Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
You can’t expect anyone else to believe you are serious about your politics - if you time after time resort to nothing but vandalism and call it the most radical shit since forever. My brother is still out of work when you’ve broken a window. My neighbours are still afraid when they walk their dog. They are still afraid of me, when we meet late at night - even though we say hello every morning.
You can’t make others view you with the same respect as you’ve cultivated within your sect - no matter how many times you’ve had your back patted. You might feel like a king within your crew. And that’s all right, most of us do and most of us should. But it’s your crew and nothing more. You can’t take a bunch of 17 year olds looking for a cool identity, or 20+ers looking for some thrill in their boring, low-status, anxious lives - and make yourself out to be representating ‘the people’.
So what have you got then? You’re there because you want to be somebody. You want to have the respect of others, be it within your sect. You want to act tough, and you want to make you out to be more than what you are. And you’re fine with that. You’ve got your intra-sect powerplays and schemes, and you’ve got a filthy lie you tell anyone at any time - that makes you something more than just a miniature subculture with political overtones. You can’t expect anyone to believe it, outside of your sect.
You might fuss about how you are working class all you like. And sure, this may separate you from others to some extent. What it doesn’t change is the fact that you play the same game, you follow the same rules, and you have no ambition to move outside of that. Because you are content. Because you want to be the most radical. You need the most-left identity, within the same framework as the rest of the Left.
That’s why you smash some obscure punk up, and call it anti-fascism. It’s not like he’d be a threat to whatever you’d want to do, but you still call it self-defense. The radical students applaud and gosh. You feel like you are the biggest and the baddest. A force to be reckonned with. But you don’t give a toss about anything outside of your comfort zone. And if anyone speaks up on it, you’ll surely bring up all the radical shit you’ve done over the last few years. Child’s play with no results. No changes. Nothing done at all for the working class where you live, or anywhere else. You didn’t even try. That’s the most important thing. You didn’t even try.
‘So, what have others done that is supposedly so great?!’
Nothing. And we all know that. But you were supposed to be different. You were supposed to make a difference.
But here we are. So much for ‘the fash have ambition. The left has no ambition. We have more ambition’.
It’s not politics. It’s not resistance. You can’t expect to change anything. You can’t expect people to ever believe in you, or what you have to say (what have you got to say?). When I was new into the game I wondered why people never seemed to stick around.
You just can’t.
You just hope you don’t come to a position where you’ve got nothing else than what you’ve had in that sect.
2 notes View comments (via wehrhafter-kampf)
I’ve never heard a libertarian argue for a society set up in a way where it’s impossible for the working class to be dominated and exploited. I’ve only heard them argue for societies that make that domination and exploitation more extreme and widespread.
What on earth does that mean?
It’s rhetoric. It’s empty rhetoric.
Now if you want to argue that the libertarian ideal of the “Unlimited Right to Contract” — where, for example, a person could contractually agree to give up their rights or even their life — is a license to exploit the vulnerable worse than has ever been seen in history, that would make sense. But then you would be raising something specific, something any libertarian could defend while you would have to actually form & articulate a case on your side.
(Hint, hint, hint, hint, hint)
Now, other than demonstrating a classic fallacious argument, did you have a point?
I didn’t think so…
18 notes View comments (via destroy-capitalism)
Fact is, health insurance premiums DOUBLED under Bush.
The LARGEST increase they are claiming under Obama — and even then only for the far more expensive non-group rate — is 80%, but we saw a 100% increase under Bush!
What’s more, there was a projected 100% increase under the Republican plan as championed by John McCain (Obama’s opponent back in 2008).
Are we clear on this?
Insurance premiums increased 100% under Bush WITHOUT any national healthcare plan, and they were projected to increase 100% under the Republican alternative to Obama’s plan… yet the Republicans are complaining that costs are going to rise far LOWER than that!
This is not new for Republicans. Quite frankly, they make a habit out of getting upset when the country is facing improvement. Back in 2004, for example, the Republicans attacked John Kerry claiming that his budget would add a trillion dollars to the deficit.
That may be true, but if it was true than it represented a saving of $1 trillion over Bush’s budget. Kerry would have cut the deficits in HALF — half of what the Republicans were calling for — and the Republicans were attacking him for it!
….and don’t even get me started about Clinton’s successful economic policies…
41 notes View comments (via deadbilly & poorrichardsnews)
Page 1 of 13