[quote author=FTL_Ian link=topic=2004.msg22883#msg22883 date=1258832447]
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22882#msg22882 date=1258831516]
We are several former "Anarcho"-Capitalists, Objectivists, and Minarchists working in tandem to expose the fallacies that prevail in the ideology that many of you present in order to form a more rational shape of libertarianism.
When we post, we are all speaking by consensus.
[/quote]
So there are at least four of you? So are you all on the same commune there on the college campus, or are you all voting on what posts are appropriate to post under your communal account?
[/quote]
We're not sure how many of us there are. We are from all over the earth. None of us are from the places. If you run in some circles, you would know who we are.
[quote]Can "we" not afford an account for each individual in "we"? Doesnt "we" realize that all this "we" bullshit just makes "we" sound like the Borg?[/quote]
We aren't interested in wasting space and time with several accounts when we can simply post through one. We realize this frightens and confuses you, but there isn't much we can do about that.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22923#msg22923 date=1258849827]
We aren't interested in wasting space and time with several accounts when we can simply post through one. We realize this frightens and confuses you, but there isn't much we can do about that.
[/quote]
I, as an individual speaking only for myself, wonder how one person (The typist who types in the statements of SocialistSleepover) can possibly represent the views of all the separate individuals who make up the collective group that identifies itself as SocialistSleepover.
[quote author=Trifith link=topic=2004.msg22924#msg22924 date=1258850458]
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22923#msg22923 date=1258849827]
We aren't interested in wasting space and time with several accounts when we can simply post through one. We realize this frightens and confuses you, but there isn't much we can do about that.
[/quote]
I, as an individual speaking only for myself, wonder how one person (The typist who types in the statements of SocialistSleepover) can possibly represent the views of all the separate individuals who make up the collective group that identifies itself as SocialistSleepover.
[/quote]
We have few disagreements, and what disagreements we have are trivial. We only post in a manner that confirms the unanimity of our convictions. We are also several typists.
It's true that multiple people are using the account.
It has logged in from Indiana University and it seems AnarcoJesse has used the account as well.
[quote author=FTL_Ian link=topic=2004.msg22929#msg22929 date=1258851959]
It's true that multiple people are using the account.
It has logged in from Indiana University and it seems AnarcoJesse has used the account as well.
[/quote]
You are aware AnarchoJesse has two roommates and they all share the same computer, correct?
Good point.
Socialism is aggression by the state to seize property, allegedly for the benefit of the people, in all practical cases for the benefit of thems that run the state.
When I signed up (tonight) there was a notice banning the advocacy of violence and aggression. (Is discussion of violent self-defense meant to be banned? Are we expected to relax and enjoy it while being raped?)
I was surprised to find this discussion on SocialistSleepover, and the word socialist for identifying someone here.
This new and improved understanding of "libertarianism" is meant to embrace socialism?
If the SocialistSleepover collective are socialists, and advocate socialism, doesn't that break the rule on advocating aggression?
Being new here I ask because I r confused.
[quote author=Thoreau link=topic=2004.msg22948#msg22948 date=1258857982]
Socialism is aggression by the state to seize property, allegedly for the benefit of the people, in all practical cases for the benefit of thems that run the state.
When I signed up (tonight) there was a notice banning the advocacy of violence and aggression. (Is discussion of violent self-defense meant to be banned? Are we expected to relax and enjoy it while being raped?)
I was surprised to find this discussion on SocialistSleepover, and the word socialist for identifying someone here.
This new and improved understanding of "libertarianism" is meant to embrace socialism?
If the SocialistSleepover collective are socialists, and advocate socialism, doesn't that break the rule on advocating aggression?
Being new here I ask because I r confused.
[/quote]
Supposedly Libertarian Socialism is different from "regular" Socialism. I've yet to hear a LibSoc admit to being willing to initiate aggressive force, but I imagine they keep a list of those who will at some point go up against the wall…
[quote author=Thoreau link=topic=2004.msg22948#msg22948 date=1258857982]
Socialism is aggression by the state to seize property, allegedly for the benefit of the people, in all practical cases for the benefit of thems that run the state.
When I signed up (tonight) there was a notice banning the advocacy of violence and aggression. (Is discussion of violent self-defense meant to be banned? Are we expected to relax and enjoy it while being raped?)
I was surprised to find this discussion on SocialistSleepover, and the word socialist for identifying someone here.
This new and improved understanding of "libertarianism" is meant to embrace socialism?
If the SocialistSleepover collective are socialists, and advocate socialism, doesn't that break the rule on advocating aggression?
Being new here I ask because I r confused.
[/quote]
You are the people who have hijacked the word libertarian! The first self-described libertarians were communists and mutualists, not capitalists and voluntaryists! We have a longer and deeper history than your 30 year attempt at stealing our history.
Capitalists, bosses, usury, exploitation… these were all concepts that libertarianism stood apart from and against.
[quote author=Thoreau link=topic=2004.msg22948#msg22948 date=1258857982]
Socialism is aggression by the state to seize property, allegedly for the benefit of the people, in all practical cases for the benefit of thems that run the state.
When I signed up (tonight) there was a notice banning the advocacy of violence and aggression. (Is discussion of violent self-defense meant to be banned? Are we expected to relax and enjoy it while being raped?)
I was surprised to find this discussion on SocialistSleepover, and the word socialist for identifying someone here.
This new and improved understanding of "libertarianism" is meant to embrace socialism?
If the SocialistSleepover collective are socialists, and advocate socialism, doesn't that break the rule on advocating aggression?
Being new here I ask because I r confused.
