"Freedom" thread or something

Actually, I would consider watching the video. I'm not sure what your reason is for not watching it, but often times I feel like I can learn a lot from a lot of the articles and videos posted here, even if I don't agree with some of them fully or at all.

Honestly, a lot of what you're saying feels either emotionally charged (some of your opinions on "rich" people) or makes you look ignorant (sweatshop video). I'm not saying you're an ignorant person because I don't know you personally. But you might learn a thing or two from watching that video.

The narrator does a fairly good job of addressing a lot of your issues with sweatshops, like how they are perceived as having "unfair working conditions". I'd say what his counterargument is for it, but I'd prefer to discuss it further once you've actually watched it. Then this debate might have some common ground to go off on.

I gave up on the sweatshop I used to attend. I lacked the discipline to attend daily and no matter how much I sweat, I didn't get any slimmer. It helped with my cardio though.

The Wizard wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The Wizard wrote: The only libertarians I have interest in are the left-anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, ect... Libertarianism offers a very limited conception of freedom that is weighed down by its obsession with private property. Private property is historically one of the most oppressive institutions to have ever existed and was actively rebelled against from its very inception. Mankind's alienation from their own self-activity by the spheres of the market and the state are cause of social divisions that will manifest violently in forms of racism, patriarchy and nationalism until abolished.   And left-anarchism itself professes violence. Emma Goldman was a thug. Yes, left-anarchism (in it's worthwhile varients) condones the violent destruction of all class barriers. This seems less objectionable to me that the violence that holds our society divided into classes.

That's a nice way of saying destroying people's lives, means of survival, and justifying things such as assassinations.

The Wizard wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The Wizard wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The Wizard wrote: The only libertarians I have interest in are the left-anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, ect... Libertarianism offers a very limited conception of freedom that is weighed down by its obsession with private property. Private property is historically one of the most oppressive institutions to have ever existed and was actively rebelled against from its very inception. Mankind's alienation from their own self-activity by the spheres of the market and the state are cause of social divisions that will manifest violently in forms of racism, patriarchy and nationalism until abolished.   And left-anarchism itself professes violence. Emma Goldman was a thug. Yes, left-anarchism (in it's worthwhile varients) condones the violent destruction of all class barriers. This seems less objectionable to me that the violence that holds our society divided into classes.  That's a nice way of saying destroying people's lives, means of survival, and justifying things such as assassinations. Sounds like what happens under capitalism. When the oppressed fight back is it somehow more morally reprehensible?

horsewithteeth11 wrote: Honestly, a lot of what you're saying feels either emotionally charged (some of your opinions on "rich" people)

Indeed, our new friend has missed hundred of pages of content (or lurked and just started now) but Wizard we've had long debates about envy and anger and honestly, those are the fuel behind leftism.
And I say that as a former socialist who fully admits it was anger (semi misguided) at the evil rich that guided me.

I won't debate you because since you are a communist that's literally another ball park, there's really no point in debate so I'll respectfully disagree with your opinion
Did just want to say if you keep an open mind and do some soul searching you can be amazed at what happens and what you learn about yourself. I of course KNEW I was right about my beliefs, but I later realized I wasn't being rational.
Hell I thought libertarianism was the 2nd greatest evil behind Neo cons...and now look. I voted for one this last election!

That is fair, it's very very closed minded, and IMO cowardly, to just flat out say "I'm not gunna watch/read that"
How can you truly understand and pick apart the enemy if you don't know the nitty gritty and really have seen their arguments?
Don't be scared, the worst that can happen is you have a change of views...you'll live!


Edited by JJLehto - December 11 2012 at 19:08

Ron Paul is awesome.  I will miss him.

Oh dude.....neo con?
Well I was a socialist so guess it happens. In our silly younger days!

On that note, I feel kinda silly for years I wanted to read Rand (as the symbol of my anti philosophy) I never got around to it and now IDK if it'd have the same impact on me. And I do the know the general point behind Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead so I'd hate to read a book and don't add anything more to my base knowledge of it haha
I did order the Road to Serfdom though. I really just know it's a staple of the limited government realm.

That is what I've heard but  I never let people's opinions sway me with music movies or vidya games, so can't start now
Really, the issue is I know her books are long, I think? and I know the premises and what her goal is.

I was that way for years man. I used to read a lot and I'm starting to get back there. When it arrives I'll take vids of me having sex with the book to inspire you.


Edited by JJLehto - December 11 2012 at 19:44