/lit/ - Literature

A cynical democrat with socialist leanings?

Libertarian? Most likely not of the lame ass Ron Paul/Ayn Rand variety though.

based on only everything you've written here, you're an anarcho-syndicalist.

>>2105389
Hmm, seems so.

What is /lit/'s opinion on political ideologies?

>>2105407
That you follow your own political ideology like a Religion. Not in the deity sense, but in the sense that you follow it, and you may always follow it, without really knowing why. Why is someone Liberal or Conservative? Most people want to appear to have studied both sides, and then made an informed decision, but in reality, most people just seem to pick one side and then convince themselves it's the only way through confirmation-bias.

>>2105415
I agree about everything you said, but I'm still interested to hear what is people's opinion on this. I wanna hear what is your political ideology, and why do you think it's the best way to go.

>>2105418

>>2105422
Libertarian socialist.

If you're a member of the working class, there's really no excuse not to be one.

>>2105382

>World is starting to look like 1984 novel.

Depends on where you are. Western Society looks more Brave New World then 1984. Authoritarian governments are adapting accordingly as well, leaning towards Huxley rather then Orwell because it's easier to preserve that way.

As far as Political Ideologies. I stopped caring about what people went for a while ago. I went a dangerous route in thinking and it broke me. Brain shuts down from it. Then you see the world a certain way and you relax a little.

Don't think i made sense but that is fine.

>>2105424
Interesting point, but a large part of class is class consciousness. Can a non-revolutionary worker really be considered as fully a worker? Even EP Thompson makes this point.

I bet this faggot is from Chile, being a chilean myself we deal with this kind of faggots every fucking day of our lives.

>>2105431
same here. You'll rest better not knowing how laws and sausages are made.

>>2105433
Pinochet was a war criminal

(neither OP nor a chilean, but upper class South Americans who talk shit about social justice always annoy me. admittedly my perspective is that of an outsider + i probably shouldn't be involving myself in a foreign country's political affairs but come the fuck on guys)

>>2105433
No I'm not from Chile (OP here).
Just goes to show how small the world is.

>>2105436
>>2105436
Who the fuck is saying Pinochet isn't a fucking faggot, we deal with this fags because they feel lost because they were born in the middle
of a massive change for our country, and the rushed development and other things such as globalization only serve to making us feel lost
but i hate when they think anarchy is the fucking solution.

>Rich get richer, poor get poorer.

Poor get richer in capitalist societies. Completely undisputable fact.

I'm not sure how I would define myself politically. As someone raised in the United States, it's hard for me to imagine living in a world in which capitalism is completely abolished. My guess is that I'm probably a social democrat with nationalist leanings.

>>2105445
What do you think is the solution?
No one can deny that modern world is facing reduced liberties, day by day.
The "best" citizen is the one who does as he's told and doesn't ask any questions.

I'm not some conspiracy theory nutcase but it's pretty obvious world is run by 1% of extra powerful people, with everything done in their favor, while the rest of the people get the short end of the stick.

Problem is, the state is necessary.

>>2105447
*citation needed

>>2105452
>>2105452
and being a whinny faggot that destroys small bussiness and fast food restaurants is going to change the world?
Deal with it shit will never change because power feels fucking awesome and no one will ever throw it away.
People will always be above and under other people, social evolution at its greatest.
Just give people equal rights and let them isolate each other naturally.

>>2105459
>Poor man makes goods/offers services, poor man makes money, gets rich.
>Poor man makes shitty/no goods or services, whines about Capitalism, stays poor.

Capitalism revolves around debt and promotes over-consumerism.
It has it's good sides, but it's far from perfect, and frankly we deserve better in 21st century.

>>2105465
>Rich man makes goods/offers services using subsidies from the government, rich man lobbies Congress to support or oppose legislation that will help or hurt (respectively) his business, becomes richer.
>Poor man makes goods/provides services, can't compete with low prices offered by the rich man's subsidized goods/services, becomes poorer.

>>2105482
True, but no real alternative that could support our way of life exists yet...

>>2105486
>Implying every country in the world has a Congress, or lobbying...

>>2105489
No real alternative exists partly due to the fact many people think they are living the dream.

