National Guard called into Minneapolis

Status
Not open for further replies.

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,231
970
118
Country
USA
So you are able to blanket condemn all communists, and not allow for variation, but I'm supposed to allow for variation for your party? When my personal experience is there is none among your faction? Sorry, but no. You don't get to just say "yeah but you can't say all republicans are like that" while in the same breath saying "all communists are like this."
I'm comparing actual, thought out beliefs, not individual behaviors. Of course there are registered Republicans that act like turds, that's not the point. I'm comparing the best cases. In the best case, a Republican wants politics and governance to: "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity". In the best case, a communist advocates a stateless, classless society. A Republican in the best sense sees many problems and many worthwhile causes to measure against one another to create a prosperous society. In the best case, a communist believes that you can eliminate the whole system and those problems and causes wont exist. If there's any variation in communist perspectives, it only gets worse from there.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
I'm comparing actual, thought out beliefs, not individual behaviors. Of course there are registered Republicans that act like turds, that's not the point. I'm comparing the best cases. In the best case, a Republican wants politics and governance to: "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".
And does such saint have a name?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kwak

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,237
6,508
118
Dear Agema,
Here is the difference straight from the horse's mouth. To paraphrase: there are no individual problems, the system is always the problem.

Thanks, Seanchaidh.
Okay, but when you read a democratic capitalist criticise Communism, they'll usually say the same thing: the system is always the problem. It's what the facile cliche argument "Communism will never work because its against human nature" boils down to.
 

Revnak

We must imagine Sisyphus horny
Legacy
May 25, 2020
2,944
3,099
118
Country
USA
Okay, but when you read a democratic capitalist criticise Communism, they'll usually say the same thing: the system is always the problem. It's what the facile cliche argument "Communism will never work because its against human nature" boils down to.
“Have you ever considered working to improve monarchy, Robespierre?”
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 13, 2010
8,577
2,986
118
I'm comparing actual, thought out beliefs, not individual behaviors. Of course there are registered Republicans that act like turds, that's not the point. I'm comparing the best cases. In the best case, a Republican wants politics and governance to: "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity". In the best case, a communist advocates a stateless, classless society. A Republican in the best sense sees many problems and many worthwhile causes to measure against one another to create a prosperous society. In the best case, a communist believes that you can eliminate the whole system and those problems and causes wont exist. If there's any variation in communist perspectives, it only gets worse from there.
I don't really care about theoretical ideal scenarios, that's not the world we live in. The reality is that the public face the republican party says they stand for, they don't, not as a group. Perhaps individuals hold true to those beliefs, but they aren't the douchebags in power and authority. And they are clearly not willing to put their money where their mouth is in regards to their "morals" and "ideals."
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,231
970
118
Country
USA
Okay, but when you read a democratic capitalist criticise Communism, they'll usually say the same thing: the system is always the problem. It's what the facile cliche argument "Communism will never work because its against human nature" boils down to.
No. They (we) won't say the system is the problem. The system, society, is the solution to the problems of human nature. That is the argument that makes anarchists and communists into allies against literally everyone else. Whether or not you think a structured society is the solution to the problems of human nature or whether you think a structured society is what causes the problems to begin with.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Feb 18, 2010
3,923
1,792
118
Country
United Kingdom
They differ in that the conservative and liberal are actually trying to solve the problems of the day (and to a much lesser extent, the libertarian).
How, exactly?

What problems are conservatives and liberals trying to solve?

I mean, police abuse. There are clear, evidence based approaches to reduce police abuse which don't require radical means. It won't solve the problem, the capacity for abuse is built into the model of policing we currently use, but it would be a start. Demilitarisation, for example. Robust and transparent systems of civilian review. More transparency in the disciplinary process. Specialised community policing taskforces for at-risk communities.

Even revolutionary anarchists would generally welcome all these solutions. It wouldn't be enough, and it wouldn't change the desire to completely abolish the current system of policing and it certainly wouldn't build any kind of trust in the police, but anything which limits police abuse is good for anarchists, and these are the best evidence based methods of doing that short of radically altering the institution of policing.

