If you are calling yourself Alt-Right you might want to be careful... I debated and then was given some info
(EDIT: Read the article before having a kneejerk reaction to the title... so far it is clear that is happening)
I am not an alt-right person but, I've seen a lot of people refer to themselves as such that are not racists, white supremacists, etc. With that said I have made that defense against a friend in my slack who generalized and referred to all Alt-Rights as being this. I said it was a generalization and a fallacy. This was true. There are quite a number of people sharing the Alt-Right label and they may have given it to themselves, or someone told them they were it just like I've been labeled "left" and "right" before as well, sometimes in the SAME discussion. If they did not dig further as I didn't they might have simply thought "okay, is that what they are calling people like me these days? Okay, I guess I am alt-right."
This same person does not condone the way things went down at Berkeley and he actually is not a Leftist. He did indicate Milo Yiannopoulos is a big spokesperson for the Alt-Right and is a white supremacist, racist, guy. As of yesterday morning what I knew about Milo was that he was "the guy who got kicked off twitter". I honestly, didn't know what he got kicked off of twitter for, simply that it happened.
So my debate with this person began mainly due to the absolutes, and generalization. All people with label X are A,B,C is an absolute and a generalization. It is extremely unlikely it will be true due to the logical nature of generalizations being a fallacy.
He eventually changed his stance and said okay there may be people calling themselves Alt-Right that don't have that trait, but all people that are of the type I believe as Alt-Right are this. I asked him for some proof of that, as I'd not seen it.
My view of Alt-Right basically came from the idea of Fox media essentially being the (Right leaning Mainstream Media) and the term Alt-Right was thus alternative right news sources. This also fits closer with the people I've encountered that call themselves Alt-Right. Yet, I don't hang out and chat with people like those that will be revealed in a moment.
If you are one of these people you might want to be very careful, or find a new label for yourself. As with the idea that T-Shirts, Hoodies, or Bandanas of the Red or Blue color might look appealing. There are parts of the nation where people quickly learned not to wear those things due to them being identifiers of the Crips and The Bloods, it appears there may be something similar here. There are some stated missions and tenants of "Alt-Right" that back up what this person was telling me.
Thus, I thought I should write up a post in case you identify as Alt-Right at the moment, but are not actually of the mindset of these people. If that is the case you may wish to stop labeling yourself that way. You wouldn't go around saying "I am part of ISIS" for example because you are into the Egyptian Goddess Isis for example. There is a negative movement using that label and that is who you would tend to get lumped with.
This appears like it could be the case with the label Alt-Right as well.
Material Shared With Me
So my friend took a little effort this morning and shared a bunch of stuff with me. One of the sites he gave a lot of quotes from was DailyStormer. It calls itself the #1 PewDiePie fansite. I didn't realize until I was writing this article that what he gave me were quotes from forums.
(EDIT: My friend corrected this. It is actually from a guide on that site A Normie's Guide to the Alt-Right.)
That is not exactly proof of anything except there is a cross section of people calling themselves alt-right and defining what that means who are stating these things in THOSE forums. They are a vocal bunch though and it still is worth considering not using this label for yourself if you do not share their views. He provided other information as well which I will share after these quotes.
And here is me taking a look at what these forums actually look like RIGHT NOW.
It does appear to be a lot of White Supremacist, and Anti-Jew discussion. I want to get into some of that again when we revisit Milo, because some of that doesn't quite work out so well when applied to him. At least not if logic is being used by Milo. If he is illogical then perhaps it would work.
Then my friend went on to say "Here is jared taylor, whom Milo calls one of the best intellectuals in the alt-right.." and share a video.
What is Alt-Right?
He then shows this Richard Spencer video which I had seen before. I remember it from the deal made about the Heil Hitler style salute. I talked about it instead as being how we actually saluted until after WW2 when it was changed due to the negative connotations of Hitler. I was distracted by that (I can be diverted by interesting historical tidbits)and didn't give a shit about the speaker until now.
'Hail Trump!': Richard Spencer Speech Excerpts
He then shared the following from Kevin MacDonald:
Finally he did share a lengthy article from radixjournal.com.
The Alt Right: The American Resistance
So what did this tell me?
I am neither right, nor left. I am simply a person and in reality I identify most closely as an Anarcho-Capitalist. This means I really don't like the idea of parties, or government at all. I also have the Non-Aggression Principle as one of my core beliefs. I do not believe I have the right to tell any other HUMAN BEING how to live, and they likewise do not have the right to do so to me, provided no one is harmed by my or their actions.
