Anarchist Discussion Forums

How forgiveing can i be? Only so to what is necessary in my life. Luckily i know the value of people well.

Unforgiveable. But you never needed me to forgive you in the first place.

[quote="Guest"]Buy yourself a nice apple at a non-market, and shove it up your ass.[/quote]
Hey, quit with the prejudice against fruit fetishists! :evil:

[quote="Guest"]Buy yourself a nice apple at a non-market, and shove it up your ass.[/quote]

lol @ presupposing markets.

ps, ouch!

Buy yourself a nice apple at a non-market, and shove it up your ass.

[quote="Guest"]The market is a simple tool of exchange[/quote]

ah yes, the myth of market neutrality. lol.

[quote="Guest"]markets must be free in order to set prices reflective of supply and demand[/quote]

if we decide that we want markets, then, sure, they should be 'free'. then again, we might decide that we don't want markets. (first person to mention mises gets e-slapped.)

[quote]Many anarchists bad- mouth the "free market", but the alternative is the authoritarian command economy[/quote]

fucking nonsense. the alternative to 'market' is 'not-market', where 'non-market can be any number of things. get thee back to mises.org.

[quote]subsidies for Archer-Daniels Midland, bailouts for banks, and so on, and do we really want that?[/quote]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. sounds like a twist on 'capitalism or gulags'. fuck off and die.

I agree with the last three guests. Vance Packard (1914-1960) wrote some similar things in
[i]The Hidden Persuaders[/i] (1957, about advertising), [i]The Status Seekers[/i], 1959, and
[i]The Waste Makers[/i] (160, about planned obsolecense).

The fact that some people can become convinced that they only be happy if they have a Rolex and other trappings of wealth is sad, but this is not necessarily a condemnation of "the market". The market is a simple tool of exchange and markets must be free in order to set prices reflective of supply and demand. A good example of a true free market is a flea market. where if Mr. and Mrs. Jones can't get as high a price as they would wish for their zucchini, they might lower the price, or vice-versa. When authoritarian bureaucratic sledgehammer economics are imposed, and it is mandated that "to feed the poor" or whatever, that zucchini can cost no more than a penny a pound, less than the cost of production, no zucchini will be produced, unless the bureaucracy then subsidizes zucchini producers. Many anarchists bad- mouth the "free market", but the alternative is the authoritarian command economy, with subsidies for Archer-Daniels Midland, bailouts for banks, and so on, and do we really want that?
Tom Palven

Sure, everything has its good and bad sides.

Everything can be compared. Anything in life. Girlfriends, schools, houses, friends. Do you have the best? Do you have something good? Do you have something crap?

Roll the dice of life and hope for the best. It's all you can. If you're lucky you'll get true love. If not wait until next time.

otherguest has touched on the fundamental flaw of hitching one's wagon to 'markets' and 'competition' as a means to determine what is 'best'. i'm reminded of the (conservative/ultra-capitalist 'think'-tank) heritage foundation's 'economic freedom' index. depending on your perspective, you could almost turn the results upside down and they'd be more accurate. the presumptions of competition are rarely considered, but they're at least as relevant to evaluating the outcomes as are the outcomes themselves. what are we trying to determine, when we compete on the market? it isn't self-evident simply by virtue of the nature of the beast. it's entirely possible (and i think often likely) that to 'win' on the market is to lose somewhere else.

The view that My continent, my nationality, my race, or my gender is "the best" seems to have as much validity as "my high school is the best, rah, rah, rah." The best in what regard? The happiest, most creative, most ethical, and most stress-free? Or the most anal-retentive, stress-prone, militaristic, and depressed?

Oh goodness, what I've been hoping for for months may soon come to pass. A battle of the racists between African_Prince and IK! Please do! We'd all love to watch.

Wow what a couple of good little anarchists. Or more like what a couple of good little capitalists.

Or.. what a couple of morons.

People are free. Free to like skin colour.

I WANT A UNIFIED AFRICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Oh wait, what kind of beaurocratic system with a monopoly on lands inhabbited by majority Africans would that require....


Also, you're a shitty fucking pan Africanist as well since you only care about Black Africans. You're still a fucking racist.