Liberals and conservatives aren't going to do any of these things. Instead, they will focus on token gestures like sensitivity training, or more use of body cameras, which have no evidence for their effectiveness but also don't impede the authority of police. Ultimately, both liberals and conservatives can't solve police abuse because they like authoritarian policing. Authoritarian policing preserves a hierarchical social order which both liberals and conservatives believe that they benefit from.

If they were trying to solve problems, they would be doing much better than they are.

There's no conservative or liberal panacea.
There absolutely is.

You don't see it because you have to live in a society where those panaceas aren't working. The free market is a panacea. Family values is a panacea. Everyone has their idea of a good society and everyone has something which they think will get us there. There is just as much disagreement on the radical left about how to achieve a good society as there is anywhere else on the political compass, and certainly more than between the interchangeable leadership of the "moderate" Republican and Democratic parties.

Here is the difference straight from the horse's mouth. To paraphrase: there are no individual problems, the system is always the problem.
Do you understand why?

This is the fundamental problem with the liberal and conservative response alike. You see a cop brutally suffocating a man to death while his colleagues look on, and you see an individual problem. It doesn't matter how many times it happens. It doesn't matter how many people are involved. It doesn't matter if the entire police department descends publicly into an orgy of violence and brutality. The problem is always individual, and because individuals can't be changed save through personal growth and reform, you thus come to the conclusion that there is nothing to be done.

The fact that one police officer makes the decision to blatantly abuse and ultimately murder a suspect is down to him as an individual. It is an "individual problem." It's also irrelevant, because we can't do anything about it. We can't mind control all the bad people to make them nice. What we can do is fix the system. We can try to prevent bad people from getting into positions of unaccountable power. We can remove the means by which bad people protect and shield themselves and each other from the consequences of their bad actions. We can empower ordinary people to protect each other from the abuses of bad people. This won't fix the individuals, but it will make it harder for those individuals to do the harm which they do.

Even in a hypothetical post-revolutionary anarchist society, someone would need to deal with issues like ensuring public safety and stopping dangerous criminals, they just wouldn't be a police officer. They wouldn't have the authority to murder someone in a public street and legally kill anyone who tried to intervene, like a police officer does.
 

ObsidianJones

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 29, 2020
1,118
1,442
118
Country
United States
Look, I'm not a fan of violence myself. But the reactions and the reasoning of why Antifa is anywhere as bad as the nazis, the racists, the Government, and/or the citizenry that doesn't care enough to help their fellow citizens is mind-blowing.

It's like if you have a respiratory infection that causes you to cough violently into all hours of the night, and instead of going to a doctor to finally treat it, you go "Oh, I've made peace with the infection. It's apart of my life now. It sucks, but it's here. What I want you to do is remove my Diaphragm. The infection is just something I have to live with, but this damn diaphragm is making the response to the infection I just can't live with."

You want Antifa to go? Make them unnecessary. One should use as much power as they devote to decrying Antifa to actually fighting the conditions that causes the fascism that people suffer under. So one wouldn't need antifascists at all.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
Look, I'm not a fan of violence myself. But the reactions and the reasoning of why Antifa is anywhere as bad as the nazis, the racists, the Government, and/or the citizenry that doesn't care enough to help their fellow citizens is mind-blowing.

It's like if you have a respiratory infection that causes you to cough violently into all hours of the night, and instead of going to a doctor to finally treat it, you go "Oh, I've made peace with the infection. It's apart of my life now. It sucks, but it's here. What I want you to do is remove my Diaphragm. The infection is just something I have to live with, but this damn diaphragm is making the response to the infection I just can't live with."

You want Antifa to go? Make them unnecessary. One should use as much power as they devote to decrying Antifa to actually fighting the conditions that causes the fascism that people suffer under. So one wouldn't need antifascists at all.
Besides, labeling someone as "an agent of Antifa" without basis undermines the argument of Antifa being a dangerous group, and becomes more "the people I don't like" label.
 

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,237
6,508
118
What problems are conservatives and liberals trying to solve?

