Join the Libertarian Socialist Federation!

[TummyTush]

Democratic socialism requires the direct democracy of the people.

[anarksee]

Hola to mi amigas y mi amigos in Portugal y Andalucia ,Catalunya,Basque Country(ETA!)!The Federacion Anarquista de Iberica are legends within the Underground of the Global Anarchists!1936-now!!!.......

[RedswordReborn]

The LSF Endures! Libertad o Muerte! Fascism, ultranationalism, empires, they will ALL crumbles while Liberty endures!

[nonameposter]

Liberty is not compatibel with capitalism!

Capitalism is the cause for dictatorships in the exploited countries. and be honest our so called democracy does not make it possible to decide anything real (which war has been decided by a asked majority?)

We are forced to work for the profit of people who do not work! we are brothers and sisters. we must for our rights! liberté egalité solidarité

[lordaltay5]

Liberty is not compatible with Socialism or any other form of collectivism. The only natural form of sovereignty is self-sovereignty. You are the sovereign of your mind and body. Any form of coercive taxation, collective ownership, collective production is anathema to liberty.

[Maxgreen1]

I agree, and although Liberty is not compatible with Socialism, it is compatible with collectivism:

The individual can choose to cooperate with others in a collectivist environment, making a merger of property, somewhat like a marriage, but based on production rather than reproduction and upbringing of children.

Collectivism can only be compatible with liberty if it is small-scale and voluntary and never required. Even Ideal Socialism cannot support Liberty. Ideal Liberty is self-sustained.

[diaverde09]

i agree with you.

[AmersfoortTristan]

Well.. the LSF disbanded. I saw it on their forum lately.

[Nintencrow]

*stands proud singing along with left fist in the air and right hand over heart*

[druidu]

And get the crap kicked out of you! HaHaHaHa!

[Maxgreen1]

You're sitting in front of a computer.

If you're seriously considering to do something for the cause, You should be on the news, not on youtube.

You are either part of the LSF or you aren't. The LSF Doesn't need posers to weigh down their message.

[jfh1986]

What a horrible song

[kabbinet]

Why?

[Maxgreen1]

I like this song. Its the Anthem for Socialism, Democracy, Communism, and Anarchism/Libertarianism.

What is wrong with you!

[DrWillyWildcat]

I just joined your alliance when i found it i would like to help make videos..

[streetgypsy44]

Im WOEKING CLASS all I have to say is the current system is oppressive and sucks. Fuck, most lower-working-class folks will never see access to higher education, healthcare, or liberty.

How do you think these injustices and even murders witness at the hands of the rich makes a young man feel about the current system?

[RedswordReborn]

Or, better yet, a young, black queer working class woman, quite possibly amongst the most severely oppressed people on the face of the earth?

Just semantics, but it is important to elevate the most oppressed amongst us all, or the white male dominance of today will be replaced by yet more white male dominance.

[Ryder69420]

Yeah, and all Democrats are Red Communists. Ron Paul is a CONSTITUTIONALIST With mostly Libertarian Values. Free Market but small government. Libertarian Socialist's believe in abolishing private property!!! Modern Lebertarians arent Libertarian Socialists Vote Ron Paul!!! look up "Who are the real patriots"

[RedswordReborn]

By definition, those who support private property support individual people owning the very earth itself. Society as a whole cannot afford this, and the abolishment of private property is essential for equal distribution of wealth and public ownership of the means of production, to better serve humanity as a whole, rather than the selfish self-interests of a few rich white guys.

[Maxgreen1]

The human being is a deciding being. I don't support aristocracy, I support meritocracy: A society where class is based upon merit. In the humanitarian sense, we are all equal. In the social sense, we should be recognized by the social contributions to society, not their heritage or material wealth.

You honor the working class. I honor those that work, no matter what class they are in. Government monopoly is not the answer to private monopoly. The answer is opposition, or rather, competition.

[RedswordReborn]

Public ownership does not outright mean governmental monopoly, nor does it justify the existence of a 'nation-state' as we know it today. Given the rise of globalization, it is apparent that borders and countries have lost their relevance. By eliminating the archaic (and clearly nullified) right of 'national sovereignity', which many governments do not even truly support anymore, and the elimination of the restriction of 'property use' to an arbitrary 'owner', we are on the road to axing greed.

[allhailtuna]

Right, so why not support labour credit, as opposed to capitalism, in which a capitalist does not need to work to earn money, merely own?

As for meritocracy in capitalism, it is a myth.

[Maxgreen1]

I do not support Capitalism per se. I support the fact that competition leads to efficiency, whether it be a socialism, capitalism, whatever.

