Self definition of ideological affinity, in NS forum

[The New California Republic]

The way you chose to explain it, by using a really snarky response hidden in white text,

You cannot demonstrate snark that is not there.

surely should have rang some alarm bells inside the censor in your head, that there was a possibility that it could be misconstrued as a malicious attempt to hide it from me? No? That oversight is on your head, not mine.

You're paranoid.

I don't really need to; since you already admitted that it was snark in an earlier post. And text that contains snark that has had a real attempt to conceal it has an innate possibility to be misconstrued as an attempt to hide it from the person it addresses. If I started sending concealed messages that refer to someone, then how do you think that person is going to react if they found them? It isn't paranoia at all, it is an understandable reaction.

But if you want to bury the hatchet then we can find some common ground through some TGs. I think we are both reasonable people who probably have much in common.

[Big Jim P]

right-leaning libertarian free thinker.

[Forsher]

You cannot demonstrate snark that is not there.



You're paranoid.

I don't really need to; since you already admitted that it was snark in an earlier post. And text that contains snark that has had a real attempt to conceal it has an innate possibility to be misconstrued as an attempt to hide it from the person it addresses. If I started sending concealed messages that refer to someone, then how do you think that person is going to react if they found them? It isn't paranoia at all, it is an understandable reaction.

But if you want to bury the hatchet then we can find some common ground through some TGs. I think we are both reasonable people who probably have much in common.

I took NCR up on his offer. He blocked me. But the reason he did so was because he completely and utterly ignored something from this thread.

Here's the key logic of his argument in the single TG exchange...

"There wasn't a long game planned for it at all, or you would have showed your hand already, without needing to be nudged towards revealing it at this stage"

And here's the revealed hand. Or, you know, the post that NCR responded to and decided contained nothing more interesting than some third person referrals by myself to myself. Alternatively consider how the offending white text literally refers to itself as a joke and also the former post. Either way.

This entire exchange has consisted of NCR's refusing to take at face value anything I have said and failing to consider any possibility other than I am out to get him. It leaves me with but the one assumption, seeing as I am a naturally paranoid person, that the whole affair was just an attempt by NCR to continue a vendetta that he believes exists between us.

As anyone who actually knows me on this forum will attest... there is one thing I cannot and never EVER WILL forgive, let go or ignore and that's the false attribution of motives.

I'd say peace but I'm on the verge of throwing my computer at the wall here.

[Autarkheia]

1) The poll spelled "reactionary" wrong

2) Why does "anarcho-liberal" (not a real term; the right term is anarcho-capitalist) get its own option but not anarchism?

[Phoenicaea]

^@Autharkeia, 1. i ve edited the accurate spelling, merci, 2. well, when i had made it, i wasn t thinking about. all terms are being copy-paste, so that not being arbitrary.

it was drastical, because if not, it becomes much arbitrary, it becomes a personal philosophical view of the idea's world, given my philosophical attitude. so i pretend apathy.

then, it wasn t a poll about definition of anarchism. nowadays, i saw that some anarchists, the socialist-anarchist, usually accept theirs as a way of socialism.

the two opposite views of the orthodox definition of 'anarchism's borders', the european and the american, are biased. they misrepresent the real, either of them.

the brief answer is, i ve took the main fringe of that class as a definition for the entire class.

in real, i should have done it with four, and not eight answers: Conservative (cons.,reac.), Liberal (Libe.,Ana.), Socialist (Soc.,Com.), Fascist (Fa.,Is.)

[The New California Republic]

I took NCR up on his offer. He blocked me.

After you admitted lying to me, or by trying to cover up your mistake.

Here's the key logic of his argument in the single TG exchange...

"There wasn't a long game planned for it at all, or you would have showed your hand already, without needing to be nudged towards revealing it at this stage"

And here's the revealed hand. Or, you know, the post that NCR responded to and decided contained nothing more interesting than some third person referrals by myself to myself. Alternatively consider how the offending white text literally refers to itself as a joke and also the former post. Either way..

That "revealed hand" shows nothing regarding the reason you contradicted yourself much later in the exchange, which is what I was getting at.

This entire exchange has consisted of NCR's refusing to take at face value anything I have said and failing to consider any possibility other than I am out to get him. It leaves me with but the one assumption, seeing as I am a naturally paranoid person, that the whole affair was just an attempt by NCR to continue a vendetta that he believes exists between us.

I repeatedly offered an olive branch, you spat in my face with the admission of a lie, or an attempt to cover up a mistake that you made by trying to feed me bullshit. The "paranoid" thing has probably been a major contributing factor in this whole sad affair, if not the main one.

As anyone who actually knows me on this forum will attest... there is one thing I cannot and never EVER WILL forgive, let go or ignore and that's the false attribution of motives.

Your current attitude, genuine or otherwise, might be a good thing actually, since it gives you a brilliant incentive to leave me alone as I have asked. I will do the same on my end.

[Konservativski]

I think in order for a country to be sustainable whilst retaining its culture, the affinity has to be conservative or right-wing oriented. Let's say in case it's not chaos will ensue or people that are in change demanding political correctness will make it so people from other nationality and cultures try to dominate their will on other people, destroying the core principles of ones country. Said country and culture is never able to defend itself because it gets quickly labeled as racist or xenophobic.