I mean, police abuse. There are clear, evidence based approaches to reduce police abuse which don't require radical means. It won't solve the problem, the capacity for abuse is built into the model of policing we currently use, but it would be a start. Demilitarisation, for example. Robust and transparent systems of civilian review. More transparency in the disciplinary process. Specialised community policing taskforces for at-risk communities.

...

Liberals and conservatives aren't going to do any of these things.
I think you'll find that plenty of liberals happily contemplate and advocate these things.

The problem with carrying them out is more political and institutional resistance from the very substantial sectors of the population and interest groups that feel differently.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,069
3,048
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Okay, but when you read a democratic capitalist criticise Communism, they'll usually say the same thing: the system is always the problem. It's what the facile cliche argument "Communism will never work because its against human nature" boils down to.
The other issue is that Capitalism doesn’t work because it works against human nature. Friedman said something like ‘the baker doesn’t get up in the morning just because he’s nice. He does it so he could earn your money.’ Which sounds awfully like making someone do something they have no interest in
 

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
Aug 25, 2013
5,637
2,856
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
The other issue is that Capitalism doesn’t work because it works against human nature. Friedman said something like ‘the baker doesn’t get up in the morning just because he’s nice. He does it so he could earn your money.’ Which sounds awfully like making someone do something they have no interest in
Huh? How does doing something to get money sound like someone doing something they have no interest in? A person can be baker because they need a job and happen to be good enough as a baker to have such a job or they could love baking but also want to make a living from it, so they become a baker paid by customers.

Neither Socialism nor Capitalism are inherently against human nature. Socialism comes from our inherent comunal nature while Capitalism comes from our inherent desire to be able to sustain ourselves. The thing that is inherently not in human nature is the existing in and managing of gigantic populations filled with people you know nothing about on a day to day basis.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,069
3,048
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Huh? How does doing something to get money sound like someone doing something they have no interest in? A person can be baker because they need a job and happen to be good enough as a baker to have such a job or they could love baking but also want to make a living from it, so they become a baker paid by customers.

Neither Socialism nor Capitalism are inherently against human nature. Socialism comes from our inherent comunal nature while Capitalism comes from our inherent desire to be able to sustain ourselves. The thing that is inherently not in human nature is the existing in and managing of gigantic populations filled with people you know nothing about on a day to day basis.
Just because one baker likes his work, doesn’t mean all do.
The only way to make a living from Capitalism is by making money. There are no alternatives.
Capitalism is designed with feedback loops in it to force a certain society on you. There is no escape.

Communism is individualistic (At least idealistically). It’s main purpose is allowing you to do what you want. Most of my working life is a business owner making me do things I don’t particularly want to do. Just so I can make money to survive. So I personally have never felt this individualism that Capitalists pretends it has. I see Elon Musk behaviour significantly effect the share price of his company, so he doesn’t have freedom either

It does have the same problem as Capitlism: how to help people survive. Instead of forcing people with money and feedback loops, Lenin thought a bunch of elites should look after it (which goes against Marx and his philosophy. He didn’t believe governments should exist.) Which.... sounds like a CEO. Lenin was an idiot and brought the same hierarchies Marx hates to a non-heirchical system.

Not that Marx had a good solution. You pretty much just ask someone for something but money has of information inherent to it, not just an actual dollar value. Also the feedback loops that make it possible to use money. It allows for less central planning, which is a big plus in my eyes.The biggest problem of Capitlism is its manipulation of money and value, often deliberately mismatched to make bank and force other to do your bidding. You can’t take a person to court over shoddy building if you don’t have a system to enforce your will. Or laws. Which means central planning.Which means rent seeking to abuse laws. Marx wanted to rid the world of central planning and corruption but took out necessary feedback loops that help people survive.
 

Eacaraxe

Elite Member
Legacy
May 28, 2020
1,703
1,287
118
Country
United States
Besides, labeling someone as "an agent of Antifa" without basis undermines the argument of Antifa being a dangerous group, and becomes more "the people I don't like" label.
Frankly, this isn't a bug, a glitch, an unfortunate sign of our times, a loophole, an unintended but foreseen consequence of the Trump administration, or even unique to the Trump administration. Scapegoating the left and painting civil rights, labor, and civil liberties protest as "socialism", "communism", "foreign influence", or any other buzzword of choice is a feature of the US government responds; hell, it's the go-to first response for nigh on a goddamn century since the first Red Scare and the Red Summer. What was the entire mission and directive of COINTELPRO? What was the Bush administration doing using the FBI to infiltrate war protest groups?