I thought I better state that so you do not identify me as an Alt-Right basher, or something else. I had a lengthy debate where I was the one lamenting the generalization and absolutes with which my friend was applying to the alt-right label.
I have come to the conclusion based upon his reaction, and the things he shared that there is a very vocal and active group of people (and they are not small) that identify as Alt-Right and espouse the values and beliefs that were shared above. I also know there are a lot of people likely referring to themselves as Alt-Right that have no idea the BED they are sharing with these people.
It is like someone putting on a red or a blue bandana and suddenly learning about the Crips or the Bloods.
So my thoughts on this are that if you have been referring to yourself as Alt-Right and you do not share the values above then you may wish to consider finding an alternative label. The things these people are writing and saying is not going away and if you do not share their views then what they say and do can be used to discredit your own efforts.
Milo
So like I said I knew one thing about Milo before yesterday. "He was the guy kicked off twitter". I didn't even remember WHY.
Then I started doing some research. I found out he supposedly a Jewish immigrant. Whoa!!! Wait. Did you read that material above? That means he is like someone who walked into the serial killer's house, climbed down the pit, and then yelled... "Hey can you send me the lotion?!?" If he identifies as Alt-Right with their extremely anti-Jewish stance then that seems kind of like suicide.
Furthermore, are you saying the ALT-RIGHT above is holding Milo up as one of their spokespersons? A Jew? Uhm... Illogical.
Here is Wikipedia intro information on Milo:
Now let's dig into some more claims... racism...
Milo is Gay. He is outspoken about it. He is an actual LGBT member. He has supposedly had "black boyfriends". This does not seem racism.
My friend of course countered this with Thomas Jefferson references... Kind of the go to SEE ITS HAPPENED IN THE PAST thing. Yet, if they do an in depth study of Thomas Jefferson they might learn a lot more.
I am not sold on the Milo being their spokes person. What I looked at he does not seem stupid, just loud, and flamboyant.
I suspect it is more of someone with a following saying something the Alt-Right above liked and they likely repeat it and share it, and it becomes guilt by association. After all they are sharing the words of a Jew... and that seems to be totally against their stated beliefs.
Public Service
Please consider this post a public service announcement. If you are calling yourself Alt-right and do not agree with the material shared above, you may be subject to generalizations about who you are and face guilt by association. It might be better if you simply did not refer to yourself as Alt-Right unless you agree with the above.
Steem On!
I pretty much agree with your assessment of what the Alt-Right actually is. And I've been familiar with their sentiments for a few years. I encountered a lot of them on FB. They are not to be confused with anarcho-capitalists or other variations of anarchism/libertarianism.
The problem with the media and other leftists is that the try to classify everyone other than a mainstream Republican as "Alt-Right." Then, after doing so, they just vilify all of those wrongly-identified people based on the characteristics of the actual Alt-Right. It's a simple and proven tactic that has worked for them for a long time. Purposely misidentify and vilify.
I would actually love it if the Alt-Right would stop pretending to be anarchists and libertarians. They're the main reason why poisoning the well is so easy for statists/collectivists.
And no - I don't believe Milo is Alt-Right. They just like to claim certain people as their spokesmen in order to try to give their lunacy some legitimacy. The left is just quite eager to accept that as truth and then do what they normally do - protest, threaten, and physically assault people and destroy property.
It is clear you read the entire thing. Thanks for your response.
I think there are a lot of people (probably most of them) that identify as Alt-Right yet do not know anything about these examples my friend pointed out.
These are the worst example you can find of people using that label. So yes it seems like a propaganda smeer thing to take the worst examples that can be found and try to say THIS IS THE ALT-RIGHT.
By the same thing I guess all of those violent rioters defines all LEFT.
It doesn't. As I understand it things were a normal protest until the 150 or so guys in masks showed up and began the violence.
I wish you would keep the left out of this, the closest America has to a left is Bernie and he's still a centre ground politician. Everything else is right of the centre.
America has right of the centre Democrats, right wing Republicans and now this Alt right even further out on the right. Just because people say Democrats are on the left doesn't mean they are left wing.
As for your post, good piece, enjoyed reading.
