Controversial General Political Discussion

[NAMELESS]

You still continued your argument after saying wars are inevitable. Wow!

So do we have safety at streets? Or people are getting robbed all the time? Assaulted and stuff?

And it gets funnier because the ones defending state aka leftists are the ones who complain the most about police and army. It's so absurd.

And despite all that we still see at the south of Brazil where it gets flooded how people HELP each other DESPITE the absence or the very few presence of the state.

Humans can be as both bad or good. Is not a state that will change a thing.

You are day dreaming now. War will always happen. Without states or not. Even Chimps go to war with each other. Safety on the streets=armed citizes+police forces. The biggest problem with ancap is law. How are people going to dish out punishment? For example: Are you in favor or against death penalty? Some people might believe some kids playing in their yard unauthorized is enough of a reason to shoot them.The kids family will probably think otherwise. In anarchism,people do whatever the fuck they feel like doing. This is a recipe for disaster. Anarchism is just as utopian as Communism.

 

[Logiko]

first you need to have options.

We don't have options anymore. If we keep this pace, poverty will start to become the norm, insecurity will rise and people who don't understand the problem will turn toward the far right to solve all of those problems. And this will only end very badly.

We need to tax the rich and publically shame those who prefer to sneak out if we need to. This is not an option anymore, this is one of the only solutions.

If necessary, laws needs to be created to force them to stay on territory.

Sometimes the rich have a monopoly on something or the cheapest product/service available so the average joe ends up giving money to them.

No one is untouchable.

I already told you why it doesn't work and why it will never happen.

And I told you how we can prevent that phenomenon. Yes, some might flee. That's why we need to make them stay, and it will not be by giving them gift.

This is debatable.

The fact that taxing more the poor than the rich is ridiculous is debatable ? What The actual F*ck ??

Why someone has to pay more because they have more money if everyone is suppose to be equal?

Because we live in a society where every one participate and its F. just that people who get money on the back of other people share said wealth?

You are inhuman dude if you believe that equality is supposed to let rich people get richer and poor people get poorer without creating a balance.

If you don't want to give to people, don't live with other people and create a town in the sahara desert.

In anarchism,people do whatever the fuck they feel like doing.

anarchism =/ lack of order

 

[Herrera95]

You are day dreaming now. War will always happen. Without states or not. Even Chimps go to war with each other. Safety on the streets=armed citizes+police forces. The biggest problem with ancap is law. How are people going to dish out punishment? For example: Are you in favor or against death penalty? Some people might believe some kids playing in their yard unauthorized is enough of a reason to shoot them.The kids family will probably think otherwise. In anarchism,people do whatever the fuck they feel like doing. This is a recipe for disaster. Anarchism is just as Utopian as Communism.

The absence of a state is not absence of a law or order. There will be laws that the society living in that region will dictate and whoever wants to go there will be under those laws. If you don't wanna follow those laws you just don't go there. Not much different from what it is today. The big thing is not obligate anyone to pay for a governament they doesn't want and specially not having a state to provide services they can't provide. Private initiative for everything.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

The fact that taxing more the poor than the rich is ridiculous is debatable ? What The actual F*ck ??

Who the fucking is saying that? What is debatable is how you measure the taxing. If it is absolute values or percentage values. And if it is based on income like I did or based on another measure.

Because we live in a society where every one participate and its F. just that people who get money on the back of other people share said wealth?

You are inhuman dude if you believe that equality is supposed to let rich people get richer and poor people get poorer without creating a balance.

If you don't want to give to people, don't live with other people and create a town in the sahara desert.

Ok everyone participates but why someone has to pay more than the other if that said one usually is getting less from the governament? You want rich to pay more taxes so governament can provide services for the poor while the rich barely gets one? This is far from fair.

You are the one defending systems that DOES make the richer getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I"m the revolutionary here trying to make something else.

