Constitutional republic as the best model so far

And you cannot separate the *relative* comfort of the working class of the developed world from the plight of the global south.

If thats what third worldism is, then it really needs to work on the "marxist" part, because it isn't very marxist.

Who is producing those phones? Where are those sweatshops located? Capital is global. We benefit from the cheap labor and the exploitation of resources of the world, and it is our constitutional republics that enforce the conditions for not just the possibility of this, but its certainty.

Secondly, moral relativism is an accusation that only is leveled by conservatives -- 99% of the time without merit (I would say 100% of the time, because not only does no one claim to be a moral relativist, but as a philosophical position it is incoherent -- it's usually used as a strawman to attack those who consider history relevant). Chomsky is definitely not a moral relativist -- his politics are informed famously by his adherence to the idea that there is a universal morality that is hardwired into our brains. This is why he is opposed to people HE calls moral relativists -- Foucault and so forth.And he is, indeed, doing that same conservative bullshit when he does that, in my estimation, but it doesn't really detract from his more valuable insights. I would say that Chomsky has legit criticisms of those latter French philosophers, but often I think they agree with each other more than they don't -- though there is a formal difference.

On the other hand, Hitchens and Harris might be good writers, but their politics are shit. You said you disagree with their foreign policy, but do you not see how those foreign policy positions are connected with their general philosophy? Hitchens supported the Iraq War, of course. Harris is like his more fascist offspring, solidifying the philosophically weak New Atheism into a state-religion of empire in no uncertain terms.

You don't believe this because...it's inconvenient? It's not necessarily "third worldist" to believe this. It's economics.

Shit Benzo, you sound just like my Dad. Soft right Tory.
Hang on, I've heard that somewhere before.

This is a pretty good example of why politicalcompass is shit.

Your edginess is disemboweling me.

Benzo89 - I got to know mate, how do you feel this thread is going?

I'd say it's going real well. In fact I'm thinking of started a 'Actually, Fascism Ain't So Bad When You Think About It' thread.

The stubbornness of bourgeois ideology is something that frustrates many of us on a regular basis, so forgive our tendency to snap at any particular proponent of it here.

This thread is a steaming pile of horse shit and guess what everyone, it's not because of benzo. This has been depressing as fuck to read.

Jamal, your attitude disgusts me. I don't accept your apology and neither should anyone. Literally the last post benzo made before yours said

. But nope, you interpret that as a resolute diatribe against the One True ideology. Communsim or death Grow the fuck up and get your head out of your own ass.

Benzo has been accused/likened to, as it stands, of being a right wing troll and now a fascist according to webby? For what. It took 1 and a half pages for some one to actually go through his OP in a structured way.

The anarchist analysis of rights is of course still as vague as it was when I remember making a thread on it. Basically it is

YEAH BUT YOU KNOW, RIGHTS ARE GIVEN BY STATES. AND STATES ARE BAD SO. RIGHTS ARE BAD.

Admitting that he is in a better situation historically speaking than much of the human population of this planet has been so far (which is objectively correct) has garnered a response of YOU'RE EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US. Like benzo said, he wasn't saying it was better than what anarchism proposes. But of course everyone would rather imply he must be of some right wing persuasion because that's easier.

Also we have seen the classic self aggrandizing YEAH I DON'T CARE ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH COZ NAZIS like you're all out there on the streets kneecaping the fash every weekend. Get over yourself. I agree with the basic argument of 'yes freedom of speech is cool for us fuck using it as a free pass for racists to do what they want un questioned' but what I have seen goes far beyond that.

Oh and as for chilli sauce 27#, if we are talking about the way solfed/afed meetings work out as examples of how anarchist politics are practically, then we are talking about 7 straight white cis dudes in a whetherspoons pub on a weekday evening getting mildly to absolutely fucking pissed either having a circle jerk or arguing about the most obscure un relevant shite.

Finally, the very fact this dude had to say "I feel as though maybe the forum isn't for people wHo are not Anarchists to friendly discuss the subject from an outside perspective. If so I will gladly bow out of the thread" is indicative of the sort of atmosphere that is still prevalent on these forums.

Benzo. My advice would be to carry on un sticking yourself from the universe of confirmation bias that is anarchism, or at least that is anarchists.

edit: https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=-8.63&soc=-8.51

*Ahem* did you read the other thread that Benzo has been a featured star of?

ffs, he's a regularly appearing troll, who pops back under different accounts. His MO is to come here and say things which he knows will push people's buttons and within a short time people go ballistic on him. Winding up anarchists for shits and giggles seems to be a hobby of his.

He's variously posted on why he thinks rape jokes are funny, why it's OK to use racial and other slurs and generally be a complete shit, if it gets a good laugh. He's posted up a video of a woman being punched in the face to prove a point about entitled women asking for it. He pretty much picks subjects which he knows will rankle anarchists, and makes his point that anarchists/commies are out of touch with the average Joe working class man ie him. He's posted some especially nasty stuff, which was unpublished and to give him credit where credit is due, this time his not using porn as an avi, which is something he did on one of his previous accounts.

There's nothing he's saying here which he hasn't said before but this time he's sugar coating it with a "let's have a civil conversation about this" veneer.

On a previous time he was here he was going to go to Syria to fight ISIS. Clearly he missed his flight.

What the fuck was that Croydonian?

It seems like you've got some other axes to grind and, for whatever reason, you're grinding them defending a person who, at this point, it should abundantly clear is a troll.

Seriously, the whole first page of this thread is pretty civil - even with some pretty clear wind-ups: "Do you not agree anarchism inherently authoritarian?", bullshit about Shariah law, and how anarchism "as an ideology...tramples existing rights and laws that protect members of society..."

Now, to be fair, it probably was the regular posters who upped the douchiness - and, yeah, some of the comparisons are pretty exaggerated - but it wasn't exactly unprovoked.

fleur are you talking about me or benzo?

Benzo. Not you Croydonian.

Well. I can't say I knew that before posting, but to be honest it doesn't really change what I said. He's clearly excellent at what he does (trolling) and I definitely agree with some of the things he said. Because I barely post in this forum anymore I am not really arsed about looking at other threads trying to play detective.

The things I say in my post about the response to his posts still has every bit of validity. It's hardly like this stuff hasn't happened before with non trolls.

So if anyone wants to give me an analysis of rights that is more than 'state given, we shouldn't rely on the state' or anything that hasn't already been said about free speech (I.e fuck nazis tbh idc), then this would be the time.

Fool me once...

Well, one way to look at it is that rights as concepts are not particularly useful without actual material conditions being conducive to their fullest expression.

Also, fuck the state.

rights are largely in response to class struggle/ struggles against oppression. with out the willingness to continue such struggles they can be ignored or removed

Benzo89 wrote:

You post on nationalist forums?!