Comments by "CynicalBroadcast" (@CynicalBastard) on "There is no "Libertarian" Socialism" video.

  1. People are social animals, you all are trying to vie for your own groups, and/or "race". At-bottom, the people, the narod, are social, and hence, at-bottom, socialism is what is relevant to the people and their social ends [as per the definition of the term]. It's about people, at-bottom, having self-management. You want that. The entire populists sphere of the right-wing now wants SELF-MANAGEMENT. You understand what that means reta- I mean, Drizzle? No. But I'll tell you. It means that, at-bottom, when the people want self-management and seemingly can't have it, because they try to rise up and attain it, this is what makes them both libertarian in ethos, and socialist in action.
    2
  2. Amish are semi-communal You mean 'ants', right? They are ants.
    1
  3. Natural outgrowth Naturalistic fallacy. Just because something is "natural" doesn't make it "good". This is the main crux of your argument and it's a fallacy. It's also "natural" to engender 'groupthink' into collective groups, social groups, even. It's natural for the state to accrue out of this body of groupthink. Is all this "good" automatically, cause it's "natural"?
    1
  4. Legal and Civic So you gonna make videos about how your audience erm special people are just not for anything like this [generally], at all? and that alot of them are so "right-wing" that they couldn't give a fuck less about "muh civic libertarianism" and want their social ends met [even if it means to violate the spirit of the constitution of the US?]...? Nah.
    1
  5. Sure there is libertarian socialism and even libertarian marxism. These are all ethos, ideology, and logic. There is no "one kind" of libertarian. Styx, you're a dumbo.
    1
  6. You're never going to have utopia bullshit Marxism isn't about utopia...if you didn't read Marx, you shouldn't talk about it. Neither should these "marxists" [insurrectionaries]. Marx said communism is the NATURAL OUTCOME of capitalist endeavor, and not something that is "utopia" or something to "accelerate", but it is an insuperable inevitability, in Marxian theory. Marxists who try and foment a revolution are reading the Communist Manifesto very shoddily, and are taking to crude communism, which Marx ultimately warned about; and he abjured the manifesto, eventually, as well. His ideas culminated in the idea that Capital was like an automaton that took on a life of it's own, and so, this was a calculus of human endeavor that was almost eschatological. This isn't to excuse these marxist insurrectionaries, but it does explain them, and how they are also just as wrong as you are, Styx...typically.
    1
  7. Amish sending their kids to the city It's like tribal initiation of old. It's really neat.
    1
  8. Actually, I'm catching up on some videos, and this video isn't half-bad. It's not total gibberish. This is the Styx I like, just sayin'.
    1
  9. Dissent, encouraged, more guns, more of everything that activates the war-machine Not like ants, at all, dude.
    1
  10. Libertarian socialist is not the same thing as that? Or anarcho capitilist -- Or that, thunberbolt two. You know why? cause at-bottom the anarcho-capitalist is socialism and the race. See Chile, when the juntas were funded by the Mont Pelerin Society [a libertarian think-tank]. They went from funded an-cap rebellion, to what? that's right...socialism. Cause they consolidated behind the race, THEIR RACE, not the world-at-large [capital].
    1
  11.  Clarence Spangle  Ok.
    1
  12. Surplus Good. But people are naturally [there's that word again!] communal animals. They tend to want their community [the place they live among people] to not be filled with shitheads ruining it. Surpluses tend to lead to this scenario. The "right-wing" in America aren't done confusing their Capitalism for their Socialism [their groupthink, resource self-management, at-bottom, decentralized wont, etc., their wont to "take back America" from other people that aren't in their group].
    1
  13. When I talk about the ideology I espouse You are talking about an ethnos, not a "system". The "system" part of the equation you're trying to muster out is American idealism.
    1
  14. Authoritarian elements Looks below in the comments.......Hey, none of these fuckwits are authoritarian. lol
    1
  15. LOL
    1
  16.  @comunistubula4424  Social ends are that which you strive for for self-management. You want to feel happy, so you attain to self-management, which are met in social ends, as you are a social animal. Spend enough to time with out social ends, in a cage, is liable to do mental damage. And at-bottom are social ends, that which you are striving for in self-management. If you can't fathom this, defenestrate yourself.