You the one who has to live in Sahara Desert because there is no property there for you to stole so you can create your delusional society there and then comeback saying that is was a mistake.

 

[NAMELESS]

The absence of a state is not absence of a law or order. There will be laws that the society living in that region will dictate and whoever wants to go there will be under those laws. If you don't wanna follow those laws you just don't go there. Not much different from what it is today. The big thing is not obligate anyone to pay for a governament they doesn't want and specially not having a state to provide services they can't provide. Private initiative for everything.

You fail to see the problem in that. That lack of unified law will breed conflict. Read history and learn how the world worked before the creation of nation states.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

The absence of a state is not absence of a law or order. There will be laws that the society living in that region will dictate and whoever wants to go there will be under those laws. If you don't wanna follow those laws you just don't go there. Not much different from what it is today. The big thing is not obligate anyone to pay for a governament they doesn't want and specially not having a state to provide services they can't provide. Private initiative for everything.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

Who the fucking is saying that? What is debatable is how you measure the taxing. If it is absolute values or percentage values. And if it is based on income like I did or based on another measure.


Ok everyone participates but why someone has to pay more than the other if that said one usually is getting less from the governament? You want rich to pay more taxes so governament can provide services for the poor while the rich barely gets one? This is far from fair.

You are the one defending systems that DOES make the richer getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I"m the revolutionary here trying to make something else.

You the one who has to live in Sahara Desert because there is no property there for you to stole so you can create your delusional society there and then comeback saying that is was a mistake.

State=constitution,tribunals,army and police. Anything else isn't need and will create more problems.

 

[Herrera95]

You fail to see the problem in that. That lack of unified law will breed conflict. Read history and learn how the world worked before the creation of nation states.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

State=constitution,tribunals,army and police. Anything else isn't need and will create more problems.

The world was no different after creation of states if not worse. You can have everything that state has without having a state itself. It is just an intermediate making the services you want to cost more and opening an opportunity to corruption.

 

[NAMELESS]

The world was no different after creation of states if not worse. You can have everything that state has without having a state itself. It is just an intermediate making the services you want to cost more and opening an opportunity to corruption.

No way,professional armies require a level of organization and funding that small communities will never be able to have.

 

[Herrera95]

No way,professional armies require a level of organization and funding that small communities will never be able to have.

Yes they will once they stop paying taxes to governament and are allowed to improve their economy without the useless regulations.

 

[NAMELESS]

Twitter is so much better than this threat.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

Yes they will once they stop paying taxes to governament and are allowed to improve their economy without the useless regulations.

Small communities don't generate enough income. Some military gear costs millions. Also,who is going to take care of nukes and other weapons of mass destruction?

 

[Logiko]

Who the fucking is saying that?

You, by questionning this assertion, and basically your entire discourse about politics support that.

If it is absolute values or percentage values. And if it is based on income like I did or based on another measure.

There is no such things as absolute taxing. So of course its based on income. The problem arrives when rich people think they should have a equal % as poor people when in reality they win 1000 time more for some.

why someone has to pay more than the other

Because its just. And for two reasons:
1. The income of rich people does not come out of nowhere, its a result of the production of worker
2. Because winning more means that you have more financial securities and overall stronger impact on society than others, so this must be equalized.

If you want to keep your own money. You take a trip naked in the sahara desert in front of an oasis and you start to build your own town. But as long as you live in society, you have a moral duty to others when you have more.

You want rich to pay more taxes so governament can provide services for the poor while the rich barely gets one? This is far from fair.

Actually this IS what being fair means. You are confusing being equal with being just. What you think is that we should have equal treatment in front of society. But you are completely missing the fact that society do not treat us the same and that we do not have the same chances in life.

You are - once again - completely blinded by your belief in meritocracy. In other word, you are blinded by a bias that we call "the belief in a just society".

Its time for you to understand that society is not just. And that your neighboor doesn't necessarily has the same chances as you. This is why when you can, you have a moral duty to help.

