism, is simple. In an anarcho capitalist society, you can start your own hippie commune. In a socialist society, you cannot start a tax free compound. So, in forcing the people who want to be capitalist to join your hippie commune, you create perpetual misery and warfare. Meanwhile, people who want to start a tribe, or commune, in an anarcho capitalist society, are free to do so. Homestead the vast stretches of land going unused, and Boom! It's yours. Enjoy the commune. Thus, anarcho capitalism, allows for competing systems to exist, where almost no other philosophy does. All that said... If people want to be violent assholes... Anarcho capitalism, doesn't fix that. If people are aggressive jerks, freedom does not solve that. Both systems require people to have a personal sense of morality, and responsibility, in order to succeed. If people in America call themselves anarcho capitalist, and then buy "cheap" products, from dictatorships... They're funding the enemy, forcing perpetual war and misery on their own people, and everyone else. People need to evolve first, if anything is to get better... but when they do, capitalism, is a much faster and more peaceful system, which allows that adjustment.

So... I'm from New York originally, thus I've been putting off any interaction with this musical in the hopes that in the next few years I would eventually be visiting family, and shell out the few hundred bucks to see it on Broadway. Unfortunately, I never got around to it, but I love listening to Opie and Anthony, so I've had to hear them rave about it for years... Finally, earlier this week, I gave up and decided to listen to the soundtrack on youtube (which is half the show, given that it's a musical). I know, I'm years late to this party, but... this may be the most beautiful, optimistic piece of artwork, I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. I can't stop smiling. Check out the soundtrack, and if you like it, buy it... trade value for value. Funny, catchy music, brilliant storytelling... I can't say enough about it... there aren't enough ellipses. Tomorrow will be a latter day http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqVzjnENlgA

For some reason my browser won't let me quote or paste arguments on this message board, so I have to rewrite them all, and interacting with nonsense becomes even more laborious than it should be. Still, I'll give it a shot. "Thank you for the outburst. I prefer honesty over the pretense of a conversation." Don't worry, you never offered any pretense of a conversation. I wrote about the hypocrisy of "libertarian republicans" fighting for jobs where they stole your money. I wrote about the insanity and double speak of "capitalists" buying slaves from dictators, and then suggested that self respect, self reliance, and avoiding "victimization", were the keys to overcoming the violent and destructive situation we find ourselves in. You called me "wretched", for "blaming the victim"... Not exactly rational discourse, no matter how down voted I get. "You didn't suggest defying authority, you suggested not trading with people simply because they're victims" No... I suggested not sending money to dictatorships, so that people eventually revolt against dictators. You're suggesting that paying a warlord, to force children to make your shoes, or farm diamonds, is a "secondary effect of your purchase", and "not propping up a totalitarian state"... also known as double speak. So, being taxed, makes you a victim, but paying a warlord to enslave children is a "secondary effect"... I understand, and that logic is horrifying. "Is it okay to disagree for reasons I have rationally explained?" If you rationally explained how buying diamonds from African children paid by warlords, or buying oil from Islamic theocracies that stone people to death is somehow moral... That would be quite a feat. Still, it's okay for you to disagree for any reason... even insane ones, so long as you don't want to force me to agree with you. Your explanations lack any morality, or rationality, of course. To have a rational moral code, one would have to include some of the "secondary effects" you scoff at... but you can disagree with anything you like, you own you. Aggression, is a natural force among chimpanzees fighting over scarce resources. Like gravity, in order to overcome it, human beings must be incredibly rational. We didn't get to the moon, or launch satellites by crying about how we're all victims. Are we victims, of natural forces like aggression? Yes... I only argued against victimization. I did not argue that government is treating us fairly, only that in order to overcome it, you have to think like a rebel, not a victim. It is empowering to see yourself as the controller of your own life, and the author of your story, and no amount of threatening violence can take that away from you. If all people saw themselves this way, they would become ungovernable, and win the war against aggression, insanity, and doublespeak. Your focus, and then rebranding of this one, very small aspect of my argument (which was about how "Republican libertarians" are hypocrites fighting to steal your money and there's no such thing as free trade with dictatorships), proves to me that you don't want to deal with the implications of those arguments. You don't want to admit, that at the same time you're a "victim", you're also buying slaves and financing warlords, and that is inherently immoral. I'm sorry that those things are inherently immoral, and that makes you sad... but it's the objective truth. All of humanity, must become ungovernable, in order to overcome tyranny. We can't just say were "capitalists", while financing violent monsters. There are only two votes that matter in this world... where you spend your money... and who you have sex with. Everything else is window dressing, back slapping, and complaining. Still, down vote my "outburst", if it makes you feel better. After all, what matters are your emotions, not what terrorists and psychopaths, you choose to fund PS... Yes, most human beings fund psychopaths, fundamentalists, governments, and terrorists... but that doesn't make it right. In order to claim any sort of rational morality, one would have to stop funding these things, and then suffer the consequences. Strike! It may seem like an unattainable goal in the modern world... but it's one of the only goals worth striving for, in my not so humble, somewhat bloviating opinion.