[/quote]
Debate and discussion is not banned. But advocating specific acts, or even general acts of violence is banned. There are thousands of other places where people can threaten others, this is not one of them. 
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22953#msg22953 date=1258861097]
your 30 year attempt at stealing our history.
[/quote]
AHHH!!
Careful; you don't believe in property rights so nobody can "steal" "your" history, because it doesn't belong to you.
Right?
Wow, even I can't troll this good.
You know… I have never been too keen on all this "solidarity" stuff. The term, to me, seems only to indicate blind alliances, faith, and unwarranted dogmatic devotion to persons whom in any other light you would consider a foe if not faced with a even greater one. Yup. I reckon I do not much care for it myself.
This "we" thing doesn't work for me. You know what it initially brought to my mind? Ted Kaczynski (aka The Unabomber) in his Manifesto. He used "we" throughout even though he was just one guy in a cabin in Montana. When reading posts by SocialistSleepover I kept thinking it was probably just one insane guy in a basement somewhere.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22928#msg22928 date=1258851193]
We have few disagreements, and what disagreements we have are trivial. We only post in a manner that confirms the unanimity of our convictions. We are also several typists.
[/quote]
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=1782.msg22930#msg22930 date=1258852371]
We are confused now. Are you speaking from a position of employment or worker self-management? If you are buying the supplies to make your own product and arguing from worker self-management, we see little discussion to be had, because we're largely in agreement.
[/quote]
And the unanimity of your confusion, apparently. I'm not the smartest guy around, and nowhere do I claim the capacity to represent the hearts of libsocs everywhere, yet I knew what she was talking about.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=1782.msg22925#msg22925 date=1258850782]
We can't speak for Jesse, but we do think that it is absurd to insist that because you're letting nature run its course you are at the same time mixing your labor with the materials.
[/quote]
Wait, you can speak for libsocs everywhere, but can't speak for Jesse? Does this mean he's not a libsoc or does he somehow manage to resist your attempts to speak for him?
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=1782.msg22930#msg22930 date=1258852371]
We are sure you're a nice lady in person, but you seem to be as dumb as a brick. We do not understand how you could have jumped to such a conclusion, especially because you haven't proven the premises you've laid out.
[/quote]
If I wanted to be a libsoc, do I have to be a condescending boob too?
[quote author=xRazorwirex link=topic=2004.msg22960#msg22960 date=1258863847]
AHHH!!
Careful; you don't believe in property rights so nobody can "steal" "your" history, because it doesn't belong to you.
Right?
[/quote]
I'd argue they had abandoned their history, so it was open to being used by others.
I'll close by saying that I like a lot of people in the Free Keene movement, including Jesse. Sure, I wouldn't want him doing Public Relations, but he's a sincere, passionate ideologue and although he stumbles from time to time (like we all do), he generally tries to make things right. He might seem extreme, but when it comes to radical ideas, being true to your beliefs makes you, in turn, a radical. Just hope he can find a way to influence people before butting heads with the state.
P.S. I would love to hear a reply to my questions.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22953#msg22953 date=1258861097]
You are the people who have hijacked the word libertarian! The first self-described libertarians were communists and mutualists, not capitalists and voluntaryists! We have a longer and deeper history than your 30 year attempt at stealing our history.
[/quote]
Interesting thought. Good thing I know where my political ideology came from and am not consider with the baggage associated with Live Free or Die.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover 270145 link=topic=2004.msg23030#msg23030 date=1258958473]
We aren't interested in wasting space and time with several accounts when we can simply post through one. We realize this frightens and confuses you, but there isn't much we can do about that.
[/quote]
Yes, I am so terribly frightened and confused by you sharing an account :roll:. Gosh, people working together is such a foreign concept to a voluntaryist such as myself. After all, cooperation implies socialism – anyone who believes people can and should cooperate, must obviously must believe in taking their neighbor's property at the point of a gun. :duh: I mean, true cooperation always involves threats of violence.
[quote author=J’raxis 270145 link=topic=2004.msg23030#msg23030 date=1258958473]
Reminds me of another weird online collective…
[/quote]
You give the third rate troll(s) far too much credit.
[quote author=J’raxis 270145 link=topic=2004.msg23030#msg23030 date=1258958473]
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22923#msg22923 date=1258849827]
[quote]Can "we" not afford an account for each individual in "we"? Doesnt "we" realize that all this "we" bullshit just makes "we" sound like the Borg?[/quote]
We aren't interested in wasting space and time with several accounts when we can simply post through one. We realize this frightens and confuses you, but there isn't much we can do about that.
[/quote]
Reminds me of another weird online collective…
[/quote]
yay, thats what I thought "we" was going for.
[quote author=SocialistSleepover link=topic=2004.msg22953#msg22953 date=1258861097]
You are the people who have hijacked the word libertarian! The first self-described libertarians were communists and mutualists, not capitalists and voluntaryists! We have a longer and deeper history than your 30 year attempt at stealing our history.
Capitalists, bosses, usury, exploitation… these were all concepts that libertarianism stood apart from and against.
[/quote]
Ansocs seem to have a bizarre and ignorant fetish about the word "libertarian". Nevermind that anarcho-capitalist theory is over 150 years old (because they didn't call themselves "anarchists" or "libertarians", they somehow count as neither even though the ideas are the same) and nevermind that anarchist critiques of the State among classical liberals pre-date socialists adopting either "anarchist" or "libertarian".
Even in the modern United Statian libertarian movement, the term has been used for closer to 70 years than the 30 you suggest.
No one here wants YOUR history. The history of anarcho-socialism is a history of violence. You can keep it.
[quote]No one here wants YOUR history.[/quote]
thank you for speaking for everyone without knowing their thoughts 