With which political ideology do you most identify?

Technically speaking the last statement is true, so how is it moronic?

 

When children are only able to walk a few steps at a time without falling, yes, it is a terribly inefficient way to move around.

Would you like to argue against the proposition?

Why are you so angry?

 

Not very anarchist of you was it?

 

:smiley-laughing002:

 

Well, I think the shift in consciuosness is probably the key thing here but fair enough

 

No idea how you link your post to what I said. As for the Charlie chapman speech again your humour has past me by

The child and evolution , I was meaning a child wants to walk as evolution is programmed into us.

Some people are driven to accumulate wealth/stuff/possessions etc ,no doubt more than they need, but that's what "we" do as humans. So no I don't agree. Not saying your system would not be better but the problem is human nature and there will always be some who want more.

 

1st.

I'm not going to explain to you the hazards of a child's crawling. However, I fear for any children you may have.

2nd.

You clearly don't know what a vice is.

You propose that in an anarchist society people will be 'driven by impulse' to achieve harmony or whatever utopia you think will happen. That article you posted clearly blames states, capitalism etc for crime. You agree that this is the generally message that is being put across.

Yet under anarchism we have no victim-less crimes as vices are legal. Vices such as theft, murder, gluttony, * etc etc - that is simply a moronic proposition.

 

Ah, got you.

I might come back and reply to this later on if I have time.

 

That's gone straight over your head then.

Oh, dear. :smiley-laughing002:

Be honest, you didn't read beyond the first paragraph, did you? You've not understood that at all.

 

No worries I can see you have your hands full mate :smiley-laughing002:, just don't let them overflow, or that could be seen as being greedy in an anarchist society

 

:smiley-laughing002:

 

I was a "socialist" once (for about 2 months, when I was like, 13). I even read the communist manifesto, once. Then I grew up. I learned some things.

This is a phase that most people go through in their University-aged years. Mostly middle class kiddos. I guess I went through my phase "early". I was working class, but through my education I mostly received at home, I would say that I got an education similar to that of most upper middle, or even upper classed youths. But yes, I was young once. An idealist. I thought I had all the answers.

When you start approaching middle age, you learn some things about life. And the way our world works. For instance, the person who wants power in government, who claims to want to help you, is usually not your friend. In fact, most times, he either wants to steal something from you, or take more control over your life. You don't like that. Then you start to realise, wow, I am starting to think like my (often more conservative) parents. Or, perhaps that pundit you always despised as a "pig", back when you were a red, or a pinko, or an anarchist, or whatever kind of idealist you claimed to be.

Many of you will find this kind of thing out, but it may even be much later in life. Perhaps many of you have already "grown up". But trust me, most of you will, at some point. It will just take time.

These days I still find myself reading the Communist Manifesto. But this is more to keep my friends close, and my enemies even closer. You should know more about your enemy than you do your friends. Remember that. Whatever path you end up choosing later in life.

 

1 for conservatism

 

Fud.

 

Great to have you back, Jorge.

 

* * , Im stunned. Suppose all that needs to be said is you are an advert for home education anyway, others can decide if its a good or a bad advert :smiley-laughing002:

 

Great question,

I dont really identify myself 100% with any of the idealogies in the poll all the same which probably says more about me.

I think you can be anyone of those idealogies based on your current plight, social standing, financial standing and mindset. I would go as far to say we have all probably identified with all the labels at any given time and situation

To clad yourself with one idealogy and never waiver is pretty courageous (and possibly dangerous at the same time) I think.

I,m just happy being a *

 

if you read the communist manifesto one could say your were more into communism, no? Not quite the same step on the ladder of evolution. And what you call a process of education, maturity, and getting wise in life and growing up, could also be called: that you´re now a part of the system, money has corrupted you morally and you are just in the hamster wheel? :smiley-laughing002: Just saying.

Do you think you would have thrown overboard your old socialist attitudes(it was more a 3 month affair) if you were not enjoying the sunny side of life now? Works for some, but not for many.

 

Zionism

 

I'm not attacking you man, but you're wrong all day. If you know anything about Communism, according to Marx and Engels themselves, SOCIALISM is the first step in the path to Communism. This is why most communists maintain that there has never been a truly Communist society yet. The most the USSR etc. have eben able to accomplish is a socialist government.

This is why most modern Communists have given up the title of "communist", because it has a bad connotation with it. In many parts of the world, like Hungary, Albania, Poland, Serbia, Germany, Russia and its satellite states etc, the word sends chills up the spine as much as "*" does in other parts of the world. That is because they lived through the horrors that it imposed on the world.

So, to become more "modern", and not so "evil" sounding, they've adopted the friendlier term, "socialist". This way they can at least attain the first step in their collectivist plans, according to their prophets, Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc.

I am enjoying the sunny side of life now? I'll have you know that I work in the public sector, I am disabled, and soon to be forcibly "retired". And no, I won't be getting in big sum of money. Not even enough to fill up my car for a few weeks. I'm approaching my middle-aged years, and because I have no real marketable skills, I am going to have to put my family through the hardship of my transitioning back to school full time, so that I can find a job later.

I've worked with my hands my entire life. The problem with the reds is the working man is still a slave when they take power. The old class system gets replaced with a new class system, where the government and their cronies are the upper class, and everyone else is poor. I don't need your revolution. I don't want to smash the state. No thank you. I just want to live my life.

But like I said most of you are young and idealistic revolutionaries. You'll find out more about life and the way "things work" later in life.

I'm not here to shun anyone or slag anyone off. Just telling it the way I have seen things go for years.