▲ -21 ▼ The man supposed to stop Donald Trump is an unpopular 81-year-old with a net approval rating at minus 16 points (www.economist.com) submitted 2 years ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) no, i mean total consensus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) So unanimous consensus? As in, something akin to expecting the tooth fairy to come wipe for you? There's no such system. The closest thing is called Approval, and even with that system, there will be people who go away unhappy. Just far fewer of them than under any other voting system, Perfect consensus only happen if there are dozens or even hundreds of people running for office, and only then if the voters have perfect knowledge of every candidate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) lots of groups practice consensus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Small groups. Not large nations. That's the key difference. A tiny group of people can reach consensus, a large group literally cannot. Not when electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >large nations. >electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. i don't like those things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) So unanimous consensus? As in, something akin to expecting the tooth fairy to come wipe for you? There's no such system. The closest thing is called Approval, and even with that system, there will be people who go away unhappy. Just far fewer of them than under any other voting system, Perfect consensus only happen if there are dozens or even hundreds of people running for office, and only then if the voters have perfect knowledge of every candidate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) lots of groups practice consensus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Small groups. Not large nations. That's the key difference. A tiny group of people can reach consensus, a large group literally cannot. Not when electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >large nations. >electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. i don't like those things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) lots of groups practice consensus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Small groups. Not large nations. That's the key difference. A tiny group of people can reach consensus, a large group literally cannot. Not when electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >large nations. >electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. i don't like those things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Small groups. Not large nations. That's the key difference. A tiny group of people can reach consensus, a large group literally cannot. Not when electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >large nations. >electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. i don't like those things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >large nations. >electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting. i don't like those things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, a libertarian house cat. That always ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) baby, i'm an anarchist permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work. The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people. There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. "libertarian socialists", yea. it's great that you mentioned the amish but you didn't finish explaining why they are relevant: anabaptists are the majority of christian anarchists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Again, you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. Tiny communities who separate themselves away from everyday society can sort of do it, but they either have to go to extreme lengths to not integrate or they are completely dependent on the larger society. Just like house cats, who wouldn't know what a mouse is if one crawled across their nose. All because of Dunbar's number and our brains not being able to maintain anything like a community larger than about 150 people. And that's with roughly 40% of a given person's social energy actively devoted to maintaining those 150 relationships. Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. The response to both are the exact same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >you cannot have anything like an anarchist paradise because there are too many people. Full stop. except every time there has been permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Name some that had communities of more than 150 people. I'll wait because you cannot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) why do they need more than 150 people? but if you insist, you can look into northern madagascar or exarcheia permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Greece and Madagascar are both places with actual governments... That doesn't help your brain-dead arguments at all. And again, the 150 people mark is due to the very structure of your brain. It cannot handle anything more than 150 relationships. That's you, me, and every living human on the planet. 150 is the mean maximum number of social relationships that anyone can have. To get around this maximum number of relationships and still get things done, we as a species invented organization and governance. If you try to run a community without taking this physiological limitation into account, your community will fail. Sometimes to bears. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) ignoring evidence against your position indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. are you moving the goalposts toward your very own no-true-scotsman? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I've been very upfront about the 150 number. You've just been too caught up in your make believe world of nonsense to notice. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i cited two societies that passed it, but you found some other reason to dismiss them. if that's not moving the goal posts or setting up a no-true-scotsman then i guess i should get a refund for my degree. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Two that you claim rule by consensus, but two places that, in fact, do not. Both places have actual national governments and hold actual elections. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) those societies don't recognize the rule of the people you claim rule them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) House cats don't recognize their owners ruling over them, but they're 100% dependent regardless. And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat who has never eaten anything except the food put into your bowl, but completely convinced that you're the best hunter in the world, not understanding anything about where the food comes from or how any of it actually works. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) >And that's what you remind me of the most, a house cat dehumanizing me indicates that this has gone beyond mere insults, and undercut any claims you might have to intellectual honesty or moral highground. the bar for your apology has risen significantly, and you've already indicated you wouldn't meet a much lower standard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago You are obsessed with an apology that you will never get. I've not directly insulted you, but have repeatedly insulted your narrow ideas of governance, but if that's all you are, then you might need hobbies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) calling the freedom fighters of exarcheia or the sheep farmers of madagascar "house cats" who depend on others to feed them is dehumanizing and inaccurate. they fought for every inch of land and every scrap of food. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago Squatters and farmers, both are dependent on the larger societies around them, even if they outwardly claim otherwise. Don't get me wrong, squatting is cool as fuck, but even when sticking it to the man, you're still dependent on his world. Hell, Exarcheia even goes against your own picture of a perfect society, they used a form of direct democracy with actual voting on policy. Policy that was enforced throughout the camps. Circling back to farmers, again, you hit that 150-person limit on community size without some form of policy abstraction. i.e. some form, any form, of governance and policy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies for insulting me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) And I'll not do that. Although I do sort of feel like I'm arguing with a child obsessed with Santa Claus while I'm pointing out that the North Pole is fucking melting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) more insults permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You have fairly thin skin. Although the second was closer to an actual insult than the first. The first was calling your argument stupid. As in, it is, me telling you to do better. The second was saying that I feel like I'm arguing with someone whose arguments so far are akin to believing in Santa Claus. Closer to an actual insult, but still not making it personal or actually attacking you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) i'll accept your apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago And you'll not get them, because your arguments so far have been stupid. Do better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) >Saying that you'll only accept that sort of "governance" is exactly like saying that you'll only accept Bigfoot as president. no. i wouldn't accept bigfoot as president. we should destroy the office of the presidency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago The response is, go sit at the little table, the adults are talking. permalink fedilink source parent