So... Everyone's a victim... and that doesn't make the word meaningless... I understand. I'm sorry that you're a Chimpanzee, and aggression is exactly like gravity. Cry into your hanky some more, that will help. How dare I suggest you defy authority? That's not an anarchists job... You deserve to be born in a world where authority already gave up, because you're a beautiful and unique snowflake. I get it. You're cherry picking way too much here. Saying "Do this, fill out some forms, or I'll throw a punch at you", is not the same as throwing a punch. If everyone's a victim, it doesn't need a word... we already have one, human. Edit: I just want to add... I didn't give negative feedback to the guy who insinuated that I was pro rape. If you down voted my opinion because I said "Cry into your hanky", but didn't down vote the pro rape nonsense... You have a very strange sense of fair play, and rational discourse. PS. Taxation is theft... but it's not rape. Stop talking about how bad you have it. No one has ever been raped and thought "This is an awful lot like being born, and having a government". Get over yourself. Fight the system, don't just complain about it, contribute to it, and then complain about being raped... That's insane.

I had a few beers last night before "True Detective", and "The Walking Dead", so I was in a bit of a "I'm gon' talk bout' freedom", mood. I apologize for the bloviating. Still... When you say every human being born in the last 5,000 years, is a victim... it makes the word victim meaningless. Comparing that to an actual rape victim who had aggressive force used on them, on top of having a government like everyone else, shows no sense of scope or degree. There are thousands of easy ways to avoid taxes. Just being poor, is number one... you can actually leech off the system if you're poor. I think that is immoral as well, but people leeching off the system, aren't being stolen from, or "raped". The other important point, is, this is about "Republican libertarians", not anarchists. "Republican libertarians", are fighting tooth and nail, to get the job of stealing your money... So, when they claim to be victims of taxation, they're acting like evil, violent, psychopaths. The people who fund these candidates, like the Koch brothers, constantly claim to be victims of taxation as well. They pay lower tax rates than their employees, thus the system is actually designed to hinder their competition, and enhance their power. Writing tax laws that benefit corporations, does not make you the victim of those laws designed to enhance your corporation. "Libertarians", who want to run for office, or got wealthy in protected industries, are speaking double speak, period. I am not "talking out of my ass", when I talk about large groups of people refusing to submit to taxation destroying government either... I'm talking about the American Revolution. If a large enough percent of the population, refused to submit, they would no longer have to. The "rational" response, to being threatened with violence, is shooting the madman in the face... Not submitting to his demands. Most people are certainly not willing to go that far, and currently I would not recommend it, but it is cowardice. The way to overcome it, is courage, and self reliance. Unfortunately, it seems like it will take centuries or a collapse, for that confidence to return, but it has been proven to exist in human beings before, and it will again. No nation has the capacity to put down a strike, or revolt, when the military or police are participants. It's possible for the war against evil to be won... It's just going to take some time. Until then, ask any psychologist, if you permanently label yourself, and become a "victim"... the rapist wins. Peace and love friends.

