[lbo-talk] When is private property NOT?

[snitsnat]

you don't understand. Chuck0 IS the anarchist movement. Chuck0 runs a web 
site that gets 57.934 bazillion hits a month and he has plans for an 
anarchist wiki. everything Chuck0 says, anarchists agree with him. If you 
don't, then you aren't an anarchist. Anarchisms is about right thinking. 
Stop thinking the feds are after you. Stop thinking that they will put you 
in jail. Stop thinking the rightwing christers have power. They dn't. Think 
this: they lost the culture war. If you'd just think like Chuck0, then all 
our problems would be solved: god would be fucked. we'd get the goods. the 
capitalist state would be gone.

Also, the Feds are always after him and he's been in major newspapers, 
interviewed as the leader of THE anarchist movement.

Chuck0=anarchist; ancarchists=Chuck0. QED. And if you disagree, you're a 
liberal. or sumpin' like that.

kelley

At 12:15 PM 6/25/2005, Jim Devine wrote:
>me: > > Chuck, are you a Lockean, a believer in absolute private property
> > > rights, totally rejecting state restrictions?  (I don't see how
> > > property rights could exist with state coercion.)
>
>Chuck: > Jesus fucking christ, I'm an anarchist who clearly stated that I 
>don't
> > give a shit about property rights.
>
>You had said >>> I don't give a damn about the American fetish for
>private property rights,<<<
>
>and since I didn't know your self-definition exactly, I didn't know
>how to interpret this. (If you had written "fetish of," it would have
>clearer, at least to me.) I had guessed you were some sort of
>anarchist (since you say stuff like "fuck god"), but the line between
>anarchism and free-market "libertarianism" is sometimes permeable.
>
> > If you are going to see this situa

"Finish your beer. There are sober kids in India."

                        -- rwmartin