True... I said to someone else in my own edit that by using the term LEFT I am also generalizing by not specifying that I do not mean everyone on the left.
It also is vocal opposition that claims to be on the left.
The guy I argued with about this in Slack does not even identify as Left. He is the guy that got me debating by saying something like "I'll not riot shame, all alt-right people are white supremacists, racist, assholes anyway"
That was a haste generalization. All of the Alt-Right identifying people I had encountered up to that point fit none of that. Some of them may have been assholes I guess. Some may have been racist. Certainly not ALL though.
So I challenged him on that... he said I wasn't going to convince him.
This morning he shared all of the material that inspired my post.
I've said before that not all Alt right and Trump supports are white supremisists. It's not that easy in the same way not everyone who voted Hitler into power were White supremisists, they were angry and pissed off at the system that was failing them. Both leaders tapped into that and won against the system.
Yep. That's the key. Generalizations and absolutes are almost always false.
So as soon as we utter one we have kind of disproven our point.
Living in Sweden and being very well informed on what the "left" in the U.S. is, I would have to say that their aims are mostly the same. However the short term goals obviously differ with a different political landscape.
Also, in my opinion the left at large in the U.S. is much more prone to reject the concept of free speech and nonviolent approaches for change. Possibly, this could be due to having picked up more modern marxist ideals out of desperation and being at a percieved disadvantage in society.
From most of the moderate people that call themselves alt-right, they are Reagan era republicans.
Chump is not a republican. He is way left of that.
And basically, the entire republican party has moved way left.
And so, the people that are still, what republicans used to be are now referring to themselves as the alt-right.
And the racist label is entirely the fault of SJWs. The alt-right is tired of being the whipping boy. Everything today is anti-white. Just a white stating that they aren't racist is met with scorn. And then their is the privilege thing... when there is none.
So, basically, the alt-right has moved back to the right, and has said, enough.
I think any Reagan era republican calling themselves 'alt-right' need to look for a new term. It is a poisoned term now, like it or not, and using that term will only cause harm to the cause. Before Reagan got into office, he sounded an awful lot like Ron Paul and was much more libertarian leaning.
I doubt that they will try for a new name. They are sick of being bullied (racist, homophobe, privileged...) and are putting their foot down. They have also had a long time of having all the scorn piled onto them. What is one more person calling them racist?
Similar to anarchy, the name has purposefully been sullied. Anarchists should have found a new name, but they haven't and that seems to be working in their favor now.
The alt-right is a diaspora. So, there really is no group. There won't ever be a body that says these/those people are/aren't alt-right.
And, any new name will be torn down by the MSMockingbirdMedia. Look what they did to the TeaParty.
So where did the term "alt-right" originate? Is this Wikipedia article I linked to elsewhere on this post not accurate?
The wikipedia article starts off saying that "alt-right" was coined by a white-supremicist. That is propaganda if ever I saw it.
But, I do not know where it started, but currently it is used by a lot of people. They all use it slightly differently. And most of them are spouting republican views like you would have heard from Reagan. All the ones I listen to aren't radical, they have just returned to what "right" used to mean.
They see family and community as the basis of society. They see the left destroying that. Its easy to go from the typical mid-western town where everyone knows each other, and almost everyone is white to "we only want whites." And with the SJWs screaming racism at the drop of a hat, its reinforced.
It actually says "The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loose group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in the United States. White nationalist Richard Spencer coined the term in 2010 to define a movement centered on white nationalism, and has been accused of doing so to whitewash overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism."
Did you see the video?
I can't say with authority that this guy invented the term (wikipedia makes that claim) but he is certainly the on responsible for making the most people familiar with it.
Did you read the article?
You are saying what I was saying...
I believe that is most...
I didn't cite ANY left sources... all of those are from people claiming to be Alt-right.
That is why I add the caveat "moderate".
There are extremists that call themselves alt-right, who are really white-supremisist, just looking to jump on the bandwagon to get views. (and there are govern-cement plants)
Milo isn't the first to get harassed off of campus.
Previously their was the MRA talking about the epidemic of male suicide. Things got ugly, with people in masks, fire alarms...
Yeah check out @ats-david comment and my reply to him.
I am not going to let the Left define what Alt-Right is, or isn't.
These were the same morons saying that Pepe the cartoon frog was a symbol of racism.
Are there racists that define themselves as Alt-Right? Yes
Are they a majority of the Alt-Right movement? No.
