Hey there, Any Forums

Hey there, Any Forums,

I'm (-6,-6) pol-compas. (Left Liberitarian) and
I think I understand the conservitive positions pretty well, but I just don't agree with them. I'd like to invite you to have a civil political discussion with me, and answer any questions you might have for me, if you're interested.

I think that once you get past all the banner waving, ultimately most of our differences in opinion are are rooted in having a different set of starting assumptions about what things are:

1. True (Factually speaking)
2. Valuable to Society, and
3. Ethical

But I'm happy to answer any questions, so AMA me about my beliefs, if you want to, of course.

I will be ignoring questions that are statements or purely insults. (Why are you the way that you are?) Not because I get my feelings hurt easy, but because I personally find it too time-consuming to respond to bad faith 'begging the question' type scenarios.

Hope this proves to be a nice evening for ya, folks'.

Attached: 26b.jpg (308x328, 12.06K)

The political compass is a Jewish scan

Scam*

Libertarian left is an oxymoron.
How do you plan to redistribute wealth without using force?

I know political compas isn't the end-all be-all. But it's a good point to jump off from, since it's somewhat objective compaired to statements like, "I'm a leftist" or "I'm a democrat" or "I'm a liberal" which can mean a lot of different things to different people.

Libertarian right is an oxymoron.
How do you plan to enforce property rights without using force?

Defense is not a violation of the non-aggresion principle

Wealth redistribution is totalitarian left and right.

Can we all agree that you're all pedophile faggots?

Is this a bot? Asking the serious questions here.

I don't personally plan on doing anything to redistribute wealth other than weighting my purchacing decisions slightly in favor of things I like.

I'm under no illusions that voting actually maters, but I still do it.

Property doesn't have any rights. People do.

In other words you're the type of person who's so far up your own asshole you think anyone gives a fuck about your gay opinions.

The joke is that the libertarian left wants gay married couples to defend their marijuana farms with machine guns. It's not a joke.

Might I suggest spekr.org? They are far more in-depth on the questions.

National Bolshevik Party. What's your opinion on the mentioned party and how the event unfolded revealing leftism always needs oppression and suppression to thrive?

>CHUNKKKKKK

Probably not. Too bad "woodchipper" has censored off of /r/pcm

Thanks for the reccomendation! I'll have a look at it. I'll probably not have time to go through it while watching this thread tonight, unfortunately.

I don't mean to side step the question, but I don't think that the leftism of the 1940-1970s has much political relevance today. The communism of the 20th century was rooted in a global market where land and labor was the primary driving source of capital. The digial ecconomy of the 21st century makes things very different today.

As far as oppression and suppression go, I see those things as the activation energy required for any type of social change. Unrest and war are themselves a form of capital expression, and at the risk of getting too 'based' here, I think that holds true for capitalsim as well as communism.

There's only one subreddit not moderated by niggerfaggots and it sure as fuck isn't pcm

Whoops! I meant to say "Pretty much NO political relevance today"

I enjoy /r/pcm but I agree that their mods are terrible. Way too many obvious russian bots and astroturfers.

And what about wealth inequality?
Force suddenly becomes acceptable to leftists when it comes to redistribution

>But I'm happy to answer any questions, so AMA me about my beliefs, if you want to, of course.

I mean... you didn't have to speak? Sage goes into the options field anyway.

I'm not sure I agree with that take unless you're using an expanded definition of 'force'.

Is inflation and taxation "force" are market "forces" using force? If so, then I don't find any inconsistancy with what you're saying. But otherwise I don't agree.