You are the one defending systems that DOES make the richer getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

No mate, you are completely projecting. I'm doing the opposite.

Its you, right nown with your belief in meritocracy that JUSTIFY a system that believes that people can be rich just by making some efforts. And since its not how reality works, you are justifying a system that keeps the poor poor and make the rich richer.

You are an anarcho capitalist mate. Its not the political side that is taking the side of the oppressed and the work force. Its the side that takes the side of the rich and those who don't want to be responsible for others.

In other words, you are taking the side of selfish peoples.

Its time for you to wake up. You don't want a state ? Fine. I can understand that, ultimately I believe that we should be getting rid of it too. But that does not mean that you should overlook the reality of the world and the reality of SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHES.

So you want to have a stateless ideology ? Fine. Then start by understanding materialism, get rid of liberals and idealistic myths like meritocracy and start to learn more about the structural nature of the social field. Then you will have a chance to actually become a real anarchist.

I"m the revolutionary here trying to make something else.

You are completely oblivious if you think you are a revolutionary mate.

Capitalism is LITERALLY our system right now. So being a anarcho capitalism means that you would take this concept and multiplying it by 100.

You are not a revolutionnary, you are the dog of the system. You are literally prepared and willing to multiply the negative effects of the current state of capitalism just to justify its own myth that economic freedom is the graal of the future. You are part of a lunatic group that will act as the executionner of society. Through people like you or Milei, the effects of capitalism will multiply:
- Women will lose more rights
- Climate change will accelerate
- The poor will get less right and will increase in number hundred fold
- Insecurity will multiply
- Racism will rise like never before
- And some war will be started

And what it will create is a faster rise of fascist ideas.

Your ideology is a DANGER.

You need to understand just how out of touch with reality you really are and you need to read some actual science for once.

 

[NAMELESS]

You, by questionning this assertion, and basically your entire discourse about politics support that.


There is no such things as absolute taxing. So of course its based on income. The problem arrives when rich people think they should have a equal % as poor people when in reality they win 1000 time more for some.


Because its just. And for two reasons:
1. The income of rich people does not come out of nowhere, its a result of the production of worker
2. Because winning more means that you have more financial securities and overall stronger impact on society than others, so this must be equalized.

If you want to keep your own money. You take a trip naked in the sahara desert in front of an oasis and you start to build your own town. But as long as you live in society, you have a moral duty to others when you have more.


Actually this IS what being fair means. You are confusing being equal with being just. What you think is that we should have equal treatment in front of society. But you are completely missing the fact that society do not treat us the same and that we do not have the same chances in life.

You are - once again - completely blinded by your belief in meritocracy. In other word, you are blinded by a bias that we call "the belief in a just society".

Its time for you to understand that society is not just. And that your neighboor doesn't necessarily has the same chances as you. This is why when you can, you have a moral duty to help.


No mate, you are completely projecting. I'm doing the opposite.

Its you, right nown with your belief in meritocracy that JUSTIFY a system that believes that people can be rich just by making some efforts. And since its not how reality works, you are justifying a system that keeps the poor poor and make the rich richer.

You are an anarcho capitalist mate. Its not the political side that is taking the side of the oppressed and the work force. Its the side that takes the side of the rich and those who don't want to be responsible for others.

In other words, you are taking the side of selfish peoples.

Its time for you to wake up. You don't want a state ? Fine. I can understand that, ultimately I believe that we should be getting rid of it too. But that does not mean that you should overlook the reality of the world and the reality of SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHES.

So you want to have a stateless ideology ? Fine. Then start by understanding materialism, get rid of liberals and idealistic myths like meritocracy and start to learn more about the structural nature of the social field. Then you will have a chance to actually become a real anarchist.



You are completely oblivious if you think you are a revolutionary mate.

Capitalism is LITERALLY our system right now. So being a anarcho capitalism means that you would take this concept and multiplying it by 100.