Did you engage in this exchange in the pursuit of truth? Because, there's lots of healthy disagreement in what I wrote, that you're simply ignoring, so you can focus on what a word means. The discussion of victimization started this... not victims. I said "This is another problem I have with "Republican Libertarians". They always talk about how poverty creates a culture of victimization... then bitch about being the victims of government. You are not a victim." There are two different ways of using the word victim. One is "A crime happened to me"... One is "this is my title, I am a victim", ie victimization. I was talking about how if "poverty creates a culture of victimization"... It can successfully be argued on the same terms, that "Republican Libertarianism", creates a "culture of victimization by government". So, I may have used the word victim improperly once or twice, but I did so in a way that you are familiar with. My argument is that, you are not part of a culture of victimization. You have not been wronged, you have been born into the same messed up animalistic, violent, and competitive world as everyone else. Does it suck? Yes... but to compare being born with a government, to being raped, is crazy. Are government and rapists both immoral? Yes, but there are degrees. Also, taxes are avoidable, you can just live in poverty, and join the Amish... A shitty option admittedly, but it exists. This is what I am talking about, when I say you are not a victim. Just being born, in the same situation as every human being in the last 5 thousand years has been born, does not give you the right, to wear the mantle of "rape victim", or compare yourself to one, as if it's all the same. Having been raped, makes you "the victim of an aggressive act"... Saying "I'm a victim", is a title, or victimization. I don't recommend, that anyone ever think of themselves as a victim. If you act as though you have property rights, and a government official beats or murders you... You have become the victim of a crime. Until then, you haven't been raped, and you're just complaining. Threats of violence, and violence, are not equal... Why? Capacity. If large groups of people forced the government to make good on its perverse threats, there would no longer be a government. Until then, we're cowards, giving in to threats... I recommend not negotiating with terrorists. Edit: In essence... Prove that nonsense being spewed by violent morons, or "threats", are a violation of your property rights. Every living chimpanzee in history, is constantly being threatened by bigger stronger animals, or larger groups. Stand up to them, and see what happens, that's called courage. If all human beings did this... Threats would stop working. Strike!... Atlas Shrugged style, or else you're just complaining PS... Complaining is awesome, and all governments are horrible... but complaining is not the same as defying, and being assaulted. When you defy and are assaulted... that's courageous, and you are now the victim of a crime. Courageous people however, rarely say "I'm a victim". They say things like "Give me liberty, or give me death"

The truth about "True Detective" is... That it's pretty darn good. It's a relatively formulaic, one season, one major criminal, detective story on HBO, but it may be one of the first shows on TV, to accurately portray a skeptic pessimist who still gets up in the morning. In the end, a very well written, funny, strange, dark, and interesting few hours. Here are some spoiler free clips, for those who want to test it out, before plunging into the complete 8 episode series. www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RfUj09pWfM www.youtube.com/watch?v=A97B3Ky5Osg "I tell you Marty, I been up in that room looking out those windows every night here just thinking, it's just one story. The oldest." "What's that?"' "Light versus Dark." "Well, I know we ain't in Alaska, but it appears to me, that dark has a lot more territory." "Yeah, you're right about that." ... "You're looking at it wrong... the sky thing" "How's that?" "Well, once there was only dark... You ask me... The light's winning"

I think we may not agree on the definition of "victim". To me, victim is a title people clothe themselves in to avoid responsibility. "They stole my taxes"... "Well, did you work in a legitimate business?"... Okay, you chose to pay tax. Do I recommend going on a crime spree? Of course not, but it is an option. I worry that many "capitalists", think that the world owes them, not being threatened, simply because they were born. Just like you don't owe the world anything, the world does not owe you anything. People will threaten you, they have always threatened one another. Some people are dicks... That's life. You're not a victim, you're the hero of a story, that you are the author of. Some people do less with it, than others. Semantics really... Was it wrong for someone to rape, steal from, or jail you? Yes, but it does not change who you are as a person. You always have the ability to fight, until consciousness escapes your body. If you choose to fight, paying people who choose to submit, does not further the cause. It's a bad idea, and one with moral consequences. Do 99.9 % of people submit? Of course, but it doesn't make it objectively right, just a good excuse. Excuses are the reason we're looking at a multi century time frame, rather than a couple years of unrest

