liquidnight
Discord ID: 523847422892310528
186 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/2
| Next
hello
what is that server about ? any agenda or topics ?
@im in the middle of nowhere bruh rly ? why would you want to murder them ?
hello
what is that server about ? any agenda or topics ?
now whats ancom ? @Prylis
ok thx. have fun !
@Prylis communist means central banking, and enforced currency usage . Correct ?
Ok. not in question. @Prylis
Communist means central banking, and currency usage by violence.
That is in direct contradiction to anarchy, which means to not use violence.
--> *ancom* is an oxymoron. capito ?
@Giani : in terms of central banking and violence, I agree.
fashionable?
@Bowserjrrules ok thx. interesting when some nazis appear ๐
lets see how the reactions are ๐
how should communism work else ? what if everyone makes his own currency ? would you still call it communism?
Ok I am neither writing of communism nor of capitalism. I do not endorse any of those.
anarchist ?
I go against the psychopathic behaviour archetype !
the abolition of the principle of violence !
people go voluntarily into communities.
wheres the problem with that?
there's no bigdaddy-government any more
just - I have never seen this variant of communism. Still why name it communism, if the other community makes its own decisions ?
`[02:04] Ned Kelly: leaders are what kill people ` ==> NO !!
to lead has 2 meanings:
* by violence
* by example
1.The killing aspect is only for the first type.
2. It is called to murder, not to kill
hierarchy is not bad - if they decide it voluntarily !
`[02:05] Ned Kelly: with that so begins the cycle once more ` NO !!
did you consume right-wing propaganda ?
The cycle begins when people accept **initiating violence **
That's it what I want to get away from !
Wait: when will what decay or corrupt ??
`02:07] Ned Kelly: If they elect a fascist, what do you think will happen? ` NO !
To elect does not mean to govern !!
Why do you have a hard time to think outside the dominator matrix ??
`02:07] Ned Kelly: Hierarchy just creates the state ` -> wrong.
Hierarchy is a concept, the concept does not do anything.
The current corporate-state is a result of carelessness of the people. And of their **will** to initiate violence against their neighbours.
`02:08] Ned Kelly: Hierarchies will create violence ` --> no thats wrong.
Violent individuals create violence. Not hierarchy.
`[02:08] Ned Kelly: and decay happens because of corruption ` --> corruption happens only ** inside a society-of-violence** !!
again: hierarchy does not inherently mean: violence !
hierarchy can be build in a voluntary manner.
I am not a pacifist. I do not talk of pacifism.
`since people will always be trying to climb up the hierarchy ` --> wrong. Without violence, there is no hierarchy. correct ?
If someone violates me, I defend against him. simple
`02:14] Ned Kelly: Violent individuals are encouraged by a hierarchy to commit violence ` --> if that were so, it were an argument against hierarchy. correct ?
I know its not simple, society has ridden itself deep into the shithole.
I do not tackle lying now. Be patient, prioritize.
First I tackle **violence**
there is no **get away** ! that's only happening under corporate-state psychopaths
medieval was already conquered - it was under violence !
ok you seem to have a medium intellect at all !
Ok, you cannot get rid of it *at all* . But you can de-institutionalize it.
If we make a consens that we defend against violence, that's the start !
when we gather 1000 people who defend against violence, thats even better
wait - no, it does not promote violence.
weapons ? and the will of the majority ??
i give you one set of knowledge to really understand this issue.
can I DM you
?
ok, that was MarkPassio : Natural Law.
the gist is: as long as society remains in the pattern of violence, they will create absolute chaos. This is fixed IN NATURE, no way out.
Only they need to modify the input parameter: no more violence.
no
we would need to de-instiutionalize the will to **initiate violence ** , and only that.
no connection to the concept of value at all.
ok np
whats a monarchist?
` [02:44] Just Niklas: Anyone anarcho-monarchist here? ` --> anarcho-monarchist is a oxymoron !
eat more sliced garlic ?
then tell her you love her !
who said its funny ?
actually depends on who understands it
@Deleted User so you want to initiate violence against your neighbours ?
no place on this server, i guess ๐
@GetGarried `15:32] Wholesome Ubermensch: i feel like liquidnight is a genius`
Just because I gave a hint to user "Voices" ?
are there t ypes ? none of those.
oh @maos slut i see you didnt get the meaning of anarchy ๐ no wonder you ask
what is the meaning of libertarian anarchist ? Aint that a tautology ?
I dissuade from ownership of land/water areas. for everything else I advocate ownership.
I go along with the NAP / non violent principle. --> money ok, money-on-gunpoint: no
why boring?
There wont be a corporate-state extorting all humans and perpetuating world wars.
I guess you misunderstood what the corporate-state does. It does **not** protect human beings.
- so arguig with "jailing" is inconclusive.
On the long run it does not depend on those. Are you missing the NaturalLaw knowledge ?
no, what you wrote is the law of the jungle.
still you are missing the knowledge. I can hand them if interested.
ok see DM, its a long audio, but can be listened well.
The general key for almost all problems. /me off
those experiments were used later for the u.s. corporation's MK Ultra and MK Artichoke secret programs.
The goal was to find a viable method to split the human's brain/ personality.
@Prometheus the image depicts the answer of statists when they are confronted with their violent fantasies and try to grasp how society would work once you dissolve the corporate-state.
@GetGarried what is your definition for not-pussy ?
@GetGarried what is solid ? As a brick of concrete ?
oh, the 7anib3 is gone already?
@Fuckers Of course, human beings are not equal, so there won't be complete equality.
No prob with that, agree?
he did not state that ๐
he desires equality of opportunity: giving men the right to abortions, too ?
Wait: equality of *rights*, not total equality.
one human is tall, one is small ---> they are not equal. But each one should grant each other one equal rights, agree ?
๐ "opportunity" sounds lile victim-centered. I tend to focus more on the granting-of-rights, because this is perpetrator-centered.
> 13:10] Fuckers: humans are not equal but every human should have the same quality of life
1. ok
2. not ok.
"should have" --> I infer a communist system. like equality-by-violence.
> [13:14] Thotsky: when we remove all unjustified hierarchies, treat each other as equals
I agree with that, but rather to leave equal rights for everyone.
I do not treat all others als equal. I do distinguish between man and woman, agree ?
I pointed out the difference of "equalty" vs. equal granting rights to all others.
There is a problem in society (visible in china) to mold the biomass into *equal* units.
I mean not so much *to grant* but more *to leave* the natural rights to the others.
> 14:04] Thotsky: I don't understand what you mean by "molding biomass into equal units"
Biomass entities ("humans") are selected by government entities, and fitted into equal living conditions, and being subjected under introctrination to make them equal.
I am not sure about your "deontological ethics". Maybe there is no such expression.
Natural Rights ~== everything not doing harm to others.
slave is a not-rightful condition. bad premise, no answer.
I have the natural rights, independent of you believing in them.
If you transgress them, I shoot you. No problem with that !
186 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/2
| Next