Sunday, October 31, 2004

Additionally:

It's ironic that we're about to prove that anarchy works, in that we're going to demonstrate that the Internet can maintain rule-of-law strictly by private netizens who are fierce about protecting their electronic property rights.

--Kfir

Hey Kfir! Learn something about anarchy, how about! Learn something about the internet, too. You aren't demonstrating anarchy works. The internet in general is demonstrating that.

Then he goes on...

Hey hacker, welcome to the wild wild west and we're puttin' up a Wanted Poster with your face on it. You best giddyup little doggie, cuz a posse is coming to hunt you down. As you know we live in Austin. Well you're about to learn a valuable lesson: don't mess with Texas.


Sorry, Kfir, but you don't understand "the wild west", anarchy, the internet, or just about anything else you're talking about. At all.

Angry posturing notwithstanding you have very little to say. For starters, "anarcho-capitalists" ("property rights are the ONLY rights"-people) are not "anarchists" in the usual sense at all. In fact, the two groups are pretty much about as opposed to each other as you can get. So don't claim you're "proving anarchy works" by "defending your internet property rights". You even know the two are different, you say so yourself, but you apparently don't get it.

In other words, Kfir, you're being disfavorably compared with a skr1pt k1dd33.

There's only one way to eliminate war, a world of free nations, not socialist utopias.


Sorry, Kfir, but war is an inter-nation conflict. It has very little to do with the internal governing style of the nation. Or did you forget that the USA, which i would assume you'd consider a "free nation", is pretty war-happy itself? Did you forget that Canada or the other "socialist utopias" have been far, far less likely to wage war than the United States?

No, New Yorkers are liberal, and we wouldn't change a thing about that, we love New York just the way it is. But they're liberal, not crazy. That's why they elect Republican mayors.


We can talk about Rudy "Blame the victim!"/"Blame the troops!" Gulliani later.

But as for "That's why they elect Republican mayors"? I urge you to consider the implications of that claim.

Yeah, yeah we know, you're not Democrats, they're just for corporations too...blah blah blah...heard it


So, uh, why do you continue to claim (or appear to claim) that democrats == communists == socialists == anarchists == fascists?

Viva la revolution! Sorry sport, but there's a fallacy in your thesis. A free society will always be one where men have different levels of talent and ambition, so the only way to a classless society is one with a heavy-handed state to enforce it, which is why you're not even anarchists, you're fascists. You should read Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron, it portrays what happens when a society is run by your sick philosophy.


Uh, what?

Stop evalutating anarchistic/socialist arguments against classism through the lense of capitalism. Please.

As far as "what happens when a society is run by your sick philosophy"? Wikipedia has some history.

This guy talks like Darth Malak from KOTOR.


He's a script kiddie. What do you expect?

(Edit: And then there's the comments from bizarro-world... More "Communism == Anarchy" nonsense!)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home