[LehmanB]

Socialists must be some kind of authotorian (gaging groups, controling others in order to create equality). They can never go for truely individualism like neoliebertarian. "socialists anarchists" is an oxymoron.

[Rei Murasame]

What?

NeoLieberalists could never rule the society.

Who do you think is ruling society at this very moment?

It seems to me like we are living in Neoliberalism at this exact moment.

[SomeRandom]

NeoLieberalists could never rule the society. And you see there are rarely polititians from them.

Neoliberalism. The horrors of far-right nationalism are there for all to see, but neoliberalism's far more widespread and insidious.

[LehmanB]

Who do you think is ruling society at this very moment?

It seems to me like we are living in Neoliberalism at this exact moment.

Okay, there is something about it. They do hold strong positions.

Yet never directly into politics since this is where they fail.

I do think today's enviornment is the best for individuals.

Neoliberalism. The horrors of far-right nationalism are there for all to see, but neoliberalism's both more prominent and insidious.

The communists and the Nazis are close to each other. They have made ultimate control. Authotorians who were capitalists were softer since the contrast in it is they allow rising of competetors.

[SomeRandom]

The Nazi's were capitalists, and I have to laugh at the idea that the numerous dictators in South America were in anyway "softer", certainly didn't seem interested in allowing competitors when they went after leftists with death squads, in any case.

[The Clockwork Rat]

@ LehmanB

http://euas.noflag.org.uk/?page_id=16

Equality

We wish to encourage the abandonment of unhealthy consumerist and capitalist ideals. We see each human being to be worth the same, and reject capitalism on the grounds that we do not see material wealth, and the ability to gain material wealth, as valid measures of a human being's value. Additionally, we see capitalism as a catalyst for oppression and violence. As such we reject capitalism. Furthermore, we believe that as humans are fundamentally equal, no justification exists for the authority of State, other than to preserve an unequal status quo. We reject the State on these grounds. We will reflect our view of equality in our meetings by making clear that the office-bearer positions mandated by the University do not give authority above that mandated by the compulsory clauses for an Edinburgh University society, and by the fact that all views will be taken into account with equal consideration.

Liberty

We differ from other left-wing societies in our acknowledgement of the State as the unjust use of force by one set of people upon another. We do not acknowledge the right of any governing body, elected or otherwise, to sacrifice the liberty of individuals for what they see as the greater good. As such we are not and do not wish to be affiliated with any political party. We believe in the freedom of every human being to act as they will, providing that they do not infringe the liberty of others. We believe that this liberty is best preserved by a system of decentralised small-scale council-style governance. We will reflect this in the running of our society, reaching our decisions by consensus.

Respect

We acknowledge that the ideals of equality and liberty in a free anarchist society are not feasible without the idea of respect, both for other human beings in our community and for the world in which we live. We believe that the ideals can be achieved by treating other people with the same respect we would wish for ourselves. We are a non-violent society, and believe that constructive social change in the direction of a free, equal and peaceful society cannot be achieved by harmful or violent means. We believe that the means are as important as the ends.

We are willing to consider any and all points of view at our meetings, and welcome anyone interested in the ideas we hold, whether or not they immediately identify as anarchists themselves. We acknowledge the bad publicity that anarchism has suffered in the public mindset, with the word being connected with destruction and violence, and wish to promote the truth of anarchism as a constructive and human-centred societal plan of action.

[LehmanB]

This is my own conclusion:

Neo Liebertarians and Anarchists are quasi identical. If you are familiar with socionics method, that means they are so called similar, but misunderstand each other, since they reach the same goal from another direction.

Anarchists are free individuals as a fact. As well as Neo liebertarian. Yet both respect authotorianism in their side (left and right) - Anarchists can understand communists as a neceassary act; and neo liebertarians can understand capitalists authotorians. Friedman can vote for Tatcher and Bush; despite been more individual, and an Anarchist can vote for Lenin.

The Neoliebertarian will see the communists as the ultimate disaster, and not as something understandable; and anarchists the authotorians rghtists.

So as for me, a neo liebertarian, I see the contrasts anarchists put, since they are violent when it reaches for their goals. If they decide people shouldn't eat meat- they can force it violentely. Thus, I would delete from the quoted manifest the 'non violence' manners the are so called believe in.

And they will say the same about me- they will say I am tolerant for exploitations and nationalism as contrast to my individualism values. Yet I will see the nationalism the necessary order in the chaotic lieberalism, and not as something that will come instead of it, if it is in the right manner.

They, Anarchists, will make socialism as their necessary organizer and will claim this will not come instead of lieberties. I won't understand them, they won't understand me, yet we both want to reach the same goal- lieberalism with a pinch of order.


@SomeRandom, Nazis are between socialism and capitalism, they are not 'far right' in that manner. - they are socialists in the manner they organize economy and rise or remove competetors, yet allow some form of capitalism.

[The Immortal Goon]

Capitalists...