Is anyone who questions the integrity of identity politics a racist? No
Is anyone who bridles at being dishonestly called a racist, a racist? No
(That last is the essence of the Kafka Trap)
I am not accusing you of being an Alt-Right basher, but we need to be careful of where we are getting information from.
If the Left tells us it is OK to assault a "racist", then of course everyone that puts the lie to their failed ideology is a "racist"
He is not the left. Neither am I. Read the article. I didn't grab a single material from the LEFT.
I was defending the label Alt-Right, so kindly refrain from a kneejerk reaction and read it. It is a Public Service Announcement.
I consider the terms Left/Right as generalizations which makes them logical fallacies. Yet, that doesn't mean you will not have guilt by association perceptions you need to deal with. Which is fine, but it is good to know they are there.
There is not a single LEFT source that I provided there I believe. My friend is also not left.
My point is that I am not going to be worried about guilt by association, and that the majority of criticism of the Alt-Right is by people that accused a cartoon of being a racist and/or cherry pick what they want to portray the movement as a whole as.
Yes, but I did not cite any left sources. Not one I believe. Also check out @ats-david comment and my reply. It is a good TL;DR or if you did read it all... it might be a better explanation than my lengthy post.
I'll take a look
It doesn't matter what you think the term means, it matters what the majority of the population thinks it means. Spending time and effort defending the label takes away from the time and effort to defend issues and can only cause harm to your cause. Words often change meanings, especially in politics. Just look at the history of the word 'liberal'.
Sure it matters. Because "what most of the world believes" will be subjective based upon where you are getting your news. The Alt-Right label is being both used as something good, and something bad depending upon your source. The truth of the matter is that Majority doesn't prove truth or false.
The truth is still the truth even if no one believes it.
A Lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it.
So minority, majority, etc... doesn't mean shit in the scope of the truth.
A label is unimportant in the scope of the truth and you are fighting a losing battle trying to define this one. If you are getting your news from any mainstream media source (including Fox News), and most people do hence the term "mainstream", then you are seeing only a negative portrayal of alt-right. Calling yourself 'alt-right' doesn't help your cause and it's just a stupid label. The truth is that there are a lot of people who are espousing racist and otherwise bigoted views that are calling themselves alt-right. Yes, they may be co-opting that term but good luck explaining that nuance to others. The whole point of a label like this is to let others know your viewpoints in a shorthand way. If most people take it to mean a racist bigot what good does it do you? You can call yourself whatever you want and I really don't care. Just offering up some free advice. Take it or leave it.
If wikipedia is to be believed then the term has racist origins anyway (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right). I wasn't familiar with the term myself until this election cycle and I pay attention. But then I don't tend to pay too much attention to white nationalists so there is that.
That meeting hosted near the whitehouse after Trump's victory by the guy who has been given credit for coining (or at the very least popularizing) that term (Richard Spencer) in which nazi propaganda was quoted and nazi salutes were given pretty much doomed the term as anything anyone would look at in a positive light. That is the truth. Say what you want about news sources but I saw the video.
Read... read read...
I did not try to define it. The article clearly states that. I described the reaction and attempts by others. I acknowledged there are many different people.
I explained what a generalization was... etc. It's all right there in the original post...
Also I am not frustrated with you... was just having a big SLAVERY related debate in slack, and my opponent decided to "fuck off for a bit" and take a work call. :)
Also I don't pay attention to white nationalists EITHER.
This article was inspired by someone in slack using a generalization that said something along "I'll not riot shame, all alt-right people are white supremacist, racist, assholes anyway"
I knew some people that claim to be alt-right and I knew that was not true.
In addition, it was clearly what is known as a haste generalization and those are almost always false.
So I debated him...
When I was done I learned about this faction that does fit his description that the opposition is attempting to use to label all people who identify as Alt-Right that.
The mainstream media of course is largely backing them up and repeating it.
It is often their justification for their protests that might turn into riots.
So I wrote this post as a public service announcment so that those that do identify as Alt-Right would know this is being done, where the garbage being used to stereotype and generalize is coming from, and hopefully inform them so they could either stop using the label, or at least be informed about where the ammunition being used is coming from.
That's it... that is all. No effort to DEFINE anything. I've seen several different definitions of Alt-Right at this point.