And I believe that greed is no basis for sound business or government. I have no respect whatsoever for those that see greed as a positive force in the economic system. Especially followers of Alan Greenspan's Philosophy that greed is good. I also feel ashamed of christians who agree with Greenspan philosophy. No good can come out of sin, especially greed

[Maxgreen1]

The workers should be given what they are owed, and corruption must be ousted from the system before any noteworthy change in our economic system may take place.

[recoome1221]

I cant speak Russian... BUt I was still in LSF... We should make another video with less annoying music...

[joebonk]

socialismo ya

chiapas resiste

[Cab00se90]

VISCA SOCIALISTE

Che Vive!

[FreeSoviet]

Democracy? Don't u C it's only a bipolaristic power alternating every few years, maybe so to never find actual responsible ppl, & the background of it being depicted of unremovable shadowy dictorial principles, & @ its backstage the slick as lard capitalistic oligarchies. So tricky & manipulative is this system that makes u harmless & remissive! So u live foolishly like N happy goat in the illusion that your shepheard feeds u 4 mercy & care. But u're his slave, & he can do what he wants from u!

[bobyhawkins]

People don't seem to understand that libertarian-socialists are just people who oppose the tyranny and exploitation of the federal government as well as that of private corporations. They are neither socialist or libertarian by an orthodox definition. Rather, they are a rational combination of the two.

[LehrBoy]

"[P]rivate corporations" don't exist. Corporate privilege and limited liability are creatures of big government and couldn't compete in a free market without subsidy.

[fusionguitar]

Yes, and modern corporations were born out of government legal decree (in recent centuries generally and specifically about a century ago). In other words, government is clearly a huge part of, and a source of, these problems.

[poumista]

visca p.o.u.m

[bluebeard2]

Punchy song. Socialism has a pretty bad track record though.

[haobio]

Because socialists didn't figure out a sicentific and check and balanced government. However, as Capitalist soceity has combined socialist ideas, such as welfare, public education. communist countries hit the dead end, refusing political reforms.

[bluebeard2]

That's true. The societies that dominate the west aren't "true capitalist", in the way it's classically portrayed. It's neither a command economy (i.e. highly centralised decision making), nor is it wholly market (i.e. highly decentralised decision making). It's a mixed economy. And yes, my choice of language is deliberately orthodox economic terminology ;)

[Dilzybhoy]

it's wank is what it is.

[gravyfury]

this is NOT libertarian it is almost polar opposite

[ronpaulvoter]

Do NOT describe this crap as libertarian. These people are just the OPPOSITE of libertarian.

[MIGHTYMANITY]

AAAAAHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH­

[Ub3rdude]

Holy shit this video is f****d!

[Suetehk]

A socialist will hug anyone they feel deserves it. A Nationalist will hug anyone the same as them, and a conservative will hug anyone that will benefit them, and spit on the ones that wont.

In b4 moron and do some research comments.

[Suetehk]

Christ, somewhere along the way all of you people got so involved into what these words mean and using even bigger confusing words to describe them that im not even sure any of you know the meaning of any of the words you are using. Keep it simple. A social person interacts with other people. And simply put, a socialist wants to interact in a posative way with other people (which normaly invovles them helping these people in some way). I like thinking about it like this;

[Dilzybhoy]

You're a liberal then. That means you're opinion doesn't count.

[phillipmcgarry]

freedom means freedom from authority. have you ever worked for a corporation? not even in nazi germany did you have to ask to go to the bathroom. libertarian socialism integrates democracy into the workplace, so that everyone has choices about what their business does.

[phillipmcgarry]

where do you get that idea?

[radiofreejuan]

Libertarian socialism is entirely voluntary. Do your research first. Anyways if libertarians are for freedom they should recognize that capitalism creates rich/poor differentiations that naturally create a lack of freedom for those on the bottom.

[tHeWasTeDYouTh]

ahahahhaha back in Spain my grampa killed anarchist and socialist. I just wander what he did to the ones that where captured.

fuck anarchist, Capitalism and Democracy you fucks. All you want to do is smoke weed and lay around.

lazy fucks(you are all dirt poor too)

[druidu]

You got butt fucked by the Nordreich during the St' Patrick Massacre hahahahaha

[radiofreejuan]

That's more an indictment of fascist tyranny than anything else.

[druidu]

You communist dumb ass, the Nordreich isn't fascist, it's a nationalist alliance for any type of nationalist. There are even Koreans, Native Americans and, believe it or not, even a half Jew in that alliance ... so much for zi fazist beazt, communist idiot.

[JimmyFartpants]

Libertarian Socialism???

That just might be biggest oxymoron ever.

[FionMacCumhail]

And you might just possibly be the biggest dumbass ever. The term libertarian has always reffered to socialists, many many many years before capitalists decided to hijack the name.

