Another Example Of The Fruits Of Socialism

[Ponca Dan]

Is anyone surprised?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06...merican-socialist-daniel-ortega-turns-tyrant/

 

[NZ Poke]

Incidentally, see below.

Isn’t this yet another reason to build the wall?

We know what’s going to happen in Mexico with his policies (the only question is how bad it will be).

And do you really want to merge with a culture that thinks this is a good idea? (Considering what been happening in Venezuela, and now Nicaragua)

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Is anyone surprised?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06...merican-socialist-daniel-ortega-turns-tyrant/

How come you never post about anarchist policy accomplishments?

 

[Ponca Dan]

Incidentally, see below.

Isn’t this yet another reason to build the wall?

We know what’s going to happen in Mexico with his policies (the only question is how bad it will be).

And do you really want to merge with a culture that thinks this is a good idea? (Considering what been happening in Venezuela, and now Nicaragua)

View embedded media

Human nature is confusing, isn't it? In how many places around the world are people persuaded to desire replacing a right-wing oligarchical tyranny with a left-wing socialist one? It seems that some people are incapable of wrapping their minds around the concept of being free. They really want to have someone tell them what to do. Even here in America we have people insisting the government take care of them, as if they can't see the ultimate result of their desire.

 

[BIGOSUFAN]

Is anyone surprised?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06...merican-socialist-daniel-ortega-turns-tyrant/

Reminded me of when DNC voters and illegals attacked people going to Trump rallies in California.

 

[Ponca Dan]

How come you never post about anarchist policy accomplishments?

Let me try one more time to explain this to you. Anarchism is a utopian concept. It is the opposite of the utopian concept of total authoritarianism. The anarchist side of the argument shows what the world could look like if people would adopt the concept of individual freedom. The authoritarian side of the argument shows what the world could look like if people would adopt the concept of becoming sheep-like. Both concepts are utopian (meaning not realistic) because human nature is not ideal, and utopia requires an ideal society.

The anarchist utopian concept is not possible because one aspect od human nature is to avoid responsibility, let others do as much of the heavy lifting as possible. The authoritarian model is not realistic because even though people want to avoid responsibility for their lives and actions, at the same time they resent being told what to do. Human nature is a mess!

All societies are engaged is a tug of war between the two utopian concepts. The purpose of philosophy is to show people what is possible, and attempt to persuade them in the direction of one side or the other. History shows pretty clearly that as humans go in the direction of the anarchist utopia their lives become immensely enriched, both materially and emotionally. As society drifts toward the authoritarian model peoples' lives are made poorer and more miserable.

I choose the anarchist model as my means of persuasion. I do not now, nor have I ever said anarchism is possible. I do now, and have repeatedly said I believe it is the direction society should progress toward.

Just look at the world, look at human history, human progress. When societies practice individual liberty, things like free market capitalism, they do better. When societies march toward authoritarianism, things like socialism, fascism, communism, they wind up with concentration camps, Gulag archipelagos, indoctrination camps, murder squads, starvation.

So, with all that being said, can you please stop with the "gotcha" line of reasoning?

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Let me try one more time to explain this to you. Anarchism is a utopian concept. It is the opposite of the utopian concept of total authoritarianism. The anarchist side of the argument shows what the world could look like if people would adopt the concept of individual freedom. The authoritarian side of the argument shows what the world could look like if people would adopt the concept of becoming sheep-like. Both concepts are utopian (meaning not realistic) because human nature is not ideal, and utopia requires an ideal society.

The anarchist utopian concept is not possible because one aspect od human nature is to avoid responsibility, let others do as much of the heavy lifting as possible. The authoritarian model is not realistic because even though people want to avoid responsibility for their lives and actions, at the same time they resent being told what to do. Human nature is a mess!

All societies are engaged is a tug of war between the two utopian concepts. The purpose of philosophy is to show people what is possible, and attempt to persuade them in the direction of one side or the other. History shows pretty clearly that as humans go in the direction of the anarchist utopia their lives become immensely enriched, both materially and emotionally. As society drifts toward the authoritarian model peoples' lives are made poorer and more miserable.

I choose the anarchist model as my means of persuasion. I do not now, nor have I ever said anarchism is possible. I do now, and have repeatedly said I believe it is the direction society should progress toward.

Just look at the world, look at human history, human progress. When societies practice individual liberty, things like free market capitalism, they do better. When societies march toward authoritarianism, things like socialism, fascism, communism, they wind up with concentration camps, Gulag archipelagos, indoctrination camps, murder squads, starvation.

So, with all that being said, can you please stop with the "gotcha" line of reasoning?

I wish I had time to finally dig into this. I'll try to later.