Geoff Stone, Obama's Review Group
carimachet at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 03:09:47 PDT 2014
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Cypher <cypher at cpunk.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> On 04/03/2014 03:49 PM, Cari Machet wrote:
> >> Do capitalists upset you?
> >> CAPITALISTS have no concept of reality and are completely self
> >> serving yes that is upsetting to my sensibilities and
> >> consciousness
> > Which is *precisely* why I would trust information provided to me
> > by a capitalist than that provided to me by an idealist.
> >> i am a fucking anarchist which by the words you use in your
> >> writing that point to your low level concepts - you probably have
> >> no clue about
> >> you are a capitalist - making frames for others to fit your
> >> fucking lame ass argument - pathetic
> Actually, Cari, I've done a pretty extensive foray into Anarchism.
> It's an interesting but, IMHO, completely unworkable system populated
> by people who dream of a better, freer world, but have no chance of
> actually creating it - not now at least.
that shows how little you know about it for you to think of it on such
monolithic terms - it already works is working in many many places and
> What turned me off about Anarchism were people like you. People who
> waved their moral superiority flag every chance they got and assumed
> that anyone who supported a different view than theirs was ignorant or
> didn't understand what Anarchy is. In a lot of cases, Anarchists are
> their own worst enemy.
your not an anarchist
what was your little 'foray' - so french - do tell 1902 chicago?
for your information i am a provocateur that you cannot see that again
exclaims your lack of knowledge/care
> > A capitalist sees everything as a product that will either further
> > his desire for success or hinder it. An idealist sees everything as
> > a mission fitting within their narrow agenda. A capitalist has much
> > more incentive to provide a good product (correct, accurate,
> > information) than an idealist who's sole goal is to further an
> > agenda. Both have their uses though and both can be manipulated to
> > good and bad ends.
> >> an anarchist DOES NOT generally have one goal - capitalists think
> >> that way anarchists are node based thinkers capitalist are
> >> monolithic thinkers and often frame things in a dualistic or
> >> black and white manner which is very christian religion in form
> >> and thought pattern
> Well, Cari, from what I've seen from the Anarchist community, the main
> goal that anarchist have is to abolish the state. This, of course, is
> a means to an end (the end being personal freedom) but the goal seems
> to be nearly single-minded focus on abolishing the state.
> And yes, I know some anarchists will say 'some of us simply ignore the
> state' and that's true. But, in reality, the main 'collective' goal
> (and I use that term loosely) is to abolish the state. To confirm
> this, just talk to any anarchist and ask them what the biggest problem
> to humanity is. Most will stay 'the state'. How do you solve it? 'Work
> to abolish the state'. Seems pretty single minded to me.
> But, please, instead of ranting and wild arm-waving, educate me if I
> am wrong. I would certainly /love/ to see a workable, large scale,
> anarchistic plan. I admit I probably don't know as much about the
> philosophy as you do. But, instead of just angrily cursing, why not
> try to educate me? I know that's a bit harder than angry arm-waving
> and cursing but it's probably more productive.
> kool thanks
its not just about the state - there are very different types of anarchists
- that is part of the quality of it all the form is open - its like the
concept of opensource
you are right to a degree it is about personal freedom but that still
frames as against the state so i would say it is more about not imposing
your will on others instead wanting others to be authentically themselves
and 'believe' it or not that has a lot to do with optimal production - each
person has a quality like no other ...
because some people have qualities that are harmful to others of course
there are huge issues of justice within this model and often we are asked
about justice - a lot of the community thinks on the level of restorative
justice which has models in pockets of society all over the world - one
example is in ecuador - the natives have a different form of justice when a
crime is committed the gov police are called but then the decision is made
with the community what will happen next - will the perp be taken to the
government justice system or will the community deal with them - if the
community deals with them then they will be asked to perform certain tasks
in the community to make up for their misdeeds - some even think it is a
good idea for the person to come up with the tasks themselves...
look up direct democracy - there is often within our model questions
regarding scalability that is often where the rubber meets the road for
people - we dont know how that works exactly as it is not been sent into
praxis enough but we have developed spokes councils and what happens is
rotation of all aspects - all members are rotated so that it is not
representative - now zizek has complained about our model that he doesnt
want to participate in this kind of constant meetings he doesnt want to
deal with other stuff besides his scholarly intellectual stuff ... i dont
think it is a problem no one is forced to be a part - there is just no
exclusion - inclusion is not mandated - so zizek is kinda not knowledgable
there - what i really like is that people that work in say sanitation do a
report back about what is going on to everyone and people that work in say
media can be knowledgeable about what is happening in that field (there can
be people that actually work in both fields of couse) but then the people
in the field of media can be alerted if there is something they can do to
help the field of sanitation in some way - get information out about that
they need help with this project etc... information flow ....
anyway i dont want to write a book here mayb listen to this - yes theres a
big star and david graeber capitalist but it has real info too
particularly i would point you to the theories of proudhon, bakunin and
>> capitalism is an economic model that has severe ramifications
> >> for society it is no different than having a monarch really there
> >> is a degree of difference regarding poverty but ... i heard today
> >> that if you are dying of cancer in uganda you have a 10% chance
> >> of having access to morphine ... they give cancer patients
> >> paracetamol ... thats your great capitalism i find it disgusting
> Actually, that /isn't/ capitalism. Why do you think what you read is
> the case? Maybe it's because of deals cut between governments and
> corporations? Do you know what we call that intertwining? No, we don't
> call it capitalism. We call is /fascism/.
i call it capitalism
when the assistant attorney general of the united states says they made a
decision not to try to convict the banks of fraud because there would be an
economic hit to the u$ of a ... that is capitalism in praxis today
i gotta go more later...