Only damn thing that's different today is "Antifa" has been added to the list of buzzwords.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
You want Antifa to go? Make them unnecessary. One should use as much power as they devote to decrying Antifa to actually fighting the conditions that causes the fascism that people suffer under. So one wouldn't need antifascists at all.
On the surface, that's all fine and dandy, but Antifa's definition of fascism is much broader than what the average person is going to consider fascism.

Frankly, this isn't a bug, a glitch, an unfortunate sign of our times, a loophole, an unintended but foreseen consequence of the Trump administration, or even unique to the Trump administration. Scapegoating the left and painting civil rights, labor, and civil liberties protest as "socialism", "communism", "foreign influence", or any other buzzword of choice is a feature of the US government responds; hell, it's the go-to first response for nigh on a goddamn century since the first Red Scare and the Red Summer. What was the entire mission and directive of COINTELPRO? What was the Bush administration doing using the FBI to infiltrate war protest groups?

Only damn thing that's different today is "Antifa" has been added to the list of buzzwords.
Is the American left any better at this point?

Right throws around socialism, left throws around fascism. Right throws around communism, left throws around Nazism. Right throws around foreign influence, left throws around...um, foreign influence. Right throws around sending in the military, left throws around abolishing the police. Right has the alt-right, left has the regressive left. The right was at the forefront of the "Satanic Panic," but now it's the left that pushes cancel culture.
 

ObsidianJones

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 29, 2020
1,118
1,442
118
Country
United States
On the surface, that's all fine and dandy, but Antifa's definition of fascism is much broader than what the average person is going to consider fascism.
As discussed before, I think Antifa are right on the money with the case of blacks in America. Where the mistreatment, brutality, and outright murder of Black citizens can be handwaved by others as a 'political matter' instead of a blatant travesty we should all be horrified over and one that we are tripping over ourselves to stop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tireseas

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,345
1,877
118
Country
4
On the surface, that's all fine and dandy, but Antifa's definition of fascism is much broader than what the average person is going to consider fascism.
In what pamphlet or flyer is this definition declared?
 

Houseman

Mad Hatter Meme Machine.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
3,910
760
118
As discussed before, I think Antifa are right on the money with the case of blacks in America. Where the mistreatment, brutality, and outright murder of Black citizens can be handwaved by others as a 'political matter' instead of a blatant travesty we should all be horrified over and one that we are tripping over ourselves to stop.
A group holds their hands out to you and says that you're being oppressed and that they have the solution, that they'll help you with your struggle.

That seems like a familiar tactic
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
In what pamphlet or flyer is this definition declared?
Antifa doesn't have a single pamplhet or flyer to my knowledge, but the Australian Antifa chapter has declared Scott Morrison a fascist. So here, at least, Antifa's definition of fascist is anything right of centre.

Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States)#Ideology - Antifa may be "anti-fascist," but it's against anything generally right of anarchism/communism.

As discussed before, I think Antifa are right on the money with the case of blacks in America. Where the mistreatment, brutality, and outright murder of Black citizens can be handwaved by others as a 'political matter' instead of a blatant travesty we should all be horrified over and one that we are tripping over ourselves to stop.
Let's suppose that the issue above is solved. Would Antifa disband? I'd venture that the answer would be no.

A group holds their hands out to you and says that you're being oppressed and that they have the solution, that they'll help you with your struggle.

That seems like a familiar tactic
I'm not sure if that's the best analogy.

Antifa, at least in the US, is acting on a legitimate grievance. But considering that Antifa is broadly communist, and considering that the Bolsheviks were acting on legitimate grievances...well, what was worse? The illness, or the disease?

TBH, I don't think there's any real chance of Antifa seizing power, and of all the groups out there willing to use violence to achieve their ends, there's much worse to worry about. But since the subject is on Antifa, and they've got a record of instigating violence, then they're fair game to be called out for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.