Also there is only one person for whom you can decide what is important or not. Yourself. ;)
I'm sure there were good Nazis too but so what? Words matter. The origin of the term and what MOST people believe it to mean does matter. Words are how we communicate with one another and it's generally good to have a reasonably common definition of them. The term 'alt-right' by all accounts was coined by a white nationalist who had a meeting after Trumps victory where Nazi propaganda was repeated and Nazi salutes were given (the term was coined some years ago but it's the same guy). I'm not sure why anybody who does not support those actions would use that term to define themselves. It would be like me calling myself a Nazi and arguing that all Nazi's don't support taking over Europe and Jewish genocide. It may technically be true but that is what the group is known for. There may well be "good" alt-right people but then they must not know the origin of the word and what the philosophy was of those who originated it.
I guess I'm just not understanding why it is a term people would want to use for themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right
And words are hijacked frequently so they no longer mean what they originally meant. It kind of drives me crazy. What MOST people do or do not believe may matter to you. I could care less. I do care about the origins of the word and what it was intended to mean.
Though MOST people can be swayed with effort that a word means something else, and then the old meaning seems to vanish. I am not a fan of that and have actually written a series of blog posts on it before. You might like them. They are from months ago.
I agree! But in the case of 'alt-right', I don't think the word was hijacked by White Nationalists. They are the ones credited with coming up with it and they are the ones I can first recall using it.
I see no proof this "most" is true. If you want to say Most of their opposition then you are correct. That is certainly not MOST people though.
I honestly had not encountered anyone using the white supremacist definition until yesterday.
I'd heard people call people on the "right" such things before, but not an entire group.
So I'd contend that it is not those who label themselves 'alt-right' either.
As I am not RIGHT or LEFT. I think they both suck.
I do try to read a lot, but I don't go out of my way to dig up dirt on the left or the right. In fact, I get annoyed by people who do that.
So without actively seeking it, it literally took until yesterday for me to encounter it.
It was someone saying he wasn't going to "riot shame" and that made the statements about white supremacy, and racism and used the generalization ALL.
Also, I haven't looked yet, but are you certain the term never existed before the white supremacist started using it?
EDIT: That's kind of like me saying most people think the left is satanic. There are people that do, but they are certainly not most. :)
I can't say with absolute certainty that it was never used before white nationalists started using it, however I can say with certainly that they were the first to make the term known to a wide audience. In my observation, the thing that made it known to a very wide audience was 1) The white nationalist given credit for coining the term in 2010 (or thereabouts), Richard Spencer, had a celebration meeting somewhere near the Whitehouse after Trump won. In that meeting they espoused Nazi propaganda and even gave Nazi salutes. I found it to be pretty disturbing myself. 2) Trump appointing Steve Bannon who recently described Breitbart (which he ran until his appointment) as news for the alt-right'.
For better or worse, this has been what has defined the alt-right for most people and brought he term to their attention (I stand by my claim 'most' though I can't prove it to you). But seriously, check out the wikipedia article I linked to and this video of Richard Spencer:
These are the things that have brought the term to the attention to most Americans. The 'good' alt-right no doubt has certain views it is interested in bringing to the masses and certain things they want to 'educate' people on. Clinging to the 'alt-right' term will keep them from doing so, regardless of whether you or anybody else think it is fair or right.
I found this to be a pretty good summary of what has brought the alt-right into the public limelight (despite being from CBS): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/steve-bannon-and-the-alt-right-a-primer/
That video is in my original post by the way.
Sorry, lost track...
I actually was not disturbed by the salutes. I chuckled and got distracted.
Do you know why?
That was actually very close to what the official salute in the U.S. looked like until the Nazi's came around.
We changed it to hand over heart so we wouldn't be mistaken for acting like a Nazi, but the salute had essentially been that for some time until it was changed.
So the first time I saw that I got distracted by that little side jaunt in history and didn't really pay attention to the guy.
So until yesterday when my friend was naming that guy and sharing that post I didn't even know his name. :)
Yes, and that was a pretty good reason to change it. So given what that salute is associated with today, I think it gives a fair indication of what kind of people those are. Or they could just be ignorant (but I repeat myself). I first heard his name and 'alt-right' at about the same time (or not very far apart anyway). I think the same is true for most people that have heard of alt-right, hence the negative view of those calling themselves alt-right.
While I could be wrong, I doubt they made up that salute on the spot or are doing it to harken back to 1915 nostalgia.
