Cool! Video and Helpful Chart posted by Anarchists friends (who otherwise oppose both R and D as "Statists")

[emilynghiem]

Finally, someone posted this chart to help distinguish the Anarchists
instead of Ancaps fighting Ancoms like Conservatives fight Liberals.

This is very cool, and helpful.



I ask of Anarchists: Can we have a mapping of "Statists" instead of lumping all people together who support minimal or Constitutional limited govt? Arguing with a Libertarian Capitalist is a totally different situation than dealing with a Liberal Statist who believes Govt can pass and mandate anything by majority vote or judicial ruling.

RE: "isocracy"
I was advised by another friend, my views are not so much Anarchy
but closer to Isocracy, where everybody has equal political rights.

PS my version of Constitutionalism has to include and protect ALL OTHER BELIEFS in order to be consistent with itself. ALL people have to CONSENT to policy or else that is "unconstitutional by imposing or establishing a belief/religion that violates or discriminates against others". So my standard of Constitutional "equal protections" of the law is a mix of Syndicates [Isocracy based on Mutualist/Voluntaryist CONSENT], Individualist, Free Enterprise, Libertarian/Anarchist, while I am personally still very Texas Nationalist and include myself equally as my progressive Collective Statist friends I support in creating their own self supporting Cooperatives and Administration to do the same thing as State/Federal Govt but only involving taxpayers who AGREE to those policies. The rest can set up their own Cooperative systems by groups or parties to ensure they only follow and fund their own beliefs, terms and conditions.

SOURCE: Here is the full video link this came from:

 

[Oddball]

Finally, someone posted this chart to help distinguish the Anarchists
instead of Ancaps fighting Ancoms like Conservatives fight Liberals.

View attachment 534520


This is very cool, and helpful.



I ask of Anarchists: Can we have a mapping of "Statists" instead of lumping all people together who support minimal or Constitutional limited govt? Arguing with a Libertarian Capitalist is a totally different situation than dealing with a Liberal Statist who believes Govt can pass and mandate anything by majority vote or judicial ruling.

RE: "isocracy"
I was advised by another friend, my views are not so much Anarchy
but closer to Isocracy, where everybody has equal political rights.

PS my version of Constitutionalism has to include and protect ALL OTHER BELIEFS in order to be consistent with itself. ALL people have to CONSENT to policy or else that is "unconstitutional by imposing or establishing a belief/religion that violates or discriminates against others". So my standard of Constitutional "equal protections" of the law is a mix of Syndicates, Individualist, Free Enterprise, Libertarian/Anarchist, while I am personally still very Texas Nationalist and include myself equally as my progressive Collective Statist friends I support in creating their own self supporting Cooperatives and Administration to do the same thing as State/Federal Govt but only involving taxpayers who AGREE to those policies. The rest can set up their own Cooperative systems by groups or parties to ensure they only follow and fund their own beliefs, terms and conditions.

SOURCE: Here is the full video link this came from:

Those on the left end are statists in the end....The second part of "ancom" is "communist", which has historically shown that it needs a brutal State apparatus to break the back of the individual into the plaything of The State.

Ancaps, agorists, voluntaryists, etcetera adhere to the non-aggression principle (NAP) which precludes and eschews the notion of The State in any case, let alone its use as a cudgel to enforce the crushing conformity of collectivist mindsets.

IOW, the very last thing that those people are is "anarchist".

 

[White 6]

Finally, someone posted this chart to help distinguish the Anarchists
instead of Ancaps fighting Ancoms like Conservatives fight Liberals.

View attachment 534520


This is very cool, and helpful.



I ask of Anarchists: Can we have a mapping of "Statists" instead of lumping all people together who support minimal or Constitutional limited govt? Arguing with a Libertarian Capitalist is a totally different situation than dealing with a Liberal Statist who believes Govt can pass and mandate anything by majority vote or judicial ruling.

RE: "isocracy"
I was advised by another friend, my views are not so much Anarchy
but closer to Isocracy, where everybody has equal political rights.

PS my version of Constitutionalism has to include and protect ALL OTHER BELIEFS in order to be consistent with itself. ALL people have to CONSENT to policy or else that is "unconstitutional by imposing or establishing a belief/religion that violates or discriminates against others". So my standard of Constitutional "equal protections" of the law is a mix of Syndicates [Isocracy based on Mutualist/Voluntaryist CONSENT], Individualist, Free Enterprise, Libertarian/Anarchist, while I am personally still very Texas Nationalist and include myself equally as my progressive Collective Statist friends I support in creating their own self supporting Cooperatives and Administration to do the same thing as State/Federal Govt but only involving taxpayers who AGREE to those policies. The rest can set up their own Cooperative systems by groups or parties to ensure they only follow and fund their own beliefs, terms and conditions.

SOURCE: Here is the full video link this came from:

Sounds like this is going to be a semantic masturbation thread.

 

[emilynghiem]

Sounds like this is going to be a semantic masturbation thread.

Words can be used for good or abused for wasteful nonsense.

I know it changed my perspective when my friend Tom Wayburn gave me the term ISOCRACY to delineate where my views and approach fit inside or outside other existing systems.

It has helped my liberal friends to focus more objectively by spelling out the history of where classic liberalism has developed into conservative approaches to govt, while radical liberalism became today's liberals who depend on govt for centralized collective authority.

Teaching the history and differences between groups of thought and political beliefs takes words to delineate.

This can either help us to organize by likeminded groups, or get abused to play "divide and conquer" bullying politics.

The same tools for defense can be abused to attack.

The same tools and materials that can be used to build and educate can be abused to indoctrinate and destroy.

 

[White 6]

Words can be used for good or abused for wasteful nonsense.

I know it changed my perspective when my friend Tom Wayburn gave me the term ISOCRACY to delineate where my views and approach fit inside or outside other existing systems.

It has helped my liberal friends to focus more objectively by spelling out the history of where classic liberalism has developed into conservative approaches to govt, while radical liberalism became today's liberals who depend on govt for centralized collective authority.

Teaching the history and differences between groups of thought and political beliefs takes words to delineate.

This can either help us to organize by likeminded groups, or get abused to play "divide and conquer" bullying politics.

The same tools for defense can be abused to attack.

The same tools and materials that can be used to build and educate can be abused to indoctrinate and destroy.

Interesting word. I had not come across it before and had to look it up.

 

[Votto]

Anarchy leads to dictatorship

At least, that is what history has shown us.