anti-authoritarianism

[d***@bezeqint.net]

Noam Chomsky considers himself to be a 'libertarian anarchist'. By
this he means one who challenges and calls for the dismantling of all
unjustified authority and oppression, one who fights for the
realisation of the full development of each individual and the
collective, through a government of "industrial organisation" or
'council communism'.

http://www.marxist.com/Theory/chomsky_part1.htm

[Bert Hyman]

Post by d***@bezeqint.net
Noam Chomsky considers himself to be a 'libertarian anarchist'. By
this he means one who challenges and calls for the dismantling of
all unjustified authority and oppression, one who fights for the
realisation of the full development of each individual and the
collective, through a government of "industrial organisation" or
'council communism'.

A government which only uses justified oppression, where he
provides the justification.

[Topaz]

The meaning of "right" and "left" has changed. I stay with the
original meaning for the same reason I refuse to call homosexual
perverts "gay". The word "gay" was originally a good thing.

The right is for outlawing homosexual perversion,
prostitution, abortions, heroin, and other bad things. It puts the
good of the nation first and ahead of the freedom of individuals to
corrupt the culture of the nation.

Leftists believe in the Rede of Witchcraft which states-- If it
harm none, do what will you will. This sounds nice, but like the apple
that the witch gave to Snow White it has poison within. The Rede of
Witchcraft is the Bible of liberalism. It would legalize homosexual
perversion, prostitution, drugs, etc.

The right is for building a great nation. Leftists care only
about individual freedom and are opposed to any laws that would make
the nation better. There are beaches where normal families will not go
because homosexual perverts practice their perversion on the beach.
When the liberals say they are for freedom this is kind of thing they
are talking about. Of course people should be free to do what they
want most of the time. There is no argument there. Liberals are
talking about being free to do things that many people object to and
want outlawed. Their philosophy, taken to its logical conclusion,
would not allow the law that says drivers have to stop at the red
lights. Their philosophy would allow heroin to be sold on grocery
store shelves and allow ads promoting heroin on TV. Their philosophy
would result in chaos and degeneracy.

Libertarians are liberals who want freedom for the Ebenezer
Scrooges to be as greedy as they want. They have the same philosophy
as other leftist who want to legalize heroin and prostitution, namely
that the state can't tell them what they can't do. People don't like
laws stopping them from doing things, and we should sympathize with
that, but sometimes that is not the most important thing. Capitalists
want freedom for greed, other liberals want freedom for degeneracy,
but good laws would make a nation good.

The Communists were leftist and they said they were fighting for
freedom. In Spain they sided with the anarchists. The Communists and
the anarchists were the same people or the same type of people. The
Communists were for having government but only temporarily. They said
that their government was necessary only until the whole world was
Communist. After the world was Communist they wanted to dissolve the
government and have an anarchy.


The right wing cares about the future. Leftists only care about the
present. If their philosophy results in a nightmare future like in
Soylent Green or some other futuristic nightmare they are not
interested and insist that nothing could be more important than the
freedom of individuals to be as decadent as they want. To see the kind
of society
libertarians are fighting for see the movie "8MM", they aren't for the
snuff part, but
other than that it shows liberalism in action.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com

[Alric Knebel]

[copy-paste article deleted]

No matter how many times you copy and paste the same few articles, your
reality is not altered one bit: YOU are inferior to most of humankind,
be they black, red, straight, gay -- whatever. In fact, that you can't
defend your supremacist ideology with your own thoughts proves my point,
that you're an empty-headed weakling, a man of inferior quality and
fiber, having nothing really to contribute; nothing to contribute, that
is, beyond shouting "Here!" when you hear your name at roll call down at
the weekly bunker meetings. Goaded by your awareness of your
inferiority, you exploit this supremacist ideology because it allows you
to hide your individual shortcomings within the perceived
accomplishments of the white race. You're a white supremacist because
your WHITENESS turns out to be the only estimated asset you have to
promote, and any esteem you have hinges solely on your forsaking your
individuality. By promoting it (your whiteness) -- with its alleged
higher IQ averages and subsequent inventiveness -- you subsume your
identity into the history of the white race, coattailing on the
achievements of others by conscripting them into your white collective.
In reality, you exist on the fringes of humanity, regardless of your
race, on the most primitive margins, and unfit for the future of
humanity. Those are the facts, my little goose-stepper. If you don't
take steps to reclaim your individuality, you're going to die a
gibbering nitwit, as ignorant as the day you were born. Yours will be a
life unlived, undeveloped, mired in a primitive ideology, and unaware of
the splendor of the modern world, the potential for humanity's future. A
willfully sad, sad case indeed.

[Topaz]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:52:37 -0600, Alric Knebel

Topaz wrote:>
No matter how many times you copy and paste the same few articles, your
reality is not altered one bit: YOU are inferior to most of humankind,

Flush yourself down a toilet you worthless piece of shit. Copy and
paste is best because writing to shit like you is a waste of time.

be they black, red, straight, gay -- whatever. In fact, that you can't
defend your supremacist ideology with your own thoughts proves my point,

I don't usually write to shit people, asshole.



http://www.radioaryan.com https://redice.tv

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com