    1
  17. @That grey area You want self-management.
    1
  18. @That grey area You clearly are not a lawyer. Would you have arbitration in your dystopian law structure? at least? can people reasonably bargain for a settlement, at least? if your stricture doesn't allow for an impartial judgement based on representatives' judgement, then can people at least beg to not go to jail if they actually pertain to freedom at hand? What are the consequences of amending the law "wrongly"? under your new strictures of "you're not allowed to sway from these words, ever", it's pretty well the case, I mean, that people could still vote on amending the constitution, right? So what if they vote "wrong"? could they vote at all, freely, if they could "vote wrong"?
    1
  19. @That grey area No, but you are an idiot, "boyo". There isn't any fantasizing in my comment. You are just an idiot. You don't know what the concept of theory is. You don't know what the concept of hypothesis is. You don't know what a political ethos is, actually; you think it's a system, but a "system" pertains to states, laws, rules, SYSTEMS...you don't like systems, but you conflate systems with ETHOS. Political science is made up of both, moron. This is why you are an idiot. Also, you're an idiotes, too. I mean ἰδιώτης, Greek for "private citizen": that is, one who doesn't partake in city life [or politics] and hence is an outlier. That is what all you morons want for yourselves, all at once begging for self-management: well, the state isn't giving it to you, because you haven't, at-bottom, risen up, and subjected the state to your abjuring of positive law from customary ethos. You do not comprehend even the words that are coming out of my mouth. Because you are an idiot. But this is just a fact. Or, if you can comprehend it, and I'm just projecting [wink, wink], and wrong about your lack of ability to apprehend concepts: then the insuperable fact is that you just don't want it. You don't want to rise up and take what is "yours". You are too fragmented. Too atomized. No social ends that anyone can agree on because the ideogram which fosters your security in ideology restrains you from actually making a collective effort against global capital: all that you get is more of the same, and more and more, and get told to wait, and you wait, and nothing changes...have fun with that.
    1
  20. No judge is allowed to say otherwise HERP ... DERP Free speech is no longer viable says That grey area.
    1
  21. ​@That grey area America, with unique characteristics that actually make socialism its anti thesis. We have evolved past the antique that is socialism but socialism, like all things irrelevant, keeps trying to force its way, to make itself relevant. However it can never be relevant again because the only way it can even become part of a modern western society, is through trickery and force -- LOL, no. America hasn't that many unique characteristics. The fascists wanted a "return back" to Rome. America is just Rome version 2.0. It's a republic fell to empire pretty quickly, and it wasn't "The left" that did it, it was early presidents that did that [no argument can really be had here]. The left just developed out of that; see the Kennedy era. You are not unique in terms of socialism. That is because you are in wont of self-management and control of the state [that is, you do not want state-management and corporatist structure]. This is had with socialism. It's called national socialism. You people just don't want to call it what it is. You want, at-bottom [the nation, the race] to take control and you presume to pertain to the self-management of your nation [collectively, as a group action] thru the state which you control [you the people]. That's what you want. It's all conflation. Especially considering linker-fachismus [leftist-fascism], in America; ANTIFA, who don't even fight fascist groups, per se, but fight their for corporations, in the long run, by vying for people like Bernie Sanders. The irony is rich.
    1
  22. @That grey area Nice ad homs, not gonna read em', though. So "Bottom line" -- No one is lying to you. You want self-management. Tell me how I'm wrong, there.
    1
  23. @That grey area Right, but you people are vying for a retrodiction of those values...the left aren't, well, at least, the center-left. But hey, the right-wing [in America], does want that. Want those values scrutinized. Ethnostate advocates, especially.
    1
  24. @That grey area You might settle for representation, but look, Trump is in, and you're still not satisfied. See?
    1
  25. @That grey area Yeah, truly progress is always good. Oh wait, not really.
    1