Left-Wing Discussion Thread II: Behind 700,000 Bunkers

[Proctopeo]

I know the final draft of the Constitution mentions a Creator, but not any specific one, but Jefferson's original draft didn't, in that section.
Not sure with Locke, but he argued it.

well I think we both full well know which creator is meant
For Locke property, the individual private right to something, is defined by labour. One works it, therefore it is there's. This, of course, excludes slaves, because that's your property improving your property.

They left it vague on purpose, Kubra.
He also defined property as "life, liberty, and estate".

[Kubra]

well I think we both full well know which creator is meant
For Locke property, the individual private right to something, is defined by labour. One works it, therefore it is there's. This, of course, excludes slaves, because that's your property improving your property.

They left it vague on purpose, Kubra.
He also defined property as "life, liberty, and estate".

I don't recall any gods of the roman pantheon guaranteeing the right of property. That lot were a bit shifty, weren't they? They'd screw your wife and then steal her jewelry in the same sitting.
Yeah, and you can be deprived of the last two real easy under locke.

[Proctopeo]

They left it vague on purpose, Kubra.
He also defined property as "life, liberty, and estate".

I don't recall any gods of the roman pantheon guaranteeing the right of property. That lot were a bit shifty, weren't they? They'd screw your wife and then steal her jewelry in the same sitting.
Yeah, and you can be deprived of the last two real easy under locke.

There exist other gods.
And so? You can't be, at least not easily, under Jefferson. Or maybe Coke.

[Kubra]

I don't recall any gods of the roman pantheon guaranteeing the right of property. That lot were a bit shifty, weren't they? They'd screw your wife and then steal her jewelry in the same sitting.
Yeah, and you can be deprived of the last two real easy under locke.

There exist other gods.
And so? You can't be, at least not easily, under Jefferson. Or maybe Coke.

I mean if you ask me there ain't, and I don't see them guaranteeing an inalienable nothing.
Sure you could, it involved being owned by a founding father with too much debt to afford cutting you loose.

[Proctopeo]

There exist other gods.
And so? You can't be, at least not easily, under Jefferson. Or maybe Coke.

I mean if you ask me there ain't, and I don't see them guaranteeing an inalienable nothing.
Sure you could, it involved being owned by a founding father with too much debt to afford cutting you loose.

There exist belief systems that include other gods.
And you know exactly what I meant and that what you responded to wasn't it.

[Kubra]

I mean if you ask me there ain't, and I don't see them guaranteeing an inalienable nothing.
Sure you could, it involved being owned by a founding father with too much debt to afford cutting you loose.

There exist belief systems that include other gods.
And you know exactly what I meant and that what you responded to wasn't it.

Yeah but I mean there's only 1 creator, and it is obviously chaos.
You said under Jefferson. That is indeed a situation under jefferson where one can be deprived of their inalienable rights.

[Proctopeo]

There exist belief systems that include other gods.
And you know exactly what I meant and that what you responded to wasn't it.

Yeah but I mean there's only 1 creator, and it is obviously chaos.
You said under Jefferson. That is indeed a situation under jefferson where one can be deprived of their inalienable rights.

Depends on who you ask.
And yes, but that's not what I meant.

[Kubra]

Yeah but I mean there's only 1 creator, and it is obviously chaos.
You said under Jefferson. That is indeed a situation under jefferson where one can be deprived of their inalienable rights.

Depends on who you ask.
And yes, but that's not what I meant.

Yes, it depends if you ask the correct people or the incorrect people. I think you know who the latter are, constantine.
Well, I don't. You'll have to clarify for me.

[Proctopeo]

Depends on who you ask.
And yes, but that's not what I meant.

Yes, it depends if you ask the correct people or the incorrect people. I think you know who the latter are, constantine.
Well, I don't. You'll have to clarify for me.

Who is incorrect depends on who you ask.
I meant under his writings and what descended from them.

[Kubra]

Yes, it depends if you ask the correct people or the incorrect people. I think you know who the latter are, constantine.
Well, I don't. You'll have to clarify for me.