[Nova5202]

Socialism is a government run form of "helping" people. Libertarians want small government including in those areas. Socialism is one of those things where some people who are better off get the short stick and later on they slowly become lesser off creating a large gap between the poor/low middle class and the very rich. Socialism only creates more poor.

[300bluebooks]

lol That is not true at all. Capitalism clearly creates the largest gap between poor and rich. Just look at the US!

Libertarians are idiots.

[LibertyAmerica]

Yes, let's take a look at the U.S.

The "poor" in the United States live like the middle class does in Europe, with color tv's, apartments, cars, and cell phones.

It's free-market capitalism that has provided the most wealth to the greatest amount of people. Just look at the U.S. - the wealthiest country, with the best standard of living in the world.

Libertarians are for Freedom. Not Government ownership of ones money, body, and soul.

[radiofreejuan]

Libertarian socialists are opposed to governments as well as capitalism, which is just as abusive. And the wealth of America is only conceivable because of the poverty of the developing world.

[GeneralPaccepa]

Too bad UGO destroyed LSF... :( Hahahhahahahahhahahaahaha

[radiofreejuan]

Our membership is growing since the crumble of the ICP. Some destruction.

[Dmitry1989]

Rosa Luxemburg was not an anarchist, she was a Left Communist. That's one of the problems with anarchism - great resolve and aspiration, but very weak ideological base. There has not yet been any anarchist international. Anarchism has only local isolated character. Its main basis consists of petty bourgeois or radical intellectuals.

[FionMacCumhail]

Well maybe thats a good thing, because anarchism has come far closer to success then leninism ever did.

[Dmitry1989]

I wouldn't say that. Name one anarchist party that everyone knows. Was there ever an anarchist state? You are ridiculous. USSR in 1920s was very close to socialism - thousand times closer than Spain in 1930s.

[FionMacCumhail]

I'm not denying that the USSR was socialist but it never achieved its end. USSR was in a permanent transistional state, and still people were exploited. And it would be stupid for anarchists to have a party. the spanish revolution was the closest thing to communism, but the communists of course shot them in the back. Its never good strategy to turn on your ally

[lincoherent]

morton is such a moron, he talk like a big etron (8) stop talking of what you dont know man, begin to think , its a good start :) use what your scumbag god gave you, read about that, maknov, kroptkine, bakounine, anarchy ect..we deserve a better world

[bradattack]

this video denounces stalin you fools

[Blobulous]

Capitalism is the system that requires force because the police and army have to protect the property interests of the rich.

[Blobulous]

Wow, why don't you idiots educated yourselves? Libertarian Socialism is not a contradiction. Socialism is a natural order of community solidarity and collective government and ownership - it requires no force because there is a unity of interests. If socialism is not Libertarian it is still capitalism under a different name because the State dominates and exploits the people exactly the same way capitalists do.

[BryanMorton]

Even given the most open ended definitions of libertarianism and socialism, the two terms are still opposites. Libertarianism condemns the use of the initiation of force as a means to achieve socio-political ends whereas socialism literally requires it. The libertarian can be so to days end without using force on anyone else to achieve his goal. The socialist must by nature, coerce the participation of those who might disagree.

[xplayer88]

Stalin was maybe really not a communist... he was a traitor of all the Soviet working class as he is responsible for the death of about 20 million people (a lot of them were just ordinary people) who were sent to working camps in Siberia.

From my point of view, the greatest communist/socialist leader ever was Josip Broz-Tito!

[dmr0binson]

I thought that perhaps watching the video would explain away the contradiction between liberterian and socialist, but no, the video was completely meaningless also.

[HaraldurTG]

Stalin was no Communist. If Stalin was a Communist, then I am a red skinned haddock living on Mont Blanc.

[brndnwilks]

Agreed, Stalin was Totalitarian, a dictator, not a communist

[dmr0binson]

Then you _are_ a red-skinned haddock living on Mont Blanc. Was he a capitalist? Were Lenin, Mao, Castro and Pol Pot also not communists? Fact is, communism just doesn't have a great track record in the real world.

[FionMacCumhail]

Fact. All of them are capitalists. And none of this has anything to do with libertarian socialism.

[ih8communism]

Socialism sucks, long live freedom, capitalism & the nation of Freedomtopia! Boooooo Stalin!

[CodeRed001]

Another fucking moron.

[Tahmus]

I didn't understand what you said, I am sorry. That wouldn't be exploitive, but common marxists and anarchists don't view small buisnessmen or small private firms to even be exploitive or "evil", if I may say.