"Being human is a part of my identity, but it doesn't encompass all of my identity."

yes, it does. at least, all those aspects which you've been discussing. the arbitrary lines you're drawing (african, male, liking certain music, etc.) fall under the heading of 'human'.

"It isn't an either or scenario"

indeed it isn't: a slice of pie doesn't contradict the whole pie. so why are you pretending that it does?

"Every relationship we have is different from any other since all of the individuals we form relationships with are different from one another."

so what? we're all in this together. there's no need to draw circles around certain humans based on more finely-grained criteria. all that does is divide us. if we're walking down the street with friends and a group of people attack us, ok, that's 'them' and we're 'us'. it's justified. but dividing people based on melanin content isn't justified. you fucking racist cunt.

"in my view, all sentient beings deserve equal, moral consideration"

bullshit. in your view, 'all are equal, but some are more equal than others.'

"You're seeing a conflict where there isn't any"

i'm reading your fucking words. you seek to divide people along racial lines. you're a fucking racist.

"Again, I appreciate the irony of your criticizing me for drawing arbitrary lines between Africans and non-Africans yet you're drawing an arbitrary line between humans and non-human great apes."

nope, that's where i would have gone next, if you'd have conceded your arbitrary idiocy, but you refuse. if we discover alien life, i'd fold that into the circle as well. don't fucking lecture me about drawing a line around humans when you're drawing an even smaller one. i'm trying to get you to broaden your own racist circle first, before i can even begin to get through to you on the commonality of life itself. moreover, life is only animated matter. so we've got commonality with the planet, and so on, and should give at least half a shit about taking care of our environment. this all comes later, after i've cut the swastika tattoo off your chest.

you fucking vile scum.

[quote]sounds good, let's unify all of humanity.[/quote]

There is no conflict between pan-humanism and pan-Africanism. Being human is a part of my identity, but it doesn't encompass all of my identity. There are some experiences that I share in common with other African people that I don't have in common with Mexicans but there are also some experiences that I have in common with Mexican men that I don't have in common with African women. It isn't an either or scenario, with one friend you can bond over a love of art, music and literature whereas another friend might not be interested in these things but you might share with them an interest in computers, science, sports etc. Every relationship we have is different from any other since all of the individuals we form relationships with are different from one another.

[quote]as has been explained to you several times, the lines you draw are arbitrary. you base them on ethnicity, or continent of origin, or whatever. replace 'europeans' and 'asians' with 'german shepherds' and 'siberian huskies' and it becomes immediately ridiculous.[/quote]

Drawing a line between siblings and complete strangers is also arbitrary since all biological organisms on the planet share some genetic heritage in common, yet most people have a special kind of relationship with family members that they don't have with friends, lovers and strangers. You draw an arbitrary line between humans and chimpanzees but in my view, all sentient beings deserve equal, moral consideration. I have more in common with an adult chimpanzee than I do with a human infant.

[quote]if you start by drawing a circle around yourself, then extend it outward to encircle your immediate family, then again for your extended family, then again for your friends and their friends, then again for everyone in your hometown, then... clearly, if we're all doing this, our circles will overlap and we'll end up circling the whole planet. so why not do that in the 1st place? 'oh, no no no!' you say. 'we've got to stop at africa!' (or wherever.)[/quote]


Being African is a part of my identity. Unity with other Africans is completely irrelevant to unity with Irish workers on the basis of class or unity with Black Brasiliens on the basis of race. You're seeing a conflict where there isn't any and I think it's overly simplistic.

[quote]there's you, and then there's everyone. those are the ends of the scale. choosing a point in between them will be arbitrary. we're all the same species.[/quote]

Again, I appreciate the irony of your criticizing me for drawing arbitrary lines between Africans and non-Africans yet you're drawing an arbitrary line between humans and non-human great apes. Life is arbitrary, even classifying species is problematic (and there is no absolute trait that all humans and only humans share). There are many aspects to a person's identity and we relate to different people on different grounds, our relationship with one person has nothing to do with our relationship with another

Insecurity, something is wrong with my computer (or the site). I will try to respond to you later.

or pan-anythingists. Would a pan-africanist still be a racist? yes.