Real Utopia-Left Forum '08: Discussion Session Part 3

[immanent]

looking forward to it.

[immanent]

Thats great that you can define labels with more labels, but you didn't address the second half of my last comment, which I consider of much more relevance as it goes towards the philosophical debate.

[immanent]

That you use contemporary labels and the bi-polar 'left-right' political paradigm shows that you have a limited understanding of the political climate. In an earlier time, libertarians were 'left-wing liberals.'

You are essentially saying that I cannot do whatever work I choose to do, command whatever wage I choose to assent to, and exchange the fruits of my labor freely.

What is compassionate, good, or minimally reasonable about ANY of that?

Your splicing of complete freedom is appalling.

[immanent]

Government doesn't tell you what your natural rights are. Natural rights are intrinsic to every human life. There is nothing vague about being left alone, and making my own life for myself, without infringing on anyone's ability to do the same. Watch the youtube video entitled "Philosophy of Liberty" for a more elaborate explanation.

Economic freedom means I own the fruits of my labor, and yes, includes free trade (NOT as defined in NAFTA, etc. We recognize those as managed trade.)

[immanent]

I don't see any inconsistency with espousing limited Constitutional government and a libertarian label. A libertarian is someone who advocates freedom; not just personal social freedom, or just economic freedom, BUT BOTH, and to that end, the only legitimate function of government is to secure and preserve each and every person's unalienable natural rights.

Maybe you care to elaborate on your point??

[t0kt0k]

Interesting stuff

[SweetDissident]

I'm very excited about Participatory Society. I think it's necessary. There is nothing cultish about trying to improve our society. It's so easy to say it's naive, and to be cynical. That won't change anything, will it?What's more difficult, I suppose, is to find out more about it. But for those interested, you may want to visit ZNet, and take a look at what Chris Spannos has written there.

[immanent]

I appreciate the dissemination of information and alternative viewpoints.

That said, I believe, as pointed out in the earlier comment, that this smacks of cult-ish propaganda, especially where we are talking about something as naive as "Real Utopia."

Once can rail against capitalism all s/he wants, but theres no denying we HAVE a controlled economy, and very limited free markets. Restore freedom, then lets talk about the so-called evils of it.

[buddhagem]

Taco Bell said thanks for the love! Well done, brother.

[spacegun]

thanks for this

[dirtymics]

People saw that their original demonstrations achieved nothing; why would they demonstrate again?

[mraketti]

This guy sounds like he is trying to promote a religion.

[Chomskyan]

I don't see how a self-critique of the movement can sound like he is "trying to promote a religion." Perhaps you can be more specific?

[awhelnaw]

ha, agreed, a religion has never been self critical...by its nature it can't be.

[mraketti]

Why is it against the "nature" of religion to be self-critical. I agree there are religious groups out there who stifle criticism, but I see no reason to extend that to your incredibly naive assertion that all religion can not be self-critical. that's bunk imho.

[mraketti]

It's just the sense I got from hearing him lament his movement's failure to successfully reach people. Specifically in ending the Iraq War, but more broadly in getting the masses to jump on board the "participatory society freedom train".

As for the self-critique was aimed at energizing the "believers" to get out there and talk to people about this "Real Utopia". In other words evangelize them into the anarchist neo-communist paradigm. A paradigm which is in itself very Messianic in tone.

[Chomskyan]

If you listened to the earlier parts, he says whats presented in this forum shouldn't convince anybody. If people are interested, then look into it and see whether you agree. Again, I don't really understand why you would see this as "messianic."

He tried to present an alternative system, and one that he and others tried to implement, with varying results. And it takes trial and error. Not based on faith

Take a look at what he is saying, and you can agree with him or not. Tone is really moot.