Who is incorrect depends on who you ask.
I meant under his writings and what descended from them.

Yes, and those you ask will give you either a correct or incorrect answer. The correct answer is Chaos, the incorrect is anything else.
I mean under his writings plenty of folks were deprived of life, liberty, and property. Sure, those who descended, but that was a bit of a slow century-long process.

[Proctopeo]

Who is incorrect depends on who you ask.
I meant under his writings and what descended from them.

Yes, and those you ask will give you either a correct or incorrect answer. The correct answer is Chaos, the incorrect is anything else.
I mean under his writings plenty of folks were deprived of life, liberty, and property. Sure, those who descended, but that was a bit of a slow century-long process.

According to you. I'd say the correct answer is something that is nothing exploding into everything. Or God. Maybe both?
On a geological timescale, a century is but an instant

[Josepf Stalin]

Sorry, but you do not have the right to private property.

It belongs to the state.

[Tekeristan]

I love having our little plot of land down in the valley. We do rent the field plots to local farmers pretty cheaply, enough to pay our rent and so forth.

I like our little home down there. If someone came to take it away, well, I dunno what i'd do.

I hate Stalin.

[Proctopeo]

Sorry, but you do not have the right to private property.

It belongs to the state.

And who does the state belong to?

[Victoriala II]

Sorry, but you do not have the right to private property.

It belongs to the state.

fuck the state joe steele

[Northern Davincia]

Sorry, but you do not have the right to private property.

It belongs to the state.

And who does the state belong to?

In this situation, Stalin.

[The Widening Gyre]

So there weren't anarchist ministers of government sharing the same side with the Stalinists? We are in full revisionist mode now.

I don't think anyone in the Popular Front was under any illusions - be they Stalinist, moderate or anarchist - that it was a marriage of convenience.

What else would you call an exchange of goods between communes? Even the Catalonia communes had to exchange goods to survive.

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

2. Except, both systems have proven themselves capable of working. Yours has not, at least not beyond the hunter-gatherer level.

And I'm imagining some French aristo saying something similar to Montesquieu in 1748.

3. You're dodging the point.

Is it really dodging to point out that an ideology can't 'fail' before it ever actually existed?

[War Gears]

Sorry, but you do not have the right to private property.

It belongs to the state.

"The state is a liar in all the tongues of good and evil; whatever it says, it lies, whatever it has, it has stolen." - never thought of a more accurate example of why Nietzsche was right.

[The Widening Gyre]

To quote Proudhon, what is Property?

Theft.

That's not what I'm asking.

If it's everyone's property, then everyone has a stake in it; if it's no one's property, then no one can lay claim to it, and, therefore, there's no way to actually preserve your stake in it without resorting to violence. I mean, how would you stop someone from just digging up the crops that you worked on, not letting you have any share in them?

There's a difference between using a patch of land that's otherwise not being used and pulling out someone else's crops. One is using common land without otherwise affecting anyone else, and the other is actively interfering with another person's labour and appropriating its product.

[War Gears]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

How is a gift economy going to deal with things such as space travel, genetic engineering, etc. which are going to be hard to fund and regulate through voluntary exchange?

[Kubra]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

How is a gift economy going to deal with things such as space travel, genetic engineering, etc. which are going to be hard to fund and regulate through voluntary exchange?

I mean there's no getting past a gift economy basically being a system of credit-based exchange except without the benefit of compound interest and convenient credit cards

[The Widening Gyre]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

How is a gift economy going to deal with things such as space travel, genetic engineering, etc. which are going to be hard to fund and regulate through voluntary exchange?

Same way any other industry with long supply and manufacturing chains would work, I'd imagine.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

You mean a barter economy?

[The Widening Gyre]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

You mean a barter economy?

No, a gift economy. As I just said.

[MERIZoC]

A gift economy, as has been pointed out.

How is a gift economy going to deal with things such as space travel, genetic engineering, etc. which are going to be hard to fund and regulate through voluntary exchange?

Ah yes, masturbatory tech fantasies for nerds and billionaires.

The important stuff.