"Hey, I have house, a wife, 2 kids, a dog and an SUV, what more can I ask?"

If majority of people realized what's going on, maybe we could work something out. Wishful thinking...

>Talks about anarchy, not anarchism
>confirmed for whiny teenage faggot.

>>2105465
>Poor get richer in capitalist societies.
Poor, as in the plural form of poor. Just because one guy somehow manages to slither his way to the top of the food chain doesn't mean that poverty is nonexistent. Also, I highly doubt a "poor" man could maintain or even start up a successful business. In order to keep a business operational you need resources; resources that the average member of the working class does not have. The upper classes need a work force (lower class/poor) to maintain their wealth and they will go out of their way to make sure that some stay poor. Do you honestly think they would just allow another competitor to just enter into the ring?

>>2105497
>talks about anarchy, not anarchism

Well I suggested it as one of the topics of this discussion. Personally, I'd like to see that day, but in order to have anarchy, people, and I mean a huge majority of people need to change their ways drastically. It revolves around the idea that each individual is smart enough to take only what he needs and have set of morals that will make him not commit crimes. We are living in the opposite world, where we are encouraged to consume more then we need and the only thing stopping us from crime is the punishment we'd get from law.

>>2105507
>>2105498
No. We need the poor and the lower-class. We need these people to perform the undesirable duties, like prostitution and factory work. This system works. It could be tweaked by having a way for the intelligent to rise to power to eventually replace the "poor" jobs with robotics, thus allowing some of the lower castes to rise. But right now, humans perform such jobs much more cheaply than robotics.

>>2105447
>Completely undisputable fact.

Ahaha, oh wow. No. The only undisputable fact is that unemployment rate is rising, the debt is all time high, and the currency value has gone to shit. When western countries reach their breaking point, we'll probably have another war that will set the scales to default again.

>>2105512
You really think prostitution is a necessary profession?

By the way, yfw pics don't make your point any more valid.

>>2105507

Anarchy is a state of chaos and disorder. Anarchism is a political theory/system. Get your fucking terms straight if you want to be taken seriously.

Then get off 4chan

>>2105529
Thank you mister wise ass but I already knew that. Point is, anarchism has anarchy as it's goal.

Difference is, how you get there.
You can have a real chaos, like in fucking Somalia, or you can have anarchism which will introduce state without authority where everyone is expected to be respectful and self-sufficient.

>>2105528
Not necessary, no, but desirable if it's regulated correctly. It serves as a great way to give money to those who wouldn't normally be able to make it that easily. And it provides a healthy outlet for repressed fantasies that could, if unvented, create psychological instabilities. There's definitely more efficient ways to achieve these same ends, but prostitution works. But only in certain situations, for example: South Africa was discussing legalizing prostitution but that would cause the trafficking rates to skyrocket, whereas the Netherlands' legalization of prostitution helped the economy because the society is more evolved/mature.

You could be in a country like New Zealand. The supreme court here (usually a joke given our 'constitution' is equal to statute law, not above it) has just declared that the police have been acting illegally by using covert survelliance in tens (if not hundreds) of cases because the law doesn't allow them.


The government's response is to change the law retroactively. By the way, to do so is against our so called 'constitution'.


You can also get arrested for drawings and writings like in other countries too, but that's for another argument.

>>2105539

No it doesn't, you fucking dickhead. The final point of anarchism is to introduce an anarchist system, NOT FUCKING ANARCHY you absolute fucking shithead. Anarchy and Anarchism are not the same fucking thing.

>>2105551
Christ, calm down.

>>2105551
And what is "an anarchist system" if not anarchy?

Looking at your posts so far, it's you who sounds like a teenage faggot.

>>2105529
Jesus fuck you're a retard. Anarchy is simply when there is no government. Chaos and disorder is only a connotation of the word, not the actual definition.

>>2105562
>>2105563
>>2105572

Retards.

You're not anarchists, you're fucking anorchists.

Google it, you illiterate cunts.

>>2105445

>Who the fuck is saying Pinochet isn't a fucking faggot

herman cain

>>2105577
I'm not an anarchist and you don't have to be one to see that you are an irrational moron.

