Leftist Riot Du Jour - UC Berkeley

[pErvinalia]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

[Forty Two]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

[pErvinalia]

One, I have not argued that anarchism is most definitely a left ideology, except that anarchist-capitalism is considered a rightist ideology BECAUSE OF ITS ADHERENCE TO THE CONCEPT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. There is such a thing as anarcho-capitalism, and it is most definitely anarchist and it is most definitely not synonymous with libertarianism.

Anarcho-capitalism is a form of right-libertarianism. Read your own fucking links. Likewise, anarchism is a form of libertarianism, which isn't surprising given that politically libertarianism FIRST REFERRED TO LEFT ANARCHISM.

You're mixing up etymology with meaning - we all know where the words came from (etymology), but that does not mean they mean the same thing today as they did 150 years ago. Libertarianism and anarchism simply are not synonyms in common English usage today. Naturally, both words have historical etymologies, but that does not mean that today non-American English speaking usage is to use them as synonyms. They aren't used as such.

Except that I provided links that show that they are (outside the US).

Give me a modern example in common English usage of the words being used interchangeably - or of libertarian being used to describe an anarchist. Let's see it.

I'm not doing an internet search for someone who will never admit he is wrong. I've already provided quotes showing how you are wrong and you refuse to admit it. FFS.

[pErvinalia]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

Who the fuck ever suggested that there aren't leftist ideologies that are authoritarian?

So, basically, you provided a demonstrably erroneous graph to prove a point that no one debates? WFT is wrong at your end of the internet?!

[Forty Two]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

Who the fuck ever suggested that there aren't leftist ideologies that are authoritarian?

Brian Peacock, in his partially sarcastic post to which I responded.

So, basically, you provided a demonstrably erroneous graph to prove a point that no one debates? WFT is wrong at your end of the internet?!

I addressed Brian Peacock's point. Your narcissism seems to result in you thinking every discussion relates solely to what you post. Frankly, what you post is generally ridiculous and stupid, and is certainly not the only thing folks reply to on these threads. There is, actually, something wrong with you, personally. It might be part of your mental condition, because whatever it is makes you a really disagreeable, and mean-spirited person.

I provided a graph that uses the very commonly known and understood graph of political positions - it's always an overly simplistic portrayal of the relationship of various ideologies, but the graph has its usefulness to discussions. There are many versions out there on the 'net with many different iterations of where different political leaders, philosophies and ideologies fall on the political map. There will always be areas where people disagree, and there are always specific ideologies or ism which a person creating the graph gets wrong. That does not mean the graph is useless for a given point.

What you do, however, is you ignore the reason why the graph was posted in the first place, and then you go off on a tangent, and your goal is not to discuss, but rather to disrupt and cause strife. You hardly ever stick to an issue, and you are almost always at least partially deceptive or mendacious. Your intent is rarely, if ever, to hold a frank, productive discussion. So, I really wish you would just go away. Brian Peacock is perfectly able to have a discussion with me about what we were talking about, and your contributions are worthless, irritating, time-wasters. Why don't you go to another of your "Occupy" demonstrations and litter a park with food wrappers, general refuse and fecal matter, like you and your ilk like to do? Either that or maybe there is someone you could accuse of being a Nazi and go pick a fight? Must be something you'd enjoy out there...

[pErvinalia]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

Who the fuck ever suggested that there aren't leftist ideologies that are authoritarian?

Brian Peacock, in his partially sarcastic post to which I responded.

No he didn't. Where the fuck did you learn English?

So, basically, you provided a demonstrably erroneous graph to prove a point that no one debates? WFT is wrong at your end of the internet?!

I addressed Brian Peacock's point. Your narcissism seems to result in you thinking every discussion relates solely to what you post. Frankly, what you post is generally ridiculous and stupid, and is certainly not the only thing folks reply to on these threads. There is, actually, something wrong with you, personally. It might be part of your mental condition, because whatever it is makes you a really disagreeable, and mean-spirited person.

I'm perfectly nice to people who aren't habitually dishonest.

I provided a graph that uses the very commonly known and understood graph of political positions - it's always an overly simplistic portrayal of the relationship of various ideologies, but the graph has its usefulness to discussions. There are many versions out there on the 'net with many different iterations of where different political leaders, philosophies and ideologies fall on the political map. There will always be areas where people disagree, and there are always specific ideologies or ism which a person creating the graph gets wrong. That does not mean the graph is useless for a given point.

What you do, however, is you ignore the reason why the graph was posted in the first place, and then you go off on a tangent, and your goal is not to discuss, but rather to disrupt and cause strife.

What bullshit. I am perfectly entitled to address the errors in the graph. Which is what I did. And despite your post-hoc claims now that the graph can be wrong but it serves a broader point, you in no way made that concession when rebutting my points. You argued my points as if the graph wasn't wrong. It's only after successive attempts to point it out to you by Svarty and myself that you have finally conceded that the graph is wrong and now are trying to make it seem like you never tried to argue that the graph was right. This is why I fucking trash you. You are dishonest in the extreme.

Must be something you'd enjoy out there...

There is. Outing so called "liberals" and "libertarians" as the conservatives that they really are.

[Forty Two]

So why did you post that nonsensical graph then?

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

Who the fuck ever suggested that there aren't leftist ideologies that are authoritarian?

Brian Peacock, in his partially sarcastic post to which I responded.

No he didn't. Where the fuck did you learn English?

Yawn. Go fuck yourself.

So, basically, you provided a demonstrably erroneous graph to prove a point that no one debates? WFT is wrong at your end of the internet?!

