Recent posts by urine420 on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Quick political question

youve figured out why im not an anarchist, and tbf, youre describing one form of anarchism, whereas the actual political belief is far more nuanced. Anarcho syndicalism is far more attainable than pure anarchism, anarcho collectivism is far more socially concious than others & and anarcho capitalism is for dumb retard babies. I am a Marxist-Leninist, by and large, with some trotskyist elements; because i believe some centralization is neccesary for a non-primative society to adequately provide goods to all citizens. anarchism is a bit too pie in the sky for me, but i am willing to have them as allies

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Quick political question

Originally posted by Kasic:

Out of curiosity urine, what would you consider radically left? Pure anarchy (no government whatsoever)?

Anarchism, basically. the rest of the people here seem to view the status quo of capitalism as being centrist, which is a notion i fundamentally disagree with. At best, social democracy is at best centrist, as it doesn’t do away with bosses, but rebalances the power relationship somewhat. Until the means of production are owned by workers, the viewpoint cannot be leftist, levels of governmental involvement determine how radically leftist it is.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Quick political question

radical liberalism is far right, only thing further right is authoritarian fascism. the tea party is radically liberal, approaching fascist. There is no radical leftism in the united states, only the far right and the further right exist. to even think of the democrats or their supporters as being radically left is dumb as shit.

but aside from all that, radical positions tend to be more internally consistent than non radical positions. social democrat reformists claim they are for minority groups, but at the same time promote the capitalist system which enslaves those minority groups. Authoritarians are shit, but at least their open about their hard on for enslaving the majority for the benefit of the few aristocrats; the dems and GOP will never admit that they hold the same position, despite actively working towards it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Prostitution

Originally posted by Helltank:

That is utter bullshit and you know it.

whats your rebuttal?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Prostitution

Rich people have more agency, so their crimes should be punished higher even on the percentage system. people like palmer or rinehart should be executed if they do so much as jaywalk (or one of the bullshit laws they use to jail blacks and poors, like the going to the pub w family law)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Prostitution

Vika, to discuss prostitution devoid of its larger context would take less than a sentence. “in a truly equal society, any person should be able to engage in prostitution if that is what they wish”. it’s not a very interesting argument and doesn’t get to the meat and potatoes of the current reality. In a society fundamentally built upon inequality and the need of money just to keep your head above water, entering into prostitution is not an “uncompelled act”, financial reality plays a large part in why many women (and men, but in far fewer numbers due to patriarchal structures) enter into the sex industry.

discussing anything outside of the larger picture is all but meaningless. if you view things at a granular and isolated level, i wonder how the world is anything other than nonstop surprise and confusion for you.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Prostitution

Originally posted by vikaTae:

His end argument was even worse. That if a woman chooses to have sex with a man of her own free will, then she is being sexually assaulted in every definition except the legal one.

That’s not what i said. if you’re financially compelled to have sex with someone in order to survive, that’s not consent. In a system where you can have the options of doing something, or starving (or any other survival related financial problem, like not having money to pay for surgery), then anyone would “choose” the former. Its not a real choice though, it’s a threat more than anything. Being forced to have sex at gunpoint is the same sort of situation as being required to have sex to survive financially.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Prostitution

Originally posted by vikaTae:

No exploitation, alongside actual regulated prices or at least a fair and open comparison of what others are charging, and if a prostitute wishes to just walk away, there is no harassment, no forced dependency on drugs. They can go and even get a reference if they wish.

In a society that is both patriarchal and capitalist, the sex industry will be exploitative. if a person has to earn money to survive, and the only way they can earn money (be it through lack of other job prospects or being a discriminated against minority) is to engage in the sex industry, how is that not sex slavery? If your choices are do x or die, then there is no choice at all and you’re being exploited.

in a patriarchal society, it furthers the comodification of women, treating them (and their sexuality) as a product to be bought and traded as desired. consent factors nowhere into capitalist patriarchal prostitution. In an ideal world, only those who wanted to have sex in exchange for money would be prostitutes, and it would be equal between men and women. As it stands, prostitution enslaves the most disadvantaged of women and (in every sense but legally) subjects them to rape.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Osama Bin Laden: Hero?

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

Its only terrorism when they do it!!

arms for contras

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Osama Bin Laden: Hero?

Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Does a hero kill innocent people?

There are no heroes in global politics, by this measure. You’re just focusing on Osama because he was closer to the killings he ordered. TBF, Osama had shithouse ideals, and was a bad person by any measure, but that shouldn’t tar the methods he used. Had he, or rather someone less shit, used those methods to fight inequality and imperialism, rather than force the same with themselves on top like osama did, then they would be a hero. The marginalised and exploited should reclaim the world from tyrants by any means necessary.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Feminism: Does Sexual Exploitation Empower Women?

