McCarthy elected Speaker.

Yeah. Pretty much. It's why it's so important to guard the fort at the local level.

Work bottom up instead of just going along with top down.
Man o man.....
IF ONLY we could get people talking about things like this more...things that could actually make a difference
rather than living life for the next "Woe is Us" post.
 
There is a general misunderstanding about the meaning of anarchy. It doesn’t mean people can’t organize to solve their community’s problems. In fact, it means exactly this.

I think we can all agree that a large centralized government as it’s practiced today, particularly in this country, isn’t effective for the vast majority of the people. It is now an enemy of the people.

When people fear their government there is tyranny.....
When government fears The People there is Liberty
 
Kevin is speaker in name only after giving away the store to the far right faction that now has more control over the goings on than he does. Notably, the nutters have been promised three seats on the Rules Committee. It controls what legislation reaches the floor and in what form. Also, spending bills would have to be considered under so-called open rules, allowing any member to put to a vote an unlimited number of changes that could gut the legislation altogether. Finally, in the ultimate act of self sabotage, he allowed for the ability of a single member of the House to call for a resolution to vote for a new Speaker.
McCarthy’s Faustian bargain with the Taliban 20.
 
I didn't have a dog in the fight but still watched C-Span here and there during the past few days. Of the anti-McCarthy Republicans, I was impressed only by Chip Roy of Texas. When he spoke, I listened, he seemed to keep things on a less personal basis then what I heard from the other speakers.
 
There is a general misunderstanding about the meaning of anarchy. It doesn’t mean people can’t organize to solve their community’s problems. In fact, it means exactly this.

I think we can all agree that a large centralized government as it’s practiced today, particularly in this country, isn’t effective for the vast majority of the people. It is now an enemy of the people.
I once remember getting into a disagreement over the definition of the term, Anarchy, with Oddball.

And here you are, also, trying to "define," the undefinable. It is, really, rather ironic.

That a word, that really means, a society with no government, folks want to put a claim on, for what amounts to, political reasons.

I got into a heated argument, with some leftist, on the topic of queer theory, in another thread, so I actually had to go, and read the paper, that the entire movement is based on, again.

And, low and behold, Gayle Rubin actually quotes, Lysander Spooner, right in her landmark paper, that sets the entire agenda for gay-rights and queer theory, "Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality." So of course, I'm thinking, wtf would Spooner make of THAT, if he were to read it.

:auiqs.jpg:

The upshot here, is that neither you, nor I, nor Rubin, nor Spooner, nor Oddball, nor Grumblenuts, nor georgephillip, are the ones to tell others they have a "general misunderstanding," about the meaning of anarchy. Oddball was patently offended by the entire term of, "green anarchist." IN his opinion, they want to force others into a green movement & green economy.

I can't say I disagree with him, but then, I have not read enough of their literature to know, what their theory is, as to why they self-organize, to call themselves anarchists. It would be arrogant of me, to tell Derrick Jenson, he has a "general misunderstanding," of anarchism. That's a tenured prof. The point here, is every anarchist, because of the very nature of self-organization, gets to define that word for themselves. . .

. . . sort of like how those gender theorist and post-modernist folks do. . .


76ove6.jpg
 
I once remember getting into a disagreement over the definition of the term, Anarchy, with Oddball.

And here you are, also, trying to "define," the undefinable. It is, really, rather ironic.

That a word, that really means, a society with no government, folks want to put a claim on, for what amounts to, political reasons.

I got into a heated argument, with some leftist, on the topic of queer theory, in another thread, so I actually had to go, and read the paper, that the entire movement is based on, again.

And, low and behold, Gayle Rubin actually quotes, Lysander Spooner, right in her landmark paper, that sets the entire agenda for gay-rights and queer theory, "Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality." So of course, I'm thinking, wtf would Spooner make of THAT, if he were to read it.

:auiqs.jpg:

The upshot here, is that neither you, nor I, nor Rubin, nor Spooner, nor Oddball, nor Grumblenuts, nor georgephillip, are the ones to tell others they have a "general misunderstanding," about the meaning of anarchy. Oddball was patently offended by the entire term of, "green anarchist." IN his opinion, they want to force others into a green movement & green economy.

I can't say I disagree with him, but then, I have not read enough of their literature to know, what their theory is, as to why they self-organize, to call themselves anarchists. It would be arrogant of me, to tell Derrick Jenson, he has a "general misunderstanding," of anarchism. That's a tenured prof. The point here, is every anarchist, because of the very nature of self-organization, gets to define that word for themselves. . .

. . . sort of like how those gender theorist and post-modernist folks do. . .


76ove6.jpg
I wasn’t suggesting you didn’t understand the meaning of anarchy. You must admit many do have a misunderstanding of the term. So I was merely trying however poorly, to define it.

Usually you get Ds and Rs screaming “so you want to live in Somolia.” Lol.

I’m not a true believer in anarchy, but I know our current situation really sucks.
 

Forum List

Back
Top