[Thorbie]

Why does the size matter? The situation is the same no matter how successful a businessman is or how big a corporation is. The employer and the employee rely on each other. If both are better off working with each other they will do it, if not they won't. It's not exploitive.

[Thorbie]

So they exploit themselves? That doesn't make any sense. It's not exploitive because both decide out of their own free will to have this contract. Whether both are equal partners with specialized skills or whether one is a rich business man and another is an unskilled worker, as long as both are going to benefit more than not working together, it isn't exploitive.

[Tahmus]

Any profit system is inherently evil and exploitive. I don't care what you damned libertarians call it.

[Thorbie]

So if 2 people voluntarily make a contract where both people will benefit than not making that contract, it's evil and exploitive?

[Tahmus]

Well, those two people would need labour power in order to produce profit, therefore, they would need to exploit that force in order to put a cheap commoditiy out in the market.

[Thorbie]

For it to be exploitive you need force. Barring a situation where one of them is threatening the other with violence or something, both only agree to the working relationship so they can make more money than without making this contract.

[FionMacCumhail]

Unfortunately, that contract is inherently coercive because even though you don't put a gun to their head your also not going to feed them either.

[BryanMorton]

They also reject the notion of private property rights. I think they're just confused.

[FionMacCumhail]

Libertarian was originally refering to anarchism, which is economically leftist. Only americans will say that it is an oxymoron.

[BryanMorton]

You might want to try all that again. The first part makes sense in that libertarianism is anti-statist, however, economically leftist means different things depending on the part of the world you're in and the time period you're addressing. Modern leftists in the US are more socialist in their socio-political philosophy.

[FionMacCumhail]

I understand but your still not getting it. The usage of the word libertarianism is semantics, as is any argument surrounding it. Its simply paradoxical to say that libertarianism and socialism is an oxymoron.

[BryanMorton]

Except, of course, that the two terms are mutually exclusive. They are two diametrically opposing philosophies.

[FionMacCumhail]

but only if we assume that everyone has the same definition for libertarianism, which they don't.

[BryanMorton]

I'm not a big fan of relativism. Words have meaning whether people believe it or not. Calling a pig a goat does not make it so.

[FionMacCumhail]

Yes but a WIDE MAJORITY of people consider libertarianism to be synomomouns with anarchism. Your argument would make sense if it was only like 2.

[BryanMorton]

Libertarianism is the belief that it is wrong to use the initiation of force as a means to socio-political ends. I doubt that your "wide majority" theory holds any real statistical water. However, most libertarians with whom I'm familiar also consider themselves to be minarchists.

[BryanMorton]

Another common misconception arises from the use of the terms government and the State to mean the same thing. This has given both anarchy and libertarianism the incorrect label of being anti-government rather than anti-State.

[BryanMorton]

Libertarianism, and to a lesser degree anarchy, depends on legitimate government to prevent negative rights violations. Legitimate governments are those such as self government, family, churches and other voluntary associations.

[FionMacCumhail]

"Libertarianism is the belief that it is wrong to use the initiation of force as a means to socio-political ends"

No it isn't. Thats your definition.

"doubt that your "wide majority" theory holds any real statistical water. "

Move to Europe.

[BryanMorton]

Libertarian socialist is an oxymoron.

[danrick77]

I thought the same thing when I heard the term. Essentially Libertarian Socialism refers to those that may accept the Marxist concepts like his theory of value, but reject government imposed socialism or capitalism. "Liberty" magazine ran an article last year, I think. Also, check out wikipedia on Mikhail Bakunin, a notable founder of Libertarian socialist philosophy. For the record, I'm a laissez-faire capitalist/libertarian.

[BryanMorton]

They also reject the notion of private property rights. I think they're just confused.

[Maxgreen1]

Bakunin is the Iconoclast that banished me from the dark depths of Marxism

Kudos on knowing of his existence!

[danrick77]

I'm reading a Bakunin biography right now.

Check out Samuel Edward Konkin III's "The New Libertarian Manifesto" and "Agorist Class Theory"

[anarksee]

Max Nomad wrote that Bakunin was a fraud in his book 'Political Heretics'.

[anarksee]

Kropotkin was wiser than M.A.B.--Max Nomad considered Bakky to be a poseur!

[DancerInTheHeart]

Yeah. Instead of using government fists and fire to ensure equality, the libertarian communists attempt shaming people into equality. =)

[BryanMorton]

Then there's also the problem that most folks today misuse "capitalism" to mean the modern day mix of fascism, corporatism and mercantilism which has replaced true capitalism. There is no free market in the US today. Everything is taxed and/or regulated to some extent.

[Maxgreen1]

Bryan, you are correct.

[Thorbie]

no it isn't...it's just moron. lol.

[Antronic]

hasta la victoria siempre