define the state.

[YaelTheGreat]

(08-17-2012 07:28 PM)Laz Wrote:  brilliant criticism of a complex economic system, interspersed nicely with homophobia and 2nd grade grammar.

dammit i don't know if my signature has space for this one.

Someone has no concept of internet sarcasm...

[Notorious1994]

(08-17-2012 07:28 PM)Laz Wrote:  

(08-17-2012 07:23 PM)YaelTheGreat Wrote:  When Marxist have the majority your opposing opinions don't fucking matter; what kind of revolution are you looking for?.........

Do you know what a socialist/ communist is? A person who orders his people to eat dead people and babies. A person who suppresses opposing ideology. A person who lacks common economic sense and plan economies that fail miserably. A person who believes that the nature of power will somehow change if we build a national state in the memory of thy lord Marx. So who gives a shit if a couple of these faggots get beaten for sharing their ideas?

brilliant criticism of a complex economic system, interspersed nicely with homophobia and 2nd grade grammar.

dammit i don't know if my signature has space for this one.

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

I want you to look at this every time before you post so you can self-diagnose what's wrong with your post

[YaelTheGreat]

Quote:Everything you've said so far is Pseudo-intellectualism, either adopted from Marx crap or made up to suit your non-existent point

[Asshole]

(08-17-2012 07:30 PM)Notorious1994 Wrote:  Where did you get the idea you can just start defining terms however you feel like? A state can exist without both of those things. A state does not need to have classes by any definition

so close to an academic debate here. we both disagree on a concept, i thought you might explain why you think i'm wrong. but nope....

(08-17-2012 07:30 PM)Notorious1994 Wrote:  Everything you've said so far is Pseudo-intellectualism, either adopted from Marx crap or made up to suit your non-existent point

give me one state that has existed without class antagonisms and without the need to resolve class antagonisms.

(08-17-2012 07:32 PM)YaelTheGreat Wrote:  Someone has no concept of internet sarcasm...

whenever i try to explain some of the vocabulary you're misusing, you troll me instead of admitting a mistake or debating the concept.

intellectual coward.

(08-17-2012 07:30 PM)YaelTheGreat Wrote:  I am not an intellectual coward, we are just coming at it at two different positions. You want me to submit to your Marxist rhetoric, which I don't claim to know and don't really care to know, and I want you to leave the rhetoric behind. And I didn't call the ideology in entirety a piece of shit, just its ideas on power and state.

LOL, you want dialogue to keep on going, but then you want me to leave the discussion for disagreeing?

so let me get this right. because you disagree with me, you refuse to try to understand, form a coherent response to, or pay any attention to my posts? your response to a debate is, i disagree with you so you must be wrong and i'm just going to sit here and be an asshole instead of reading your posts?

furthermore you just openly stated that you disagree with something you have no understanding of.

---

(08-17-2012 07:33 PM)Notorious1994 Wrote:  http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

I want you to look at this every time before you post so you can self-diagnose what's wrong with your post

if you feel that way, identify some of my fallacies. i'm not seeing them from my side. however you and yael both indulge in

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

quite a bit. and good website i'm going to use it. i mean that sincerely.

[psy0nyd3]

(08-17-2012 07:14 PM)Laz Wrote:  

(08-17-2012 08:51 AM)psy0nyd3 Wrote:  WHy is it absurd exactly? Specific regions already have specific dialects, traditions, subcultures, tendancies, and mindsets so they are already basically tiny nation-states.

you are going to centralize production to the surrounding miles?

you are going to isolate people to the couple thousand people living in their nearby town?

i assume theres going to be some type of mercantilist trade between nationstates?

and autonomous governments in each nationstate?

this is feudalism without the serfs. you realize that right?

and you're an idiot if you think that people will want to stay in their 'communities' their whole life, that globalization still allows for such isolation, that a locality could produce and trade for all of its needs, that thousands of small regional governments wouldn't evolve into aristocracies, that those same governments wouldn't go to war with each other, or that simply squeezing people together into little communities changes anything, anything, about class society.

how exactly are you going to tell someone living in manhattan that he can't visit brooklyn because he is now part of one of your communities? how does this make any sense at all?

When does isolation enter the picture exactly? You seem to think that the nation states are speaking different languages or something instead of the reality where they will be mainly just loose democratic organization of regions. Nobody would tell anybody that they cant have freedom of mobility. I thought that was a VERY common anti marxist argument. Are you seriously throwing that at me?