You are not a revolutionnary, you are the dog of the system. You are literally prepared and willing to multiply the negative effects of the current state of capitalism just to justify its own myth that economic freedom is the graal of the future. You are part of a lunatic group that will act as the executionner of society. Through people like you or Milei, the effects of capitalism will multiply:
- Women will lose more rights
- Climate change will accelerate
- The poor will get less right and will increase in number hundred fold
- Insecurity will multiply
- Racism will rise like never before
- And some war will be started

And what it will create is a faster rise of fascist ideas.

Your ideology is a DANGER.

You need to understand just how out of touch with reality you really are and you need to read some actual science for once.

That is rich coming from a guy that believes in a ideology that has many genocides and dictatorships under its belt

 

[Logiko]

That is rich coming from a guy that believes ina ideology that has many genocides and dcitatorships under its belt

Since when does socialism or even Troskism (since that the ideology I'm the closest to right now) is responsible for many genocide or dictatorships ?



I'm not a maoist neither am I a leninist or a stalinist mate

 

[NAMELESS]

Since when does socialism or even Troskism (since that the ideology I'm the closest to right now) is responsible for many genocide or dictatorships ?



I'm not a maoist neither am I a leninist or a stalinist mate

Just look at Latin America and how people with similar rhetoric as you protect the drug cartels . The left is organized crime.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

Since when does socialism or even Troskism (since that the ideology I'm the closest to right now) is responsible for many genocide or dictatorships ?



I'm not a maoist neither am I a leninist or a stalinist mate

Trostky was such a retard that he got killed off with a pick axe by his "comrades".

 

[Logiko]

Just look at Latin America and how people with similar rhetoric as you protect the drug cartels . The left is organized crime.

The problem here is not leftism rather than corruption. And corruption can happen no matter the political side sadly.

Trostky was such a retard that he got off with a pick axe by his "comrades".

What was his bad ideas ? (asking seriously)

 

[Mathias]

What was his bad ideas ? (asking seriously)

Trotsky wasn't pro-Bolsonaro

 

[Logiko]

Trotsky wasn't pro-Bolsonaro

 

[NAMELESS]

The problem here is not leftism rather than corruption. And corruption can happen no matter the political side sadly.

What was his bad ideas ? (asking seriously)

hum..lets see...Marxism?

Trotsky wasn't pro-Bolsonaro

Homie,i quit the Bolsonaro hype train long ago. I'm still not sure who to vote in 2026.

 

[Logiko]

hum..lets see...Marxism?

And why is marxism bad ?

 

[NAMELESS]

And why is marxism bad ?

 

[Logiko]

Can you explain to me why marxism is bad please ?

 

[NAMELESS]

The absence of a state is not absence of a law or order. There will be laws that the society living in that region will dictate and whoever wants to go there will be under those laws. If you don't wanna follow those laws you just don't go there. Not much different from what it is today. The big thing is not obligate anyone to pay for a governament they doesn't want and specially not having a state to provide services they can't provide. Private initiative for everything.

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

Who the fucking is saying that? What is debatable is how you measure the taxing. If it is absolute values or percentage values. And if it is based on income like I did or based on another measure.


Ok everyone participates but why someone has to pay more than the other if that said one usually is getting less from the governament? You want rich to pay more taxes so governament can provide services for the poor while the rich barely gets one? This is far from fair.

You are the one defending systems that DOES make the richer getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I"m the revolutionary here trying to make something else.

You the one who has to live in Sahara Desert because there is no property there for you to stole so you can create your delusional society there and then comeback saying that is was a mistake.

Revolution=radical changes in a society's culture. Are you social engineer now?

Post automatically merged: May 24, 2024

Can you explain to me why marxism is bad please ?

Go back 1500 pages from the current one and read all the shit slinging we went through talking about marxism. I'm not gonna repeat stuff to satisfy you.