im my opinion the greatest speech of all time is Watch

This discussion is closed.
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#41
Report 14 years ago
#41
(Original post by llama boy)
Some friends of mine were recently accused of being libertarian socialists on a US university campus.

The group was disbanded and they were all expelled.

Aside from specific examples, however, your post is spurious in the extreme. So what? You've proved that America doesn't overtly reach the depths of depravity that some other countries do. And? It's not as if that disproves the original point that was made.
universities are private entities, they have the right to control the formation of any group they wish.
0
curryADD
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#42
Report 14 years ago
#42
(Original post by vienna95)
tell that to the French, the Dutch, the Belgians, the Jews and the rest of Britain.
definatly supports vienna in this!

america has had its few racail tight spots over the years including, unfortunatly, slavery......

the fact that my great-great grandparents had owned slaves and a plantation means nothing to me.....what does mean something to me is my friendship with brittney, whose ancestors were slaves...

europe however, has had more than there tight spots, for example: the people who let the gestapo take their neighbors of to concentration camps in bondage......the people who actually TURNED the jews in...

and 11 million jews died because of this. im sure that many african americans died in slavery, but at the peak, we had no more than 5000 in the country.
0
love_4_ducks
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#43
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#43
(Original post by curryADD)
i would have to agree.....did you happen to know that (if you've seen/heard the WHOLE speech) the part when he starts saying all the i have a dreams is improv.

yer read and heard the speech
0
curryADD
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#44
Report 14 years ago
#44
(Original post by love_4_ducks)
yer read and heard the speech
the whole speech? im not talking about the i have a dream part, but also the other parts.....

whats your favorite line?

mine is "and when justice will reign from every mountain top."
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#45
Report 14 years ago
#45
(Original post by llama boy)
Quite. And that is the first time I've heard someone attempt to win an argument by citing their own ignorance.

Kropotkin. The term has also been carried on by the likes of Chomsky. Perhaps you'd like to email him with your monkey/typewriter comparison? I'm sure he'd be only too keen to bow to your greater political understanding.
jeez, give me a break. Noam Chomsky wouldnt recognise reality if it came up and bit him in the face. instead, he prefers to sit and contemplate endless abstract ideas in the comfort of his cardigan and slippers while being worshipped by soft-revolutionaries who call themselves pacifists and anti-globalists. in short, you and he and any monkey dressed up in glasses might be able to formulate some fancy ideas of a socialism being held together by a minimal state, but it does not exist and neither does much support for it, which is why youve cited that definition more than once before.

"Libertarian" in the traditional sense means freedom from constraint (ie the state). What you describe is arguably a form of libertarianism, yet it adds to the definition an ideological belief of human nature as naturally selfish (therefore people will compete rather than co-operate, therefore there will be a "market"). This could reasonably be described as "libertarian capitalism". "Libertarian socialism", however, has the same premise (ie lack of state), but believes that in a stateless scenario, people would co-operate to form a socialist society. (ergo "libertarian socialism, or "anarchism").

Only if you assume the same point about human nature again (ie that socialism is only possible through state interference). Libertarian socialists would contend otherwise.
and theyd be free to. as i would be free to contend that pigs fly.

What might be helpful here is the political compass. It helps to see there are two different measures of a political position, left/right and libertarian/authoritarian. The position you described was right/libertarian, "libertarian socialism" is left/libertarian.
the only two 'characters' that fall into the libertarian left are Gandhi and Mandela. hardly two exceptional statesmen. and they are both their by virtue of their ideas of liberty and almost no conceivable recognition of economics or marketeering.


Nope, and I don't recall ever saying it does.

See, the thing is, it isn't just one person posting something on the web, "libertarian socialism" is the absolute heart of anarchism, and anyone who understands the doctrine will see that.

Furthermore, your baseless insinuations about the commonness of the phrase (all the great anarchist thinkers, not to mention the vast majority of anarchists themselves, have used/do use it), not to mention the insinuations about my own political understanding (surprisingly enough, just because I post a link to another site rather than explaining the point myself, it does not mean that a) i believe everything i read or b) i am incapable of thinking for myself) are really really bog standard.

Of course, I wouldn't expect you to agree with libertarian socialism for a second, however you really should attempt to understand its existence and coherence as an ideology.
it is coherent with anarchy.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#46
Report 14 years ago
#46
(Original post by vienna95)
universities are private entities, they have the right to control the formation of any group they wish.
yes.
0
bazippit
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#47
Report 14 years ago
#47
(Original post by piginapoke)
The one that went into the song Everybody's Free (To Wear Sunscreen).

Can't remember who did it.

Baz Luhrman
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#48
Report 14 years ago
#48
(Original post by vienna95)
jeez, give me a break. Noam Chomsky wouldnt recognise reality if it came up and bit him in the face. instead, he prefers to sit and contemplate endless abstract ideas in the comfort of his cardigan and slippers while being worshipped by soft-revolutionaries who call themselves pacifists and anti-globalists. in short, you and he and any monkey dressed up in glasses might be able to formulate some fancy ideas of a socialism being held together by a minimal state, but it does not exist and neither does much support for it, which is why youve cited that definition more than once before.



and theyd be free to. as i would be free to contend that pigs fly.



the only two 'characters' that fall into the libertarian left are Gandhi and Mandela. hardly two exceptional statesmen. and they are both their by virtue of their ideas of liberty and almost no conceivable recognition of economics or marketeering.




it is coherent with anarchy.
Do you have a point vienna? All I was doing was trying to explain to Howard that such an ideology exists. As you clearly accept that such an ideology does, however misguided you feel it is, what exactly are you bringing to this argument? Or are you just attempting to drag another bog standard general political discussion over 7 pages for the sake of it, again?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#49
Report 14 years ago
#49
(Original post by llama boy)
Do you have a point vienna?
they are all there. Howard found the idea as laughable as I. you outlined it as plausible, they are my thoughts on that position.


All I was doing was trying to explain to Howard that such an ideology exists. As you clearly accept that such an ideology does, however misguided you feel it is, what exactly are you bringing to this argument?
which one? my opinion to your(and Howard's) comments regarding libertarian socialism?

Or are you just attempting to drag another bog standard general political discussion over 7 pages for the sake of it, again?
*yawn*
0
MattG
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#50
Report 14 years ago
#50
(Original post by curryADD)
definatly supports vienna in this!

america has had its few racail tight spots over the years including, unfortunatly, slavery......

the fact that my great-great grandparents had owned slaves and a plantation means nothing to me.....what does mean something to me is my friendship with brittney, whose ancestors were slaves...

europe however, has had more than there tight spots, for example: the people who let the gestapo take their neighbors of to concentration camps in bondage......the people who actually TURNED the jews in...

and 11 million jews died because of this. im sure that many african americans died in slavery, but at the peak, we had no more than 5000 in the country.
i dont think you can judge people like that for turning Jews in. Families were intimadated into handing people in. failure not to or hiding people away could had led to death sentence.

i take it you learnt this in school right? have you heard of hiroshima and nagasaki? (Second world war)
0
G4ry
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#51
Report 14 years ago
#51
:cough: 6 million jews actually, but who's counting?
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

The new Gillette ad. Is it:

Man-hating bullsh*t (131)
46.29%
Pro-humanity (152)
53.71%

Watched Threads

View All