[Vince Vaughn]

Economics: 1980s
Social attitudes: 1920s
Foreign policy: 1920s
Style: 1950s
Music: 1980s
Technology: 2050s

[Autarkheia]

Why is your description of communism actually a description of anarchism and your description of "anarcho-liberalism" (which as far as I know is not a thing) actually a description of anarcho-capitalism? You've left off, for example, Marxist-Leninism.

I got a rather incoherent answer to this question but as far as I can tell, it's because Marxist-Leninism is (theoretically, of course it is the opposite in practice) anarchist, and anarcho-capitalism grew out of classical liberalism. But most anarchists still consider themselves socialists so it's very confusing.

[Ghost Land]

Economics: 1980s
Social attitudes: 1980s
Foreign policy: 1920s
Style: 1950s
Music: 1980s
Technology: 1970s

Fixed.

Social attitudes of the 1920s were a bit too conservative for my tastes, and I'm a technophobe, so this seems about right.

As I've already stated in this thread, I'm a conservative libertarian, with a link to my political chart in my sig.

[XY Inc]

As an alt-right, anarcho-capitalist, Neo-Confederate with anarcho-transhumanist leanings. I'd say I fit under Anarcho-liberal and Reactionary. As i'm basically a cross between a transhumanist, free market anarchist and Southern Nationalist.

[Autarkheia]

A pro-Axis anarchist. This is a new one.

[Asherahan]

I am a Marxist Leninist.

[Rhonom]

Where would technocratic nationalism fit? Conservative or Fascist, idk

[Phoenicaea]

^ it depends what 'technocratic' means, I can t figure. in philosophy, 'technocratic' could be regarded as an adjective for the docrine about techne, which isn t the case in talk-shows.

I would say it conservative. as it is something which refers to the approved hierarchy, somewhat.

[Esternial]

I'm whatever you want me to be ;)

[Albydia]

Where would paleocons fit?

I'm whatever you want me to be

You are a Posadist-Thanosist

[Esternial]

Where would paleocons fit?

Central Perk with the rest of the gang.

[Rhonom]

^ it depends what 'technocratic' means, I can t figure. in philosophy, 'technocratic' could be regarded as an adjective for the docrine about techne, which isn t the case in talk-shows.

I would say it conservative. as it is something which refers to the approved hierarchy, somewhat.

tl;dr i believe only those with the necessary qualifications should be in the government, not elected by the people.

[Esternial]

^ it depends what 'technocratic' means, I can t figure. in philosophy, 'technocratic' could be regarded as an adjective for the docrine about techne, which isn t the case in talk-shows.

I would say it conservative. as it is something which refers to the approved hierarchy, somewhat.

tl;dr i believe only those with the necessary qualifications should be in the government, not elected by the people.

Why not both?

Do you even know how many people would qualify for Minister of Health?

Being qualified is ok, but you need to be a somewhat capable politician as well - e.g. be able to explain things without falling into deep technical jargon.

[Rhonom]

tl;dr i believe only those with the necessary qualifications should be in the government, not elected by the people.

Why not both?

Do you even know how many people would qualify for Minister of Health?

Being qualified is ok, but you need to be a somewhat capable politician as well - e.g. be able to explain things without falling into deep technical jargon.

While I prefer some kind of test to determine government positions, if voting has to be there I'd restrict it to citizens (and in this case, citizenship would have to be earned with proper education and loyalty to one's nation, not a birthright).

[Esternial]

Why not both?

Do you even know how many people would qualify for Minister of Health?

Being qualified is ok, but you need to be a somewhat capable politician as well - e.g. be able to explain things without falling into deep technical jargon.

While I prefer some kind of test to determine government positions, if voting has to be there I'd restrict it to citizens (and in this case, citizenship would have to be earned with proper education and loyalty to one's nation, not a birthright).

And what would be defined as "proper education"?

[Rhonom]

While I prefer some kind of test to determine government positions, if voting has to be there I'd restrict it to citizens (and in this case, citizenship would have to be earned with proper education and loyalty to one's nation, not a birthright).

And what would be defined as "proper education"?

Hmm, that's quite hard to determine, actually. Some kind of citizenship exam should do it, maybe.

[Phoenicaea]

^ @Rhonom, it is reactionary. people tend misuse it, nevertheless, even if it s not epic-flavour, this is an old-fashioned reactionary argument. it doesn t mess with fascism naturally.

i suppose, if i can afford it, not an insult, you seem to be a young guy, whatever. you are in search of something. this case, it is different. i was 'authoritarian' styled, i was young.

conservative, reactionary, as you wish, i don t know. if your requirement is regarding offices then conservative, if it s regarding voting rights it is reactionary. not fascist.

this poll is so ugly, if someone else could make an other, and i would eraise this 'bla, bla'.
it truly is a 'bla, bla' thread. indeed it made success, bacause is low quality.

I bet if it was a decent thread, no more than two people would have answered. it is ashaming nonsense talking. why doesn t people speak as in last of the mohicans, at least?

i wonder, why? @Rhonom, you re right about citizenship. keep thinking like this, without caring 'talk-shows', and people saying. good guy.

[Rhonom]

English isn't your first language, is it? No offense though, I understood what you said. and yeah, I didn't vote Fascist, I voted conservative