Considering yourself as a well informed and highly educated intellectual

>considering yourself as a well informed and highly educated intellectual
>not being anarcho-syndicalist

I seriously hope you guys don't do this

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=BRM9PdDf3zA
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Anarco Mutualista here bro

NO GODS NO MASTERS NO PARENTS NO BEDTIMES ANARCHY LIVES!

what is an anarcho-syndicalist?

>smug liberal intellectual: the Platonic form

ITT: circlejerking around meme-tier economics

>Chomsky
>Well informed and highly educated
Wew lad

well, because i am a well informed and highly educated intellectual i understand that the only way to live would be in an anarcho primitivism society.. but because i am so smart i understand that there will be immediately a new form of government, because a government is much more efficient than loosely connected tribes... therefore i acknowledge that we all are fucked and nihilism is the answer because in the end it doesnt even matter!

He's highly educated and an excellent linguist. He just has the bad habit of being a moralfag.

So according to this picture, if a society has laws that makes that society authoritarian? Then I guess "true right-wing libertarianism" is chaotic as fuck

I've never understood this.

The only way anarcho-syndicalists/communists/etc have ever explained it to me is by appealing to a moral system which they're unable to justify.

Anarcho-libertarians have a similar problem, in that their ideas rely on argumentation ethics. But at least they don't add the extra layer of the threat of coercion on top of that. So it seems to be the more coherent ideology of the two.

>Excellent linguist
Except for the fact he held back scientific progress in the field for 50 years and it still hasn't fully recovered from the cancer that is universal grammar.

Yes, libertarians on any part of the political spectrum are literally on the spectrum. It just evolves into feudalism and the winner holding the largest monopoly of force declares itself a state. Best case scenario it becomes a monarchy or democracy and worst case scenario a socialist shithole

I stopped taking Chomsky seriously around the time he argued people would work shitty jobs for free because he talked about how pleasurable it was for him to plant peach trees. And I say this as a person that's attracted to socialism.

>because he talked about how pleasurable it was for him to plant peach trees
I thought the bones in his fingers would have turned to dust from age by now

libertarian put the coercion of private property of the MOP m8

The funniest thing to see is when he makes his appearances on TYT videos. The fat socialist turk basically worships him like a god and treats him like a genius meanwhile the man is so old and withdrawn that he can barely form sentences at this point.

Then they're equally coherent to people who don't already accept either system of ethics.

>The fat socialist turk
M8 he thinks that wanting free healthcare makes you a socialist. I'm not sure if he actually is a "socialist"

youtube.com/watch?v=BRM9PdDf3zA

NO GODS NO KINGS NO MASTERS!

NO SUNDAY SCHOOL NO HOMEWORK NO GYM CLASS!!!

I'M AN ANARCHIST!!!

Just imagine how peaceful and free a society would be without ANY laws! Even the ones people like! PARADISE!

The only people I ever see worship Noam "THE KHMER ROUGE DINDU NUFFIN" Chomsky are typical normies who are upper class hippies who spend their vast economic freedom engaging in luxury while spouting out some rhetoric drivel like this shit

>not being an anarcho capitalist not because you think it will work, but because of the hilarity that would ensue

>hilarity

I don't think feudalism was hilarious.

Anarchist really do give people who support freedom a bad name.

Natural hierarchy would exist and so would laws. It would probably look similar to feudalism.

If anything, religion would play more of a role in society. The modern state has sought to replace all the functions of church, family and community. The world would be more segregated on race, religion and culture.

But ya, Op Is a retard and so is Chomsky. Egalitarianism is a mental illness.

>considering yourself as a well informed and highly educated intellectual
>aligning yourself totally to one pre-existing position and making passive-aggressive internet posts about it

Its cute how anarchist think their gay utopia would be anything other than anarcho capitalist. Im a millionare, so Im just going to pay a bunch of dudes to be my personal army and then force all you faggots to do what I want and what are you going to do about it? Spout some rhetoric at the guy?

>pay a bunch of dudes to be my personal army
But in an anarchist world money would be meaningless, so how would you pay them?

>falling for the "supporting one socioeconomic system because you think it's the 'best'" meme

The truly wise realize that humans cannot live indefinitely under a single system, and use this fact to their own advantage.

gold? sheep? hookers?

> He thinks only government can create currency that is widely accepted as the medium of exchange and store of value.

Kek, Marxist are cute.

You pay them with superior food, shelter, weapons, and entertainment.

Money is just a placeholder.

Where do you get these things?

Through being clever, and getting other people to do it for you, for a small management fee.

this. look up corporate towns in 19th century america. they gave their employees company scrip instead of dollars which they could use at the company-owned stores

>getting other people to do it for you
Why would they do it if you are exploiting them of their labour?

If they have the guns why don't they just take all of your shit?

maybe you should read Tom Sawyer

>being tied to a single corporate owned town and being paid in monopoly funny money that you can only spend at the stores they own is a good or desirable outcome
ancaps not even once

>starting a /pol/ thread on Veeky Forums
>"syndicalist"

>pretending that government is a vague but menacing force and somehow not people
>not accepting that any kind of organized group of people that creates some kind of standard rule set for a group to follow is literally a government.
>not trying to more evenly distribute political power to as many people as possible using systems already in place
>not trying to emphasize a society based on humane scientific advancement & cultural richness, rather x favorite economic ideal

>monarchy is a best case scenario
>democracy and "socialist" are mutually exclusive

>Being anarcho anything

But he's a mean, mean guy

>not watching autistic ancaps recreationally nuke each other with your Democratic confederalist/ anarcho syndicalist buddies from afar

I'm some sorta facist libertarian socialist or some fucking shit

>there is no such thing as left libertarianism

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism


Objectively false, considering there were left wingers who opposed the authoritarian left (George Orwell)

Please explain...

I don't really know to be honest, I think aspects of all political viewpoints are valid, and my opinion changes rapidly
But it comes down to me thinking humans are dumb fucks that need guidance, but at the same time hate the idea that people can dictate what you can and cant do, of course assuming it does nothing to hurt others
Basically I hate the idea of authoritarian figures, but I think they're also the best way to advance