[Decky]

That's all fine Eran but if I were ending a public system like the NHS it's the best place to start.

The best way to start would be killing every Britain. Do you know what would happen if you came over here and told everyone you were trying to end the NHS? You would have to get rid of everyone first.

It was a funny, yes?

No, I'm not really sure how I feel about mixed class relationships.

[mikema63]

Well I'm not trying.

Mixed class relationships are good for happy fun time, no?

[Decky]

Mixed class relationships are good for happy fun time, no?

As I said I don't have a clear position on the issue yet. I'm not sure how it would effect the ideological purity of the proletarian involved.

[mikema63]

Well you plan to make everybody the same class anyway so does it really matter?

[Decky]

Well you plan to make everybody the same class anyway so does it really matter?

I will in the transition period. It's not as if there will be a revolution and the next morning will will live in a classless stateless society.

I'm not an Anarcho-"Communist."

[mikema63]

I thought the revolution would kill them all, is is not problem solved?

[Decky]

I thought the revolution would kill them all,

Where did you get that idea? Lenin was a lawyer for fucks sake and Iron Felix (RIP) was a Polish nobleman.

We will liquidate them as a class (just like we will do with the Proletariat) this doesn't mean we will kill them all.

[mikema63]

Ah I see, it's just that liquidate sounds....ominous.

[Decky]

When Marxists say that they want to destroy the bourgeoisie they mean they want to destroy the parasitic class that are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange and cream money off from the people doing the actual work (profits represent unpaid wages after all). It doesn't necessarily have much do do with them as individuals just their relation to the mean s of production (although Maoists can get a little carried away sometimes).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

Wanting them to cease to exist as a class doesn't necessarily mean anything ominous at all.

[mikema63]

Well I know how you commies get.

[Eran]

When Marxists say that they want to destroy the bourgeoisie they mean they want to destroy the parasitic class that are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange and cream money off from the people doing the actual work (profits represent unpaid wages after all).

Let's see. Which group of people are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and cream money off from people doing the actual work?

The political class!

[Decky]

Let's see. Which group of people are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and cream money off from people doing the actual work?

The political class!

Nonsense, the politicians do as the capitalists tell them to not the other way around.

[SolarCross]

Nonsense, the politicians do as the capitalists tell them to not the other way around.

What eran means is that in your marxist state the political class are the capitalists, so you are just swapping one group of capitalists for another. Except your marxist capitalists don't know or care about market dynamics and have a total monopoly on the means of production. What you have then is a 19th century 'company town' the size of a country.

[Eran]

I agree, but I also mean the same with respect to politicians and their cronies.

Thus I will gladly accept Decky's point and include those capitalists who use their political influence aggressively (i.e. to cause government to use its power to help them directly, or against their competitors, and as opposed to those who merely use their political influence defensively) in my Ruling Class.

Hans Hoope's Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis makes the point eloquently.

[Elect G-Max]

Except that money represents value you've added which you have not used, it wouldn't be something you would lose property rights over. :?:

What if someone chooses to store value as grain instead of money? Grain will always have some value, which is something that