vimothy
yurp
in what sense is this the point? I'm asking you, does the state have the _right_ to exercise its power without observing any kind of limit, and your answer is yes it does
josef k
- Thread starter vimothy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa argument by tag seems like an odd hobby at least we can spell clever you bellend autistic foreplay autoflatular narcosis barty's entertainment bell end pantomime cancelled concerned parent craner's aggressive gargling lounge act den of despair disgusting old men erectile dysfunction finger wagging i blame twitter i've got mates intervention john's mates josef and his technicoloured meme coat josef k's sick burns kanye without the talent meritless thread no wonder brits sneeked into ira centcom north london house mafia not angry just disappointed not what john was hoping for orange penguin bars paying dress up piety as surrogate sexual dominance sebastian semantic apocalypse now she's not going to fuck you!!! sid viscous vs robocock such bloody awful poetry the evola virus trying to shag a lecturer half my age turd reich vanquishing the goblin nonce vim's sensual meringue hostility group vimothy killed jungle vimothy's hectoring wait till dad gets home we're not going to shag her joe what are you trying to achieve? what is the end goal? what is the point of this thread? who cares? world's worst dinner party you lot aren't as cleaver as you think z haterzzzzzzz
in what sense is this the point? I'm asking you, does the state have the _right_ to exercise its power without observing any kind of limit, and your answer is yes it does
Fascism steals from the proletariat its secret: organisation. liberalism is all ideology with no organisation, fascism is all organisation with no ideology.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
vim, what are you getting out of this emotionally?
are you enjoying a sense of intellectual dominance?
do you find them laughable?
what is the actual emotional compulsion to entertain these kind of conversations?
are you enjoying a sense of intellectual dominance?
do you find them laughable?
what is the actual emotional compulsion to entertain these kind of conversations?
john eden
male pale and stale
Calling it out for what it is isn't apologism. I'd personally like to see power distributed in different and more dispersed ways.
I'd like to see prisons abolished. And states.
john eden
male pale and stale
No my answer is quite precisely that it doesn't matter if it has the right to do it or not. It does it.
How we feel about that is of no consequence unless we can galvanise our own power, to create a more just system.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
vim, answer my questions!
I am saying it is an inherent function of the state to exercise arbitrary moral, legal and property based right. when people say this I tend to say yes to spite them. because anyone not stuck in an ivory tower can see that the state does it. whether it should or shouldn't is a matter of complete indifference.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
vim, when he or third are writing things like that, isn't it blatantly obvious that you're not going to be able to have the kind of conversation you're trying to have with them? the parameters you're working in are so wildly different. like Wittgenstein talking to a lion.
Last edited:
luka
Well-known member
I know you think he's running circles around them but I think they're just talking at cross purposes. everyone seems to be enjoying it in any case.
by abolishing the states contingent and thereby the state itself, all property. ownership must not exist for any group of individuals, let alone a class. houses and schools must not exist as land.