Woody Gutherie, Utah Phillips… I guess I am asking what divides county from folk.
Woody Gutherie, Utah Phillips… I guess I am asking what divides county from folk.
I have a lot to learn. I appreciate the insight. I listen to Aesop Rock. I remember his work being with Rhymesayers.
I agree with the music industry problems. Luckily I have found some great hip hop and country recently.
As an anarchist, voting is fine. In addition, build community and help others.
Audible Anarchist is great. Anarchist Library is another great resource depending on what you can hyperfocus on.
Becoming familiar with other ideas is beneficial. There is nothing wrong with being a Democrat, Social Democrat or Libertarian. Real people hold these political ideas. My transition over years was Democrat since I opposed hawkish Republican imperialism, but I rejected corporate power, so Social Democrat, but I rejected hierarchical power, so Anarchist. Through reading I know Pacifism meshes with any of these ideas. I have never been a Pacifist, but I applaud anyone that takes the time to explore politics even if we do not agree.
Being able to have conversations with people around you is important. Reading theory from other politics helps. Most people around me consider themselves conservative. They say talking points like “I’m for small government”. Having read Libertarian texts like Nozick’s “Anarchy, State and Utopia”, I can discuss the minimal state as a Libertarian idea. I can then transition to “Nozick’s minimal state is not small enough”. In my area this approach opens conversation more than banging a drum about being a Democrat, Leftist, Communist or Anarchist.
Learning to explain math to a computer has been a major blessing.
I agree. Legal and ethical are not the same. Legal does not imply just.
I assumed you are familiar with American history. You assumed I want mass killing. I will simplify my question. When is it necessary to kill another human?
For education, John Brown was an American Abolitionist. That means he did not think anyone should be enslaved. To keep it simple, he attempted to spur a slave rebellion. He killed slave owners.
Killing another human is not ethical. Domination can make killing another human necessary. Your death could be necessary if you are dominating other humans.
What are your thoughts on John Brown?
I know it has been a bit. Renting makes sense in the case you mentioned. Needing to buy and sell property is a hassle. Landlords are a necessity for short term housing under the current economic model.
A future economic model could be use based. Housing is yours while you use it. The housing is available for someone else when you move on.
Why would anyone choose to rent provided an option to own and sufficient funds? Who owns new construction? If landlords, why not manufacture scarcity to drive up prices?
I referenced a news story in which the parachute on an air dropped aid package failed to deploy crushing people underneath.
Genocide is not ethical. Voting for genocide, but less, does not change the ethics of genocide. Part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020 will not vote for him again due to his support of genocide.
The options for such voters are:
I understand the two party system created by first-past-the-post. I understand third party candidates are unlikely to win. I understand Democrats are rightfully nervous. If Democrats are nervous enough, they should do something to change the minds of voters that will not vote for genocide.
There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic. Helping others is a moral thing to do and I was there in 2020 even though peanut butter sucks. Individually, I will get a sandwich, probably with peanut butter.
However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.
I understand needing to eat the sandwich. I also understand making a collective first-past-the-post choice individual is a flawed argument.
However there is an individual component to saying I really can’t eat peanut butter. The decision then becomes stand your ground (no peanut butter), compromise (just a little peanut butter) or protest (full peanut butter; see you in the ER). The claim is the compromise is best.
How do we reach a point where we no longer need to compromise on peanut butter?
Offering a sandwich with more and less peanut butter when I am allergic to peanuts still means I will be sick. I’m hungry and I want a sandwich with no peanut butter. There are third party candidates providing sandwiches with no peanut butter. I am sorry demand decreases for the sandwich with less peanut butter, but I am unable to stomach peanuts.
I find Nozick’s minimal state interesting. He seems to want to entrust violence to a state. How would such a system prevent the minimal state from forming monopolies or cartels by which the ruled give up economic and political freedom?