Leftist Riot Du Jour - UC Berkeley

[Brian Peacock]

The problem here is that we cannot proceed on the assumption that Socialism is a single, fixed ideology where in fact it is a term applied to ideas from the utilitarian and democratic to the totalitarian, depending on who's making the case.

[pErvinalia]

This is just getting repetitive. He was a libertarian socialist, and also called himself an anarchist. Happy?

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... d#p1701860

[pErvinalia]

pErvin wrote...

Dunno who your post is addressed to, but I just point out that labelling oneself as something or another does not make the label a true description.

It doesn't make it a false description, either, and it's pretty well established what Proudhon was, and he wasn't exactly an idiot, so it may well be trusted that he knew when he called himself a socialist that he was a socialist. If you have some evidence that he was not really that, then bring it on.

My point, however, is that I've got this pErvin coming at me demanding I "admit that I'm wrong" for calling Proudhon a socialist. why this is important to him, I have no fucking idea. However, pErvin thinks the guy was an anarchist, which pErvin himself says is essentially synonymous with libertarian socialism, and he does not deny that Proudhon was considered one of the first proponents of libertarian socialism.

Given all that, where the fuck am I "wrong" about proudhon being a socialist? Proudhon said he was one. pErvin says Proudhon was something that is "essentially synonymous" with libertarian socialism. So..... where am I "wrong?"

I've explained this to you multiple times. He wasn't a socialist when he wrote the quote you are referring to. HE WAS AN ANARCHIST.

[Forty Two]

Oh will you just fuck off. You've posted what you think are explanations, but your just wrong. Christ dude. You're like a really stubborn and dimwitted dog with a fucking bone.

[pErvinalia]

Yes, 42, black is white.

[Forty Two]

The problem here is that we cannot proceed on the assumption that Socialism is a single, fixed ideology where in fact it is a term applied to ideas from the utilitarian and democratic to the totalitarian, depending on who's making the case.

There are varieties, which is why the one making the case in favor of one such variety bears the burden of describing which variety to which he or she is referring.

However, like religions with many denominations, for the various varieties to be considered part of the over-arching religion, they must share some key features. The same goes for varieties of socialism. There is no variety of socialism which is "the nice, kind, capitalism...", for example.

[Forty Two]

Yes, 42, black is white.