>>2105577
You don't have to understand the entire greek language to know a few simple words. But seeing as you don't even understand this much I went to the trouble to find these two wikipedia pages for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privative_a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon

>>2105445

Pinochet was OK. I thought it was funny when his nose got all long when he told a lie.

>>2105604

>>2105624

Thanks, you've been a great audience.

I've reached the conclusion that humans are incapable of sustaining a pure government of any kind, the dark side of human nature is too strong and corruption inevitably seeps in over time. Now the global economy is in shambles, and great unrest is on the horizon. I won't be putting my faith in any revolution, new candidates, etc. I'm preparing to go live in the forest when shit hits the fan. Seriously..

i wish i could have come with, seriously, really

>>2105424
Libertarian Socialist here, the more I read about the current Chinese/Korean/Japanese system the more I feel like it accurately represents a system of government that I could see myself endorsing.

I say that in that these countries are endorsing a sustainable socialist system and are actively reducing the powers of the state and corporate powers equally over time.

Worship chaos.

>>2105817

I've reached the conclusion that all these so called anarchists and libertarians should spend a week in Somalia and then come back and whine about how unfair having a government is

Anarchy would never work. The ones with the bigger guns would end up controling the rest of the population. No one wants to live in a world where there are no laws to protect you when you sleep.

>>2106364
As if democracy or socialism or whatever would work in Somalia in its current state. That's a ridiculous argument.

>>2105382
anarchists are all just retards since inevitably they fight on the side of the communists who are tyrants worse than anyone else.

>>2105497
>>2105497
>>2105497
but you yourself act master over self?!?!

anarchism contradicts itself. the abolition of power would also entail the abolition of anarchism for anarchism is simply another form and expression of power

>>2106498
>>2106498
to add a point. the only anarchism is anarchism of the mind, anarchism in the 'Stirner' sense i.e the destruction of concepts that hold power through your own acceptance. even a morality of anarchism can't be held as 'true' anarchism

>>2105382

Don't worry about categories, that may end up limiting your ideas. You can borrow ideas from every line of thought and agree with them. People are way too obsessed with fitting everyone in a box.

For instance, I love some ideas in this text:
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Oscar_Wilde__The_Soul_of_Man_under_Socialism.html

But I don't think it defines my ideas. Things are blending up too much to categorize now.

Humans are not evolved far enough to maintain a society without government, decentralization,or peace. Not saying there aren't a few who could maintain this in small collectives, but on a global scale you'd quickly see the primitive aspects of humanity show. Individualist anarchism seems the most feasible though.

>>2106519

>primitive aspects of humanity show

Such as?

>Individualist anarchism seems the most feasible though.

No such thing. Or, well, there is, but such an ideology is either not anarchism at all or utterly pants-on-head retarded.

>Humans are not evolved far enough to maintain a society without government

Evolution isn't a contest, it isn't a straight line, there is no direction to it. Clearly we have had the kind of societies which you describe in the past, before agriculture was introduced, and most likely still do today in the most unexplored of places. This is completely ignoring the established anarchist communities that have been developed from civilization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities

>>2106563
>Such as?
Negating morality. Rape, looting, killing, etc. New Orleans after Katrina is an excellent example. I could mention Japan after the earthquake, but that would be an example of a society that could maintain.

>is either not anarchism at all or utterly pants-on-head retarded.
Elaborate

>>2106596

>Elaborate

Mostly because a strong, tight-knit community is THE building block of an anarchist system, which can be seen from the obvious fact of larger population = more difficulty establishing a working anarchy.

"Individualist anarchists" are the "every man for himself" types, with some hackneyed concepts of teamwork thrown in there for good measure. This is my understanding anyway, I am no expert so I probably shouldn't be making such boisterous remarks.

>>2106611
>Mostly because a strong, tight-knit community is THE building block of an anarchist system,
Yes it's funny how so many anarchists support all that sort of left wing multi-culti we're all earthlings trash which will forever prevent any sort of anarchist society from developing.

>>2106596
>New Orleans after Katrina is an excellent example. I could mention Japan after the earthquake, but that would be an example of a society that could maintain.
I wonder what is the primary difference? Oh wait i'm a racist for pointing out that like usual, niggers are always causing problems.

>>2106618
It's good, because the state is necessary.