> >> the careerist journalists laura poitras et al are capitalistic
> >> in every way - exploitive
> > I disagree. The careerist journalists are "crony capitalists" in
> > every way.
> >> listen i am an activist journalist making money / becoming famous
> >> like them off of journalism in the way they do it is not ok with
> >> me its not how i would ever in a million years do my work
> And /that/ is one of the great things about capitalism: you can try
> different things. You don't have to be confined to one narrow model.
> You don't agree with it? Great! Go do something your way and nobody is
> likely to stop you (except the predatory crony capitalists, but I
> think we've established those aren't real capitalists, right?)
> > They know that, regardless of the accuracy of their information,
> > the 'other side of the coin' will smooth things over and keep the
> > public hooked on an inferior product. That's not a true
> > capitalist.
> >> i think your an idealist actually 'true capitalism' thats a
> >> theory
> Perhaps I am. Just like a Utopian anarchistic society is a theory
> that's never been proven. It's a different way of thinking, each with
> positives and negatives. I think we're probably /both/ idealists in
> our own ways.
> > That's one of my main arguments with socialists and other
> > non-capitalist believers:
> >> BELIEVERS????????? LMAO
> >> i dont believe in belief that is religious
> You don't believe in the power of your anarchistic philosophy? Hmm,
> perhaps that's the problem then! I assume, being a journalist, you
> understand that words have multiple meanings and we use them withing
> 'contexts'. Using the word 'believe' in the context I did doesn't have
> religious connotations at all. But I bet you know that. It looks like
> you are upset and just lashing out at everything because we don't
> agree. That's alright. I've seen your posts here and know you're more
> intelligent than that. So, yes, you're a 'believer' or...at
> least...you should be.
> > they point to our current system and say 'see, it's exploitive and
> > hurts people!' and it does. But that's not a true capitalist
> > system. Will we ever actually have one? Doubtful. But what we have
> > now is definitely not a good example.
> >> i dont think you understand that capitalism is well beyond an
> >> economy - watch naomi klein
> Oh I understand it very well. I suspect it's you, who's obviously
> stuck within a very narrow worldview, who may not understand it. I've
> read Ms. Klein and I like a lot of her work - I don't agree with all
> of it, but I like it. But you know as well as I do that she comes at
> the topic with a bias. Also, from what I've read, her main beef seems
> to be with globalization and the influence corporations have on
> governments and, thus, the people. Remember, we've already covered
> this: it's not capitalism but /fascism/ when you have that.
> Do you have any thing in particular by Ms. Klein you'd like me to read
> that may help 'educate' me? I'd be happy to give it a go. So far, I've
> only read "No Logo", "The Take", and "The Shock Doctrine". Anything
> else I should pick up?
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka3Pb_StJn4
> Yep, saw this video series. Brilliant woman, great book. Still talking
> largely about fascism and not capitalism. I mean, sure, she uses the
> /word/ 'capitalism' but that's not what she's describing. She's
> talking fascism.
> >> with capitalism the iraq invasion happened within its frame
> >> black sites torture sites around the globe where conducted within
> >> the frame of capitalism > gitmo 'lives' inside the frame of
> >> capitalism
> So, do you believe that the horrible things that happened in Iraq and
> GITMO wouldn't have happened if the corporations weren't involved? I
> agree that they probably wouldn't have happened on such a /massive/
> scale simply because their would have been a manpower shortage but I
> suspect some of those 'true blue' soldiers wouldn't have had much of a
> problem picking up a chemical light and sticking it up someone's
> ass...or raping them. Were the naked pictures of prisoners at Abu
> Ghraib capitalism at work too? Oh, wait, those were soldiers, not
> businessment trying to make money.
> >> i dont think you understand anarchy or anarchistic thought
> >> processies at all
> I certainly admit that I don't understand it as much as /you/ do or
> many others who spend a good amount of their time researching and
> reading anarchistic thought. But I do have a good understanding of it.
> However, feel free to point me in the direction of some good
> educational material. I'll read it happily! I like exploring different
> thoughts. I actually /like/ the idea of anarchy, just like I like much
> of the ideas of socialism. But they both, IMHO, fall a bit off the
> mark. That might be an educational thing that can be fixed though so
> feel free to point me in the right direction. No sarcasm intended
> here, I am open to learning!
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
carimachet at gmail.com
Syria +963-099 277 3243
Amman +962 077 636 9407
Berlin +49 152 11779219
Reykjavik +354 894 8650
Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the
addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without
permission is strictly prohibited.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 16962 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the cypherpunks