Nah, I doubt that was their intentions. I remember vaguely thinking "These people are dumb" then noticing the salute and remembering that little bit of trivia that most people don't know.
I can't remember all the dumb shit I've seen. It doesn't stay in my memory as there is too much of it. I see it all over the place from all parties, and labels.
Lately those protesting, and rioting though have added a burst of speed to their group and I can't keep up with the amount of stupidity I am seeing/hearing from that area lately.
There are smart people too, but man do they appear to be outnumbered.
we lost the use of the word "liberal" because we allowed the lying garbage of the left to define it
I moved this up a couple levels since we keep hitting the nesting limit.
I don't disagree with that.
Yet also a thing that can be important is where a person first learns the meaning of a word/label.
It appears that a huge amount of people that self identify as Alt-Right don't even know those White Nationals are there.
;)
So you are saying they are hijacking the word? :)
I love debating politics because I am both extremely knowledgeable and current on most topics and also about as truly independent of party affiliation as possible. I would say the whole alt right label is just DNC propoganda after managing to lose any control in federal govt. I think both DNC and GOP are garbage. DNC was just lucky enough to get exposed for their fuckery. Bernie got fucked over by the DNC just like Ron Paul did by the GOP. I'll try to find this debate I had with a libertard on Facebook and share it later.
there are plenty of people on the GOP side that identify as Alt-Right. I've met them, and spoken with them. There just happens to be a large group that is not at all close to MOST of them that is clearly like a Neo-Nazi group. The DNC propaganda machine has chosen to use this group to try to cast them as the model for all ALT-RIGHT people. It's a generalization.
Generalizations (Haste Generalization) are almost always false... very rare for them to be true.
Yet the label is not something created by the LEFT. It simply is not conclusively describing one group of people like the LEFT would like people to believe.
EDIT: I am using the term LEFT, but not all people on the "left" are like this or doing that. This too would be a haste generalization and thus false.
I think shoehorning anyone into a label is a bad idea personally. It's all bullshit and noone should 100% agree with all choices one party or group makes. People should learn to analyze all sides of issues and not assume their interests are in the interest of humanity. US citizens have the stupidest political debate skills I have encountered. That's a generalization I'm making based on people that only pay attention to politics when they don't like something. Also who told people that rioting is protesting?
As to rioting... if you read the definition of Terrorism... acts of violence for political gain... that seems more accurate than the word Protest.
I agree with this completely. Labels are generalizations as well. Which means they are without a doubt be false.
I could point at two "christians" sitting on a pew and say CHRISTIANS....
Yet if you looked into the heads of each of them they would be very different people.
A label assumes that people are clones of each other.
Yet that was not what my article is about. My stance on labels and your stance on labels does not stop people from using them or reacting to them.
So if they are using the Alt-Right label I thought they should know what negative shit is being used against them...
The entire "guilt by association" thing.
Yeah it's pretty unfortunate how we live in a society where someone can do everything right and be a great member of society and one wrong label fucks up everything. I find myself leaning more towards anarchy daily.
I am an Anarcho-Capitalist if I am anything. Not what these jackasses the media is labeling Anarchists and such are...
Core tenant of my ideology is the Non-Aggression Principle. I will not initiate aggression, but I will strongly and as decisively as possible defend myself.
I believe we could do pretty much everything by contracts voluntarily agreed upon by those who want to participate in them.
Those who break their contracts would be known and would find it increasingly difficult to get contracts, or at least ones at good terms.
With that said... what I choose to do is no ones business as long as I harm no one, OR their property. This is true of everyone else...
I cannot and should not be able to dictate what anyone else does unless it is harming someone or their property.
That's bascially it... doesn't mean it is not without its flaws or BIG questions...
but many things I don't believe we could realistically answer until we are in that position.
Nothing is perfect... I view Utopia as like infinity. It is a goal to strive towards that can never completely be attained.
EDIT: And I don't use profanity that much except when I am really angry. The fact I am resorting to it more often lately is an indicator of how fed up I am with the mainstream media and the vast amounts of stupidity and hypocrisy that are occurring.
"But who will build the roads" lol i love basic ass thinkers that believe the world crumbles without a govt controlled life. I am of a similar political view. I like true capitalism for economy and no government impact on my life. I have people tell me everyone will just kill everyone else due to anarchy and I just sigh. One day we will evolve.