Glenn Beck can't just have a one way conversation with America. Sally Kohn is the progressive answer to Glenn Beck. Here, she responds to Beck's insistence that communism and fascism go hand-in-hand with progressive politics.
FOLLOW SALLY and the MOVEMENT VISION LAB:
Facebook: http://facebook.com/MovementVision
Twitter: http://twitter.com/sallykohn
@gnomechomskylives -- The reason I go again is because collectivism is a real ideology. Individual rights are anchored in man's nature, just like F=ma is anchored in reality. It's not a matter of any collective decisions. It's a matter of fact. And, to repeat, we are individuals first and foremost. We experience and act as individuals. The "group" is not anything greater than the individual. You're treating it like some sort of disembodied spirit.
ORagnar 6 days ago
@ORagnar There you go again with this collectivism. Everything is a collective; it's all a matter of degrees. If you and I and 300 million people agree we have the inalienable right to life & liberty then we are a collective. As I said, you can't just pick and choose what you consider "collectivism" and when its not because it's inconvenient for you. Homo sapiens are collective animals, society and collectives are in our DNA. So long as there is more than one of us, there will be a collective.
gnomechomskylives 6 days ago
@gnomechomskylives -- society is only ever a collection of *individuals*. If anything, society is secondary to the individual. My life is my highest value and you certainly have zero right to tell me what to do. Where you presume you get this right, I don't know, but you don't have it, nor have you established that you have. But, what I find evil about your pronouncements is your outright evasion of history, and and the death and destruction wrought by collectivism.
ORagnar 6 days ago
@ORagnar I know what they mean but these are false distinctions; that's what I mean by myth. Individuals are never truly independent and societies/states are products of individuals working together. Separating one from another out of some grandiose notion is childishly absurd. Being subject to the market is just as collectivist as being subject to a state. If the "invisible hand" determines my job is better off in China & iPhones are better than Nokias then I'm being denied freedom of choice.
gnomechomskylives 6 days ago
@ORagnar -- That should say: collectivism means that the individual must submit to the group or the state.
ORagnar 1 week ago
@gnomechomskylives -- Collectivism is the idea that the group is above the individual or the state and must submit to it. Altruism leads to collectivism. Tribalism is the primitive form of collectivism. Individualism is the idea that the individual owns his own life and is free to pursue his own happiness and dreams. The former enslaves men to the state. The later leads to freedom. I disagree with you that it's a myth. It's very real, and people are motivated by it, sadly.
ORagnar 1 week ago
@gnomechomskylives How could you inherit land that your father didn't own? You said the dad was renting land from a Mr. ApartmentComplex then dad gave to his son the land he was renting from Mr. ApertmentComplex. Dad doesn't own the land. Mr. ApartmentComplex does. You can't inherit something that isn't the property of the deceased.
Can I give away your house to my son when I die?
MrGreeneggsnham 3 weeks ago
@MrGreeneggsnham lol I know what tenant means, but this is a hypothetical argument according to anarchism: tenant is a legal term; legality denotes law and law denotes state; but there is no state. So for that so-called "tenant" who received/inherited the land, it is his birthright. He didn't sign a contract. He lived there his whole life. Now he's got two machine gun nests several AK-47s and M-14 Assault rifles, trip mines and barbwire. You're screwed. lol
gnomechomskylives 3 weeks ago
@gnomechomskylives What? Tenent means you are renting. You are not the owner. Do you know what not the owner means?
MrGreeneggsnham 3 weeks ago
@MrGreeneggsnham formal definition of tenant or not - from his perspective your ownership is the state - if he refused to be removed (since from his perspective that land was his birthright) you'd have to use some form of violence to remove him.
This is of course all hypothetical, but anarchism is not exempt from these problems.
As I said, let's agree to disagree. Cheers ;)
gnomechomskylives 4 weeks ago