The governmental organization should be democratic from the work place to the city council and in times of emergencies like natural disasters and war we can mobilize state militias to handle the crisis. Immediately following resolution they must be disbanded.

Without insane bombardment of entertainment and lies through the news media I dont see this type of organization as far fetched.

It is not feudalism...

[YaelTheGreat]

Quote:brilliant criticism of a complex economic system, interspersed nicely with homophobia and 2nd grade grammar.

The purpose of the paragraph was to mock the obvious stupidity inherent in your logic. I completely understand that the "dictatorship" of the proletariat merely means they have the majority. But what I also understand is that the purpose of this "dictatorship" is to make the other political parties and their philosophies minorities. Now, judging by the way you speak of Capitalist, you plan to treat them in the same fashion they have treated you (socialist, communist, opposition in general). It was to mock.

Quote:furthermore you just openly stated that you disagree with something you have no understanding of.

I did no such thing. I admitted that I don't really want to learn the special rhetoric that Marxist have created amongst themselves to describe their philosophy, I never said I am not open to the philosophy itself. If the rhetoric is essential to the philosophy, then there is something wrong with the philosophy. Your massive intellect should be able to describe your philosophy without continually referring to your special rhetoric.

Quote:dentify some of my fallacies

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

And, for the record, it is not that I lack intellect, it is that you view intellect as the ability to quote from a philosopher instead of asking questions and thinking. All your intellect comes from the mouth of Marx.

[Djoser]

The State is any organization and/or government that holds a monopoly on the legit use of force. I think that's something we all agree with and is applicable in all spectrums.

However, unlike what Laz has stated before(in other threads), this doesn't mean that the military is automatically counted as a state. Therefore, if there is a militia, it's not a state if it has authority over a certain area. Neighborhood watches don't possess authority over the neighborhood it protects especially since it's voluntary.

Yael and Laz, take a breather. Both of you are spouting bullshit that makes no sense.

[ClichéGuevara]

(08-17-2012 06:53 PM)Laz Wrote:  YO IT WOULD BE COOL AT SOME POINT IF UOU MADE A COHERENT ARGUMENT AND MAYBE STOP REDEFINING POLITICAL TERMS TO SUIT YOUR IDEALS

---

you know you can't just decide to redefine a word because you don't like what it means right

That's a large part of Marxism, Laz...

(08-17-2012 07:02 PM)Laz Wrote:  its nice how you substitute any factual evidence, any supporting argument, any theory, for name calling. internet sarcasm will save the world, right?

You do the same shit with your condescending, pretentious dickery.

Quote:i'd agree with a few tweaks, the state is essentially class coercion.

---

There's a difference between class/people power and party/state power.

[Asshole]

not reentering this thread yet just making two short responses

(08-17-2012 08:43 PM)Djoser Wrote:  However, unlike what Laz has stated before(in other threads), this doesn't mean that the military is automatically counted as a state. Therefore, if there is a militia, it's not a state if it has authority over a certain area. Neighborhood watches don't possess authority over the neighborhood it protects especially since it's voluntary.

if there is a military, there is a state. a neighborhood watch is not a military force. they aren't even allowed firearms.

however, latent militias wouldn't constitute a state if they were inactive.

(08-17-2012 08:43 PM)YaelTheGreat Wrote:  http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

honestly i'm going to ignore anything you say that i feel like in this thread since you're obviously not interested in a debate and disagree with something you have self admittedly no understanding on.

but where are these at? also attacking you isn't an ad hominem attack since i'm not trying to discredit your theory through personal attacks. you haven't even proposed a theory yet.

[YaelTheGreat]

Bye Laz. If you read what I said, you would have seen I did want a discussion, but you refuse to modify your rhetoric.

Quote:you have self admittedly no understanding on.

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

Quote:honestly i'm going to ignore anything you say that i feel like in this thread since you're obviously not interested in a debate

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

[Asshole]

your criticism is i disagree with you so i won't listen to what you have to say. how else do i respond to that lol? and the false cause one doesn't even apply at all.

fuck now this thread is going to be everyone misusing that webstie.

[YaelTheGreat]

False cause makes perfect sense. You relate my distaste for special rhetoric as a cop out for discussion and a lack of intellect. The assumptions don't even relate.