Long, but very good: About Anti-Fascists and Anarchism

[jim bell]

 From: Joshua Case <jwcase at gmail.com>

>Though you would agree that this exists though, and is of late gaining momentum of some sort, yes?
>https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t4359/
>And while it pretends to play nice, you are never a click away from overtly fascist neo-nazi siege-heiling in front of a camera.
Hey, I don't like that either, but it is an unfortunately predictable consequence of misconduct at the other side of the political spectrum.  And I say "other side" with caution:  The "horseshoe" theory of political expression    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory    explains why dictators of the left and dictators of the right tend to look and act alike.  So, I've come to believe that there really is very little difference between (for example) communists and fascists:  They are merely authoritarian or totalitarian thugs that somebody has arbitrarily and capriciously labelled as being "left-wing" and "right-wing", respectively.
   

Myself, I have long preferred the "Nolan Chart",  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart   to the extent that it shows that as you slide down the lower-left boundary, you begin to get to the same location (0/0) as sliding down the right boundary.
>I defend the right to speech that I do not agree with, but war starts in speech - and things are escalating. It’s not just  a sense I’ve got, you can look at the attendance and participation changes.
Saying, "war starts with speech" may very well be true, but let's not fall into the trap of using that to justify restrictions on free speech.  I've lived long enough to see "the left" engage in massive protests in places like UC Berkeley in the 1960s in favor of free speech, to today's left wing engage in riots in the same venue to oppose free speech.  Quite a change, huh?  Most of the young ones don't even see the irony there.

>You cannot pretend this isn’t real, and problematic. You can’t act as if all people are rational actors, if they were the free market system would have worked! (Ok last line was open trolling, Jim)
A few weeks ago, I noticed that BOTH Fascism and Communism pushed the idea of perfectibility of man.  (Google-search 'perfectibility communism' and 'perfectibility fascism' to see the similarity.)   Their motivations?  I suspect that much of it had to do with providing excuses as to why (for example) Communism didn't actually seem to work when it was tried.  'If people didn't seem to work to follow the latest 5-year plan, it must be because of their inherent inperfection, Comrade'. 
One illustrative example could be that the dictates of the famous 5-year plans wouldn't be very specific:  Shoe factories were presumably told to make a billion pairs of shoes during the then-current 5-year plan.  It was far easier to make a billion of the same style of shoe, rather than a selection that the public would actually want and buy.  No doubt a "perfect person" was, rhetorically, a person who was willing to adjust his desires to the capabilities and function of the then-current (communist) government, rather than the government being required to adjust its output to the desires of a varied population.  
And what is the definition of a "rational actor", in that context?  A self-interested individual makes choices for his own benefit, or those around here with which he has a special relationship.  (Family, friends, etc.).  The Communist ideal, I assume, was that a good Communist would always choose what is/was good for the public, or at least the State.  Not quite the same thing.  
             Jim Bell

   
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 12273 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170303/1f5fb606/attachment.txt>