Agreed, obviously stupid af. That might be why...A socialism-capitalism binary is obviously stupid af.
Interesting what you choose to respond to....yup, very VERY few anarchists are anarcho-capitalists. The single largest anarchy group currently is ANTIFA with a logo displaying a red flag representing socialism and a black flag representing anarchy. Most pro-anarchists I know are Bernie bros even if ideologically that makes zero sense.
You seem to be very easily impressed.
Really? What are we trying to accomplish?Y’all are wasting your time. Again.
Dunno. But i definitely wish this one dude would just go away. That would be more likely to happen if everyone put him on their ignore list.Really? What are we trying to accomplish?
More like a special neurosis. It's a gift, and a curse.Dunno. But i definitely wish this one dude would just go away. That would be more likely to happen if everyone put him on their ignore list.
You have a special power, though. You do the good work. So just ignore my frustrations.
How so? Cause I think Schulz is hilarious and a genius?You seem to be very easily impressed.
How so? Cause I think Schulz is hilarious and a genius?
Podcaster Joe Rogan has made a mint off of appealing to the sea of men who want an easy boost to their self-esteem through chauvinistic chest-thumping, rather than developing real skills and a personality. Rogan can be a little more subtle than Carlson about it, but ultimately, they're playing on the same set of anxieties and insecurities in American men, and prescribing the same toxic masculinity as a supposed cure.
In Rogan, it's easy to see, for instance, how refusal to get the COVID-19 vaccine got encoded for the fragile masculinity set as a way to "prove" their manly bona fides. He falsely claimed that "healthy" men who are "exercising all the time" don't need the vaccine. He repeatedly suggested that vaccine mandates were somehow an assault on freedom, rather than what they are: a common sense health measure that helps free everyone from far more miserable pandemic restrictions. Taken together, it paints a picture of vaccination as the behavior of supposedly weak men. Unsurprisingly, then, Rogan ended up with COVID-19 and had to admit that he had kept finding excuses to put off getting a vaccine he had routinely insinuated was emasculating.
I don't know why people keep saying that. I don't feel the pattern is that much of a mystery. I try to stay away from personal attacks. I don't claim to be perfect with it but any time a subject veers into a comment on my character, such as 'you believe B follows A because you're xxxxxx' I'm likely to drop the subject.Interesting what you choose to respond to....
They don't have power. If those you are referring to had power, I believe you could count on their government setting up a centrally planned economy if they didn't self destruct via infighting before they got that far.The people who self-style themselves as anarcho-socialists don't meet your notion of socialism (a centrally planned economy) to any significant degree. I was referring to socialism as you use the terms, not as other people bend it.
I don't understand what this has to do with you telling me that I'm very easily impressed. I'm vaccinated and would like for all to be so, again, how am I easily impressed?Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan and the Proud Boys: How the fragility of the male ego fuels the far-right
Authoritarians know how to play on the gender anxieties of insecure men, building up an army of bitter chumpswww.salon.com
Do you understand what anarcho-socialists believe?They don't have power. If those you are referring to had power, I believe you could count on their government setting up a centrally planned economy if they didn't self destruct via infighting before they got that far.
I was referring to the appeals to machismo, which was the complete tone of the first several minutes of the Schulz video, as well as the tone of the title of his video.I don't understand what this has to do with you telling me that I'm very easily impressed. I'm vaccinated and would like for all to be so, again, how am I easily impressed?
Funny how you keep linking to videos of people you have nothing in common with and want nothing to do with.Funny how your go-to is to bring up the far right and people I have nothing in common with nor want anything to do with them.
No.Are you suggesting Andrew Schulz is far right?
So you're saying either Rogan or Schultz are far-right?I was referring to the appeals to machismo, which was the complete tone of the first several minutes of the Schulz video, as well as the tone of the title of his video.
Funny how you keep linking to videos of people you have nothing in common with and want nothing to do with.
No.
What they believe is all over the map but ultimately I don’t think it matters. When naïve ideas meet the real world, and anarcho-socialists are full of naïve ideas, history shows that it results in an authoritarian strongman seizing control of everything including the economy.Do you understand what anarcho-socialists believe?
1) The two paragraphs of the article I quoted did not mention political affiliation.So you're saying either Rogan or Schultz are far-right?
Odd, coming from someone who is posting responses from something he has not understood.Gtfoh. You're drunk.
????? Were you trying to make some sort of point there? You failed.You're a Nazi supporter.
Indeed, which is why we can be glad that anarcho-socialists and libertarians do not control the world.What they believe is all over the map but ultimately I don’t think it matters. When naïve ideas meet the real world, and anarcho-socialists are full of naïve ideas, history shows that it results in an authoritarian strongman seizing control of everything including the economy.
Man, beat me to it.According to your graphic, Socialism encompasses Communmism.
You randomly, without any context, said I was easily impressed after posting the Schulz video. I'll I saw was "..." with no context.1) The two paragraphs of the article I quoted did not mention political affiliation.
2) When you asked me why I quoted the article, I gave you a reason that had nothing to do with politics.
3) I have already explicitly denied this once regarding Schultz.
So, I will say this again. No.
At this point, though, you should be asking why you keep coming back to this. Are you trying to avoid my point?
Odd, coming from someone who is posting responses from something he has not understood.
????? Were you trying to make some sort of point there? You failed.