I'm sure it's shameful to be a socialist in your circles, among the people you live with or frequent, where there are probably not 1 socialist. For the rest of the world is just another political alignment. Some people even dare to think a healthy society is plural. But I guess living in a bubble where everyone thinks alike and congratulate themselves for it is a lot easier and very "rewarding" when it comes to your own self righteousness, because -obviously- you are always the good one and the "other" is always wrong.
Ok, friend, I live in Venezuela, and in fact, all my family is socialist, we always talk about politics, and in Venezuela practically 99% of the people are socialists, when they are not socialist by ideology they are by the culture, because although the majority opposes the government, they would be willing to support another socialist government. And it is shameful to be a socialist in any circle, by the way.
" Personally, I would like to see humanity achieve biological immortality and technology that is basically equivalent to magic (being able to transmute elements and having a replicator, etc.)."
Q, The Soulstone, Ride the Lightning, all the works of yours I have read indicate to me this is exactly what you yourself desire to come to pass.
I suspect that ignoring the easy pigeon-holing that clearly falls short of a full understanding of @ekklesagora's positions might potentiate a more useful discussion.
Seeing different paths to the same goal shouldn't pit men against one another. There's room for discussion, I think.
I say this without a deep understanding of more than this post, in terms of @ekklesagora's positions, but it is obvious that you, he, and I all share similar goals.
I do not shy away from the term "socialism." I actually mention in this post that my views mix left-anarchism (AKA "libertarian socialism") with social democracy (AKA "democratic socialism"), so... I kind of did admit it. Also, I have a whole series of Steemit posts on the libertarian socialist critique of property. Also, I talk about Bookchin, Proudhon, Kropotkin, Lerner, etc in this post...all socialists, so I wasn't trying to hide anything.
Also, "socialism" has many different definitions, so whether or not I'm a socialist kind of depends on the definitions used by the folks that I'm talking to at the moment. Most communists wouldn't see me as being socialists since I still wish to have a market system, money, and some sort of private property.
I can so totally see why a socialist doesn't want to be identified as a socialist.
by the way libertarian socialism is not possible democratic socialism is a redundant term
Since I see you as a classical liberal, which does not mean commie, BTW, but rather means socially progressive, but fiscally conservative, I suspect that definitions of the terms 'libertarian', 'socialism', 'democratic', and etc., which might be informed by some of the extensive reading list @ekklesagora has undertaken, might potentiate libertarian socialism, or democratic socialism, being actualities.
Was the Soviet Union democratic? If you don't think so, then democratic socialism isn't redundant at all, because it sure was socialist in your perspective. I actually don't think it was socialist. It was rather a tyranny.
I don't think getting hung up on assumed connotations improves comprehension.
ah..but you forget dunbar's number.
I see any group larger than my monkeysphere to be irrational..
the larger the group the MORE irrational.
put any name you want to on it...it really doesn't matter..theyre nucking FUTZ.
As are UBI, and JG. JG isn't necessary at all, given UBI, as the problems you note with unemployment drive people, who are freed of the necessity to toil against their will, to undertake labors of love.
In the current situation where economic privileges result in the transfer of wealth from the hands of the many to the hands of the few, UBI would only accelerate inequality growth.
I plan on making some posts to explain it a bit more.
Not only is he a socialist, he is The Socialist!
I'm sure it's shameful to be a socialist in your circles, among the people you live with or frequent, where there are probably not 1 socialist. For the rest of the world is just another political alignment. Some people even dare to think a healthy society is plural. But I guess living in a bubble where everyone thinks alike and congratulate themselves for it is a lot easier and very "rewarding" when it comes to your own self righteousness, because -obviously- you are always the good one and the "other" is always wrong.
Ok, friend, I live in Venezuela, and in fact, all my family is socialist, we always talk about politics, and in Venezuela practically 99% of the people are socialists, when they are not socialist by ideology they are by the culture, because although the majority opposes the government, they would be willing to support another socialist government. And it is shameful to be a socialist in any circle, by the way.
Dude, you guys actually seek the exact same ends.
Q, The Soulstone, Ride the Lightning, all the works of yours I have read indicate to me this is exactly what you yourself desire to come to pass.
I suspect that ignoring the easy pigeon-holing that clearly falls short of a full understanding of @ekklesagora's positions might potentiate a more useful discussion.
Seeing different paths to the same goal shouldn't pit men against one another. There's room for discussion, I think.
I say this without a deep understanding of more than this post, in terms of @ekklesagora's positions, but it is obvious that you, he, and I all share similar goals.
ZAP (zero aggression principle) unlike socialists...I have some (principles)
and no 'yeah but'.
socialists are aggressors.
I want all the things that socialist claim to want.
I just don't trust organizations...so I'm NOT a progressive.
The Iron Law of Bureaucracy will not be denied...hasn't been since Ancient Egypt.
so starve the beast...neuter it if possible.
I do not shy away from the term "socialism." I actually mention in this post that my views mix left-anarchism (AKA "libertarian socialism") with social democracy (AKA "democratic socialism"), so... I kind of did admit it. Also, I have a whole series of Steemit posts on the libertarian socialist critique of property. Also, I talk about Bookchin, Proudhon, Kropotkin, Lerner, etc in this post...all socialists, so I wasn't trying to hide anything.
Also, "socialism" has many different definitions, so whether or not I'm a socialist kind of depends on the definitions used by the folks that I'm talking to at the moment. Most communists wouldn't see me as being socialists since I still wish to have a market system, money, and some sort of private property.
I can so totally see why a socialist doesn't want to be identified as a socialist.
by the way
libertarian socialism is not possible
democratic socialism is a redundant term
Since I see you as a classical liberal, which does not mean commie, BTW, but rather means socially progressive, but fiscally conservative, I suspect that definitions of the terms 'libertarian', 'socialism', 'democratic', and etc., which might be informed by some of the extensive reading list @ekklesagora has undertaken, might potentiate libertarian socialism, or democratic socialism, being actualities.
Was the Soviet Union democratic? If you don't think so, then democratic socialism isn't redundant at all, because it sure was socialist in your perspective. I actually don't think it was socialist. It was rather a tyranny.
I don't think getting hung up on assumed connotations improves comprehension.
ah..but you forget dunbar's number.
I see any group larger than my monkeysphere to be irrational..
the larger the group the MORE irrational.
put any name you want to on it...it really doesn't matter..theyre nucking FUTZ.
Support of land value tax is generally considered to be radical, so throw that into the mix.
As are UBI, and JG. JG isn't necessary at all, given UBI, as the problems you note with unemployment drive people, who are freed of the necessity to toil against their will, to undertake labors of love.
People will still work, even if not for wages.
Hell, I work for chocolate chip cookies now =p
In the current situation where economic privileges result in the transfer of wealth from the hands of the many to the hands of the few, UBI would only accelerate inequality growth.
I plan on making some posts to explain it a bit more.