you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -7 points 3 months ago (20 children)

Thats just even more fucked up libertarianism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 3 months ago (15 children)

    Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (13 children)

    If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling.

    Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one.

    Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (8 children)

    Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

    Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling.

    I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (3 children)

    I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read.

    Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments