Comments by "BlackFlagsNRoses" (@blackflagsnroses6013) on "" video.

Personally people should be civil libertarians. The government shouldn’t force anyone to be socially progressive or conservative. All government and public institutions should not refuse service to anyone, it cannot discriminate. Private institutions on the other hand can refuse service. Churches can refuse gay marriage if that’s their view, but civic marriage by the State is for all. In the same vain that government should not interfere with people’s liberties, and pursuit of happiness in sexual orientation, government shouldn’t force people to accept gay marriage, but they’ll have to tolerate it. The answer is no social engineering, and pursuit of liberal values, liberties, and rights. Trust if you are conservative in America you should be conserving a liberal society and the democratic Republic.
4
Michael Reed but Shapiro would have the State governments be illiberal. Or I don’t know. Church can deny gay marriage if they want but no government should. Federal or State. Shapiro still is a social engineer that would have government authority interfere in lives from what he’s said. But if he isn’t on gay marriage then I agree with him in that aspect. Leftists been saying this since the 19th century. I mean real leftists, libertarian socialists. As well as conservatives with actual liberal values, like Barry Goldwater
4
Exactly!!!
3
Jesse Grove We need to fix what the political spectrum actually means. Left wing has always meant in advocacy of lesser authority and greater egalitarianism. And right wing as greater authority and hierarchy. Social stances haven’t to do with being left or right wing. One can be socially progressive or conservative and be left wing, if they are for lesser authority in peoples lives. And vice versa. At some point social issues got confused with political/governmental stances.
3
yoda yoda no actually it’s about living in a free society. I’m socially progressive. That doesn’t mean I think government can control who anyone can service in their own business anymore than they can control who can marry or what is acceptable in personal lives. If there are stores that are that socially intolerant then okay anyone that’s cool with lgbtq+ would just not support that establishment. Point is Government should not be social engineering lives. This coming from my libertarian socialist perspective. People should be free to sleep with anyone of consensual age, be free to polyamorous relationships free to love, free to do whatever in their personal lives. Government isn’t a social engineering institution, government shouldn’t be a thing in my ideal world. But whether you’re socially progressive or conservative.... in a liberal society you should share liberal values of civil libertarianism. Like a said a social conservative doesn’t have to like or personally accept gay marriage, but they’ll have to tolerate that in a liberal society government cannot dictate who marries and if it’s allowed. People have civil liberties and civic rights.
1
Prince JellyFish that’s an excellent point. If you were visiting outside of that community you’d kind of wouldn’t have that argument as you would where you live. Seeing as I support decentralized forms of government the most important would be local. I would say in the end the free association is best. Most regressive attitudes would be found in southern states. I’d say if I an Hispanic were refused service for being Hispanic, I would let the community know this establishment refuses service to me out of a bigoted sense. Anyone that doesn’t want that kind of attitude in the community would boycott and refuse to associate with that establishment and person. In the end lack of income and clients would push them out of the community or they may apologize to the the public and community and people might start doing business again. In a more bigoted area where the larger community has those bigoted beliefs well what is to be done? If I had a business I’d refuse service to anyone I know is bigoted, even though that is easy to hide unlike ethnicity. Ultimately I believe people would live in places they feel comfortable with themselves. No lgbt or colored person would live in a predominantly racist community. And look for more enlightened communities to associate. And this would be my stance on it. Associate with communities that have the same values, and refuse association with those that don’t. The reason for this is in the long run the social progressive stance wins. As generations come people are more tolerable and progressive, not caring about old social norms. In a free society there will be bigots and regressive attitudes in some places, but we would want the same liberties and freedom of association with who we want. I believe this better than State coercion, for it’s that same State that has in the past tolerated and accepted racism, sexism, bigotry etc... with actual legislation and discrimination in public institutions. Instead of serving liberal values and protecting the rights and liberties of people. Our government’s role is one of serving and protecting those rights and liberties not social engineering to it’s benefits. An interesting tidbit. While the fervor for equality was understood, during Civil Rights all public schools and services should have been integrated without fault, as they’re government institutions. They didn’t have to coerce association where it wasn’t warranted. As Killer Mike said it actually hurt the black community. Black businesses were lost that were successful as the black community did business with itself. But forcing to associate where people weren’t ready and didn’t want to only exacerbated the tensions and issues. Of course the black community should have always been free to do business with whom they please, but forcibly integrating with people that hated them hurt the community and set them back. Black economy would have thrived more had black businesses remained within the community, and eventually as subsequent generations come and cultural barriers broke through music and entertainment media, generations of youth would freely associate with each other in schools and break those bigot barriers freely. I genuinely believe in the long run social progressivism is inevitable and along the way we do not need coercion but breaking the barriers slowly through free association and valuing each other’s freedoms. The State likes to make us believe one is the enemy or is trying to force our way of living. This would be less an issue if everyone knew they shared a sense of freedom. Your argument may be may stronger with another thing I support. The LTV tax where anyone that deems to privatize public utilities or commons will be taxed and that be served to the community. The community may decide what to do with that compensation.
1
Prince JellyFish it’s also Georgism/geoism based on American political economist Henry George’s ideals. It’s the influence for the game Monopoly to teach even kids the problems with land monopoly. Ultimately I’m beyond LVT, support occupancy and use, but so long as we have government LVT is great. It’s amazing how the US hasn’t implemented it. Overall bigots are the minority. And they are only a problem if they have influence in government and power institutions. The majority of people don’t care for bigotry, the State just likes divide and conquering to keep the underclasses from uniting.