I did not ignore your first point. Capitalism cannot compete with fascism on price... Fascism is cheaper. Until there is an enormous moral awakening, it would be a waste of time and money to try to compete with entities given "free money", who trade with dictators. Starting a moral business, won't suddenly surround you with moral customers. Property rights exist. "When a government claims ownership of you"... people claim all sorts of nonsense. Most people claim magic sky gods are watching over them. Victims exist in the past tense. When they kill you for asserting your claim to property rights, then you're a victim, until then you're making choices, and complaining, just like me. As long as you're alive, you're the hero of your own story, not a victim. Trade between nations, does not involve you freely choosing to pay a laborer to make you something in a poor country, it involves you bribing an official to threaten them. When you buy a gallon of oil, almost none of it is freely traded to the people responsible for drilling it. You can choose to ignore this, or call it "secondary", but it's a moral choice that you are making, and responsible for, just like every other individual. So long as the vast majority of individuals want to abuse human beings for cheap crap, competing with that model, will cause you to simply lose your investment. Capitalism doesn't fix problems, it's the non violent mechanism human beings can use to fix their own problems. Currently, not many people are interested in working that hard... Hopefully over the centuries that changes, but until then, you do what you can. Personally I'm strongly leaning towards homesteading nowadays, but we'll see if even I have the fortitude for such an endeavor. I really want to design solar concentrators and electric cycles, on a farm, but to start a business would involve supporting a bunch of the psychopaths claiming to own people, and.... no thanks. Still that's a choice, I can contribute to an immoral system, or I can wander off and join the Amish, homestead in poverty, or become a criminal. They're crappy choices. It would be nicer if people were sane, and caring, but that's not really up to me. I know... I'm all smiles and rainbows, just a genuine joy to discuss things with www.youtube.com/watch?v=90OrQIpF60o "Hope is irrational" Huey Freeman "This is the most depressing fing kid, I have ever met in my life" Werner Herzog

As to the first response... It's not a feeling, it's the truth. If treating people like livestock, attracts more customers, because it's cheap... life for people will be awful under a capitalist society. Customers need to constantly value labor more in their purchasing decisions, or the value of their own labor will decrease. What communists tend to want, is very similar to what the average Republican wants... to have their cake and eat it too. What the modern Republican party, and most (not all) of its associated "libertarians" want, is for the labor of "other" people, to stay cheap, while they continue to believe "I'm a beautiful and unique snowflake worth millions". What did the Walton family invent? Nothing, completely replaceable cogs in the statist machine. I'd be shocked if the people currently running Koch industries actually invented, or manufactured a new chemical. These aren't "industrialists", and they're not valuable. Also, if you don't believe this, you believe in fascism, not capitalism. Every time you (or I, we all make mistakes), buy Nike shoes, you're voting with your dollar. You want a government like the one in Nigeria, or some other poor African dictatorship. Traditional Republicans, and some "capitalists", will tell you "No, we're helping them, trade is always good"... nonsense, almost all of that money goes straight to the warlords, and you're inherently devaluing not just the value of your own countries manual labor, but the worlds. Capitalism without self respect, is a race to the bottom. When you buy oil from Saudi Arabia, you're casting a vote for Islamic theocracy, and honor killings... period. To the last point, as I suggest in my argument above, no it's not a typo. Also, being governed is by choice, and there is no such thing as a victim. This is another problem I have with "Republican libertarians"... They always talk about how poverty creates a "philosophy of victimization"... Then bitch about being victims of government. You're not a victim. The military could go on strike tomorrow. People have chosen governance, it was and is, a terrible choice. You could live outside the law right now, either through barter, or crime... you could join a commune, live on a reservation, wander into empty territory and homestead it, become Amish (they don't pay taxes for war, ss, or medicare, thus if they make less than 12k a year, they don't pay any taxes). There are a whole bunch of choices you make, and one of them is to be governed. If enough people stop choosing it, it will stop happening. Once again however, this is a multi century process. I haven't even fully achieved my goal of living on homesteaded land for less than 15 k a year yet, it's a long process, but it's a choice, you're not a victim.