Fascism is the best thing in the world because it's the opposite of the goddamned communists because:

[quote"Churchill, as quoted by The Times January 21, 1927"]rendered a service to the whole world…if I had been an Italian I am sure that I should have been wholeheartedly with you from the start to finish of your triumphant struggle…Italy has shown that there is a way f fighting the subversive forces which can rally the mass of the people, properly led, to value and wish to defend the honour and stability of civilized society. She has provided the necessary antidote to the Russian poison[/quote]

Oh wait, Germany and Italy want colonies and shit also? They're bad now, so they must be communists.

This kind of ridiculous bullshit was tired when Hitler was saying that capitalism and communism were the same thing; or the Jesuits, persecuted by the Nazis, said that communism and fascism were the same; or by the anarchists in claiming that Trotsky and Stalin were the same; or the capitalists constantly changing their mind as to whether Trotsky and Stalin were the same, and constantly changing their definitions of fascism and communism to suit whatever they felt like that second...

The class basis of this false and pompous sermon is the intellectual petty bourgeoisie. The political basis – their impotence and confusion in the face of approaching reaction. Psychological basis – their effort at overcoming the feeling of their own inferiority through masquerading in the beard of a prophet.

A moralizing Philistine’s favorite method is the lumping of reaction’s conduct with that of revolution. He achieves success in this device through recourse to formal analogies. To him czarism and Bolshevism are twins. Twins are likewise discovered in fascism and communism. An inventory is compiled of the common features in Catholicism – or more specifically, Jesuitism – and Bolshevism. Hitler and Mussolini, utilizing from their side exactly the same method, disclose that liberalism, democracy, and Bolshevism represent merely different manifestations of one and the same evil. The conception that Stalinism and Trotskyism are “essentially” one and the same now enjoys the joint approval of liberals, democrats, devout Catholics, idealists, pragmatists, and anarchists. If the Stalinists are unable to adhere to this “People’s Front”, then it is only because they are accidentally occupied with the extermination of Trotskyists.

The fundamental feature of these approchements and similitudes lies in their completely ignoring the material foundation of the various currents, that is, their class nature and by that token their objective historical role. Instead they evaluate and classify different currents according to some external and secondary manifestation, most often according to their relation to one or another abstract principle which for the given classifier has a special professional value. Thus to the Roman pope Freemasons and Darwinists, Marxists and anarchists are twins because all of them sacrilegiously deny the immaculate conception. To Hitler, liberalism and Marxism are twins because they ignore “blood and honor”. To a democrat, fascism and Bolshevism are twins because they do not bow before universal suffrage. And so forth.

Undoubtedly the currents grouped above have certain common features. But the gist of the matter lies in the fact that the evolution of mankind exhausts itself neither by universal suffrage, not by “blood and honor,” nor by the dogma of the immaculate con ception. The historical process signifies primarily the class struggle; moreover, different classes in the name of different aims may in certain instances utilize similar means. Essentially it cannot be otherwise.

[eugenekop]

They, Anarchists, will make socialism as their necessary organizer and will claim this will not come instead of lieberties. I won't understand them, they won't understand me, yet we both want to reach the same goal- lieberalism with a pinch of order.

That's why you should vote for libertarians (unfortunately there are no such candidates in Israel though).

[LehmanB]

They are not in politics worldwide. Yet I could point Aryeh Eldad is neo liebertarian, though in his party the majority are extrimists religious which are not liebertarians.

[Beren]

Chauvinism, so I voted for extreme nationalism.

[Fasces]

Neoliberalism and anarcho-capitalism.

Any totalitarian state, communist or fascist, can be mismanaged with both ease and disastrous consequences, but they are not fundamentally flawed or invariably damaging as the ideologies above.

[Agent Steel]

Wow people really, really hate Communism. What's the big deal?

[ThereBeDragons]

Communism is in a comfortable third place, and communists are masters at getting people killed.

[MB.]

Fascism.

[R_G]

Anarchism because what happens is gangbangers get free reign and there's far more chance of mass rape and mass theft.

All the other ones are at least structured.

[The Clockwork Rat]

Wow people really, really hate Communism. What's the big deal?

You can't hate what you haven't heard of, whereas you can hate what you have heard of, even if you have absolutely no idea what it really entails

[ladyinred]

Extreme nationalism for sure. They have no ability of humanism. They intend to see other nations as animals.

[Figlio di Moros]

1) Your avi's out of regs; must be black-and-white(atleast you got that right) photo bust, or a painting if person depicted lived prior to the age of the camera.

2) We don't view other nations as animals, we simply recognize the differences and seek to protect our own culture. Unless our culture happens to be superior, as an American, and then I can only find it proper to choose to spread it.

[El Gilroy]

Anything with an abundance of capitalism! in it, basically. Because capitalism is based on evolutionary mechanics and tends to help its host society grow fast - cancerously so.

So I'll vote neoliberalism, but anarcho-capitalism, conservatism and classic liberalism I don't trust either.