I addressed Brian Peacock's point. Your narcissism seems to result in you thinking every discussion relates solely to what you post. Frankly, what you post is generally ridiculous and stupid, and is certainly not the only thing folks reply to on these threads. There is, actually, something wrong with you, personally. It might be part of your mental condition, because whatever it is makes you a really disagreeable, and mean-spirited person.

I'm perfectly nice to people who aren't habitually dishonest.

Lying again. And you're lying again.

I provided a graph that uses the very commonly known and understood graph of political positions - it's always an overly simplistic portrayal of the relationship of various ideologies, but the graph has its usefulness to discussions. There are many versions out there on the 'net with many different iterations of where different political leaders, philosophies and ideologies fall on the political map. There will always be areas where people disagree, and there are always specific ideologies or ism which a person creating the graph gets wrong. That does not mean the graph is useless for a given point.

What you do, however, is you ignore the reason why the graph was posted in the first place, and then you go off on a tangent, and your goal is not to discuss, but rather to disrupt and cause strife.

What bullshit. I am perfectly entitled to address the errors in the graph. Which is what I did. And despite your post-hoc claims now that the graph can be wrong but it serves a broader point, you in no way made that concession when rebutting my points. You argued my points as if the graph wasn't wrong. It's only after successive attempts to point it out to you by Svarty and myself that you have finally conceded that the graph is wrong and now are trying to make it seem like you never tried to argue that the graph was right. This is why I fucking trash you. You are dishonest in the extreme.

I'd call you a lying piece of shit, but that'd be an insult to pieces of shit. I stated immediately that there was a reasonable issue with the including of "totalitarianism" on the graph where it was included, for the very reason that both left and right can be totalitarian. So, shove your lying post up your ass. I'm sick of your garbage. You don't deserve the courtesy of replies anymore.

You've admitted before that you will respond to people and tell them they're wrong without reading their posts. You make shit up. You divert and disrupt. You are not here to discuss honestly, or cordially. You just lied through your teeth.

Must be something you'd enjoy out there...

There is. Outing so called "liberals" and "libertarians" as the conservatives that they really are.

You're just a typical post-modern leftist progressive, SJW-type, ideologue, and truth means nothing to you. Reason means nothing to you. You're caught up in your own self-righteousness and you've lost any semblance of skeptical or rational thought in the process.

[pErvinalia]

The graph was posted to show that there are leftist ideologies that are authoritarian.

Who the fuck ever suggested that there aren't leftist ideologies that are authoritarian?

Brian Peacock, in his partially sarcastic post to which I responded.

No he didn't. Where the fuck did you learn English?

Yawn. Go fuck yourself.

No, I think I'll point out how you either can't read English very well, or you are being dishonest again. Or likely both. Brian said: "No, you've got that wrong Jim. Authoritarianism is leftist by definition. Admittedly it's not my definition, or any considered definition of a student of political theory, but that doesn't stop it being defined as such - no sirree.


That in no way suggests that there can be no leftist ideologies that are authoritarian. The only way that it could was if we are talking about a totalitaranism being binary - that is, one of either left or right. But as most of us know, it isn't a binary case. It could apply to either of left or right individually (two cases) or BOTH left and right (the third case; therefore not binary). You need to upgrade your logic skills and/or reading skills and/or honesty skills.

You've admitted before that you will respond to people and tell them they're wrong without reading their posts. You make shit up.

That second sentence is ironic given that the first is absolute bullshit. I've never admitted to that, most notably because it's utterly false. More dishonesty from you.

[Forty Two]

Of course you admitted that. You did it. You're just lying about it. You were caught. Have some dignity not to compound it.

[pErvinalia]

Am I lying like you claimed I am about Obama? And the other countless times when you accused me of lying after which I posted the link to show you I wasn't which you then usually ignore or try and argue that black is white? You're up there with the most dishonest people on the internet. Provide the quote where I said what you claim and I will humbly retract. Of course, you won't, because it doesn't exist.

[Hermit]

The problem is that I don't actually read everything you write...

[Forty Two]

Am I lying like you claimed I am about Obama? And the other countless times when you accused me of lying after which I posted the link to show you I wasn't which you then usually ignore or try and argue that black is white? You're up there with the most dishonest people on the internet. Provide the quote where I said what you claim and I will humbly retract. Of course, you won't, because it doesn't exist.

I've done that before. The thread is there - we've already been through this. I'm not playing your game anymore. It happened. I'm sure someone will confirm it for me.

[Hermit]

Am I lying like you claimed I am about Obama? And the other countless times when you accused me of lying after which I posted the link to show you I wasn't which you then usually ignore or try and argue that black is white? You're up there with the most dishonest people on the internet. Provide the quote where I said what you claim and I will humbly retract. Of course, you won't, because it doesn't exist.

I've done that before. The thread is there - we've already been through this. I'm not playing your game anymore. It happened. I'm sure someone will confirm it for me.

Done. Check the post above yours.

[Brian Peacock]

No, you've got that wrong Jim. Authoritarianism is leftist by definition. Admittedly it's not my definition, or any considered definition of a student of political theory, but that doesn't stop it being defined as such - no sirree.

There is an authoritarian left. Progressives tend to to be slightly over to the authoritarian side of the left. Communists are hard left and hard authoritarian. That kind of thing.

Here is one illustration - top left quadrant is authoritarian left:

Hmm.

given how totalitariansim is shown as a lefty tendency, after having been implemented by thoth the fascists and the Nazis, I'm not sure how reliable this graph is.

It shows left-to-right economic views horizontally and authoritarian-to-libertarian views top to bottom. Forty Two and Seth seem to think that just appearing on the lefthand side of the chart is enough to mark you as inclined towards authoritarianism.

[Forty Two]

I don't think that.