1
Jesse Grove I’m a socialist and support government out of economics. The original socialism was libertarian out of radical liberal circles. Socialism isn’t government interference just take it from the first libertarian socialist to call it anarchism in the 19th century: “To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place[d] under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.” And: “Under the law of association, transmission of wealth does not apply to the instruments of labour, so cannot become a cause of inequality. [...] We are socialists [...] under universal association, ownership of the land and of the instruments of labour is social ownership. [...] We want the mines, canals, railways handed over to democratically organised workers' associations. [...] We want these associations to be models for agriculture, industry and trade, the pioneering core of that vast federation of companies and societies, joined together in the common bond of the democratic and social Republic.”— Pierre J Proudhon The State has no role to play in genuine libertarian socialism.
1
DynamicWorlds yes but a conservative can be leftist if they don’t seek to impose their social views on others via power institutions like government, economics, or religion etc.... The problem is there are social progressives and conservatives that would social engineer to coerce others to their views. This isn’t necessary. Ultimately social progressivism in the long run wins out, conservative norms are left behind. As an egoist I do not believe in the legitimacy of social norms, mores, conditions, and traditional views. They are just “spooks” that inhibit individual freedom.
1
DynamicWorlds as I said in my post before, civic marriage cannot discriminate and should be available to all. But churches if they feel like can’t be made to marry, which isn’t really an issue as they aren’t. But when I say the government stay out of marriage means people be married as civilians in whatever form they want. Public institutions aren’t there for discrimination but for public service. Government cannot dictate what constitutes marriage and what doesn’t.
1
Jesse Grove anarchism is self governance instead of government over you. It is federation of free associations and popular assembly. While I get the movement in 20th century America for limited government was called libertarian it is an appropriated term taken form socialists. There is no libertarianism if there is government. Though on the way to anarchy I’d be fine with limited government if there is going to be government. Also libertarian socialists advocate either market socialism or libertarian communism since the 19th century. Free societies should be free to their own systems, so long as they keep to libertarian values. I advocate both anarchist communism and free market anarchism.
1
Michael Reed I’m not seeing that. Violence is a political tool. Unfortunately it’s unorganized and rioting for the sake of letting off steam. But were it organized riots like the Sons of Liberty and no civilians being harmed I wouldn’t really care about big corporations or fear of political parties. But they’re destroying small businesses which does nothing for the cause and is just giving opposition what they want. The rise in hate crimes and extremism has been of right wing groups. Groups like Boogaloo infiltrate these protests and instigate violence. That’s part of their agenda to start a “race war.” There is a history of right wing agitation to frame leftists. BLM is an organization, many black liberation organizations are Marxist and socialist like the Black Panthers. But as of now they have a platform of political reform on criminal justice. They aren’t out there arming the people like the Panthers did. Antifa is predominantly anarchist so they aren’t trying to grab powers, it’s just an anti-authoritarian direct action ideal. They aren’t a paramilitary branch of a party, it’s individuals going out to protest aggressively. All this propaganda corporate media dishes out daily to divide working class Americans I don’t buy it. There is violence going on out there but it does not justify the State’s actions. Word of advice never let the State dictate what is and isn’t justified, they are the biggest mass murderers and source of violence. Their’s is the only justified violence, and citizens out causing raucous isn’t part of their monopoly on violence. There are colored communities with grievances against the State and politicians. No one knows the crushing weight of the State like minorities. They aren’t the problem, the State and their propaganda wings like corporate media are. “God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13 states independant 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” — Thomas Jefferson letter to William Stephen Smith in response to Whiskey Rebellion “I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions indeed generally establish the incroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medecine necessary for the sound health of government." - Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Paris, January 30, 1787
1
Michael Reed liberals aren’t leftists. There isn’t a single leftist in mainstream American politics. Just centrist progressives, right neoliberals, and conservatives. Not a single socialist. Liberal social justice is only concerned with preserving the status quo overall. When you see anarchists, Marxists, and socialists of any kind being prominent figures in mainstream politics then we’ll talk. They blame the left for liberals.... there is nothing more politically incorrect than anti-statists and socialists. “And the only regime which, in the long run, will dare to permit freedom of speech is a socialist regime. If Fascism triumphs I am finished as a writer — that is to say, finished in my only effective capacity. That of itself would be a sufficient reason for joining a socialist party.” – George Orwell, “Why I Joined the Independent Labour Party”
1
Michael Reed When I say “unorganized” I mean there is no tactic, no specific targets. Preparing items isn’t organizing a plan. Even terrorists in the Middle East organize their attacks, because terrorism is a political method. One that only got negative connotations this last century. I’m not concerned with civilians rebelling a little, I think it’s refreshing. I’d be concerned if people just take the State boot without consequence. I don’t condone the destruction of small businesses or hurting others. But that doesn’t mean violence is evil and unjustified. I’m not letting propaganda tell me what is justified. As MLK said “riots are the language of the unheard. And we must condemn the cause of the riots as much as much as the violence”, paraphrasing. If these are youth letting off steam and anger so be it. They’re young and stupid. But I’ve seen right wingers infiltrating these protests to initiate the mayhem. To blame peaceful protestors. Everyone has an agenda, and some just enjoy the chaos. This is old news to anyone with insurrection experience and military knowledge.
1