Exploitation can only exist in an ownership society. She is in a position of being exploited in our capitalist society, the only way for feminism to advance is as a part of a larger marxist revolution.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Apparently the government could wreck SD

You’re right they’re targeting gun owners, jhco, but wrong about the rest. America is a deeply conservative (far right-wing, liberal) leaning on fascist country. the govt exists to serve an aristocracy, to which no moral exists and only the furthering of the individual lifestyles of the ultra-wealthy is imperative. to this end, the government divides the people with a mantra of individualism and false wedges of division (religion, race & gender conflicts). They have no skin in the game of what people believe, so long as they believe that their enemy is not class related.

The gun issue is an interesting one, the main bastion of the defence of the slaves’ ability to over throw the monied interests and exert their dominance in the creation of a true classless society is the furthest right individualists. They are the only people willing to defend the great equaliser of physical force. Violence, economic & and physical, is kept by the ruling class as a means of keeping the working class in line; as, in a fair fight, the poor majority are far stronger. If the left would realise that force is the only true way to wrestle this world from the few who’ve ruled for countless millenia, we might see some change, but far too often they fall to the trap of hand-wringing liberalism.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Apparently the government could wreck SD

the people the far right corpratist government are going after is the farther right. – jhco

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Pop Culture Trending Topics - What do they mean for us?

Originally posted by 1132:


And here I think you’re just missing the point. Yeah, there were racist sub-themes. The main characters participated in a freaking massacre of Native Americans, and it haunts the shit out of him throughout the game. There are totally unrepentant characters, and they’re, shockingly, the bad guys in the game. It’s a criticism of American’s beliefs during that time period, and especially by hammering on some issues that are still prevalent today (immigration, for one) it can even be argued that they’re taking shots at current cultural trends.

The issue with BS:I is that it insists on a truth in the middle approach. The oppressing class oppresses the oppressed in the first half of the game, but as soon as the oppressed (blacks/irish/etc) win control, they become the villain (which vindicates the original oppressers). Having the main character become opposed to the revolution, means that the game ultimately wants you to believe that the oppression of minorities and maintenance of the status quo is in the best interest of all. Or, it would mean that if the game didn’t disappear up its own arsehole with the time travel/alternate universe shit. Viewing the piece separate from the sci-fi elements, it is pro-oppression; as a whole, it is a clusterfuck of poor ideas.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Marriage Process.

Originally posted by Helltank:

Please cease attempting to turn this into a political debate, as well as making hasty judgements about my age or ability or political views.

Everything is politics. and your age, ability and political views are transparent (teen, incapable of functioning in society, childish)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Marriage Process.

Originally posted by Helltank:
But if I say it outright, I don’t even get trusted with a relationship, let alone billions of dollars.

I’m certain you aren’t a sociopath, you just seem like one of those idiot kids who thinks that being “above” emotions makes you smarter than other people. You don’t consider other people because you choose not to consider other people because you think that not considering other people makes you cool. You will either grow out of this form of thinking, or become a libertarian.

Originally posted by Helltank:

Is this why people like to promote individuals who show signs of sociopathy into high ranking positions and trust them with their money?

capitailsm is not democratic or merit based. the people who rise to the top in the capitalist system are the modern-feudal lords and those who’re willing to massively fuck over all else in order to get bigger numbers. Sociopathy is capitalism working as intended

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Marriage Process.

Originally posted by Helltank:


No, that implies I’m sexist. Frankly, I view everyone this way. And I don’t “throw away” someone. If a person has been drained of any and all useful resources, unlikely as long as a woman’s vagina remains functional, I simply walk away and leave them to get on with their lives.

quoting cuz it is funny

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Marriage Process.

Originally posted by Helltank:

Oh well, same end result. Frankly I see a lot of sociopaths being treated unfairly by society. There’s this enduring belief that no emotions is somehow inferior to emotions. Reminds me a little of the racism stuff back in the early 20th century.

The racist-sexist-homophobe claims that he is the victim of prejudice due to having abhorrent views. Fails to see the irony in invoking past racism, when he himself falls into the oppressor group at the moment an shares views with the oppressor group of the past.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Amanda Knox farce

only guilty people get arrested, if they didn’t break the law, why would the police go after them?

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is it wrong to hold the Sochi Olympics in the 3rd world country of Russia?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 

Topic: Kongregate / How we can protest the new forum layout

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Marriage Process.

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Thug" is the new "N-word"/Jordan Davis and Treyvon Martin

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Philosophy

Originally posted by AEBEATIAxSOOKIES:

Thanks. So debating philosophy with an atheist would be very embarrassing for the philosopher.

wtf? where are you getting this?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Thug" is the new "N-word"/Jordan Davis and Treyvon Martin

ignoring systemic injustice makes it go away