The problem is, he's right about a large chunk of right wing American libertarians. In fact, recently, even here on FDR, especially in the Peter Schiff guest spots the "I'm not a Republican, but..." nonsense has been really bothering me. They aren't the lesser of two evils, they're religious zealots, and Wal Mart is their new Demi god. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard "Corporations are a construction of the state", within 5 lines of a defense of McDonalds, I'd be able to start a nice health savings account. In order for anarcho capitalism to work, and not turn into corporate fascism, people would have to stop shopping at corporations that treat people like livestock, otherwise you're demanding the government change, and outlaw or break them up... thus you're really a communist. I say that with no ill will, unlike many here, I think hippie communes are cool, I'd just prefer a free market system, because governments never will change, they are violence incarnate. Also, in my experience, what's popular, is almost never right. What draws me to the ancap philosophy, is that it's the only one suggesting "We don't need psychopaths with guns to fix these problems". Thus, it is the only actual anarchist philosophy, which is not "opposition of government", as Noam defines it (which is where I stopped reading because it gave me a headache btw), but "no rulers". In order to have no rulers, large groups of people cannot simply force other large groups of people to fall in line. Anarchists can't simply become a majority, and win elections. Anarchism, in my mind, is the philosophy of making yourself, as an individual, ungovernable. The only way for an individual to be ungovernable, is to refuse to buy products from the governed, and refuse to take their money. That's the slow, multi century revolution in my mind. Every time I shop at Wal Mart, I am failing to live up to my own values. Every time I buy a cell phone, anywhere, I am deciding to support a dictatorship, and encourage their exploitation of workers, rather than not have a cell phone. I shop at Wal Mart, and buy a cell phone every few years, thus voting with my dollar "China's got it right". Until people stop doing that, hopefully myself first, we're all going to be statists. The problem with anarcho syndicalism, and communism, is that the few true believers who want a stateless society eventually, don't realize that until all individuals overcome the desire to shop at fascist corporations, you're going to be demanding the state force them to, through violence. I don't want to force people to live my values... That would be extremely hypocritical, because even I fail to live up to them at times. I want human beings to have objectively better values, and hold themselves up to a higher moral standard, because I see that as the only way to eventually attain a peaceful society. In a perfect world, the workers will eventually refuse to accept payment from the ruling class, or "capitalist class" as the communists improperly call it, because they've already got good things going on in their own life. Billionaires will be paying millions, or trading artwork for loaves of bread, since everyone knows what they did to earn money (manipulated an entity of violence), and no one likes them, or has any desire to trade with them. It's fun to dream...

I want determinism to be true, so I can get hammered and eat junk food all day. Thus, I choose to side with the people who believe free will is a myth. We must begin convincing toothbrushes immediately

1. My problem with avoiding any reputational consequences for copying is simple, "first to market", means nothing in the internet age. Should there be a state enforcing copyright law, hell no, but interpersonally, people should still discourage those who refuse to trade value for value. The fact is, that new ideas are rare, and they are valuable. There are almost no innovations in this society. Cures in medicine, aren't stepwise. Innovating, is a type of skilled labor... again, see Tesla. The years spent crafting theory, before you come up with a unique innovation, are labor. This is how I see things, apparently most people disagree with me nowadays. I think that's why we lack innovation, but it's just a theory. 2. Capitalism is a theory crafted by men, very shortly after evolution was discovered, with a purpose. In order to put it into practice, they needed to convince people that it functionally worked better than other theories... like "god does everything", "long live the king", or "we need the aristocracy to protect the poor from themselves". I don't think I'm a social Darwinist, nor was capitalism designed in that way, because that would suggest creativity, productivity, and skill are genetic... I think they're choices. Steel sharpens steel, but if you're made of iron, then chopping wood is more fun, you have to choose to sharpen your skills, and mind, it doesn't come naturally. I wish nerds were sexy... They're not. Period. No one's drooling after the chess or math clubs. EQ, doesn't build new things, math, science, philosophy, and experimentation build new things. Politicians have high EQ, it's called sociopathy, but they have a lot more sex then the science nerds. If people who could build, reason, innovate, or fix things were sexy, the world would already be stateless. There's a lot of opinion in this writing, but I think it's really weird, that this forum talks about "mens issues", and "capitalism" a lot, but rarely connects the two. If we didn't subsidize Biff's charismatic sexuality, people would stop having sex with him. It was designed to aid the reproductive fitness of Leonard, not sociopaths, I mean "people with high EQ"... Hopefully the names in that analogy were self explanatory. All this said, it was designed by men, without thought of women who were innovative, productive, and skilled. Men have failed to find women good at math, science, and philosophy sexy, as much as women have failed to do the same. Personally, I think striving for gender neutral single parent incomes, could fix this problem slowly over time (freely, not through state minimum wage, or any of that nonsense). If people don't value innovation, productivity, math, science, and philosophy sexually... those traits will cease to exist. 3. Tesla didn't like money, didn't really like women either. He had lots of social, and sexual issues... but my point remains valid, he shouldn't need to ask for more money... value should be traded for value. I know "should" is a dangerous word around here, but hey, I'm obviously deep in the realm of opinion and emotion on this topic. Adam Smith, had very strong goals, and desires, when he wrote "The Wealth of Nations", and "The Theory of Moral Sentiments", both are required reading if you want to understand "capitalism", which I admit is a very nebulous word. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aiyo2K7DvfA Joe Rogan uses dumb people outbreeding smart people, to explain the pyramids. "If I left you alone in the woods with a hatchet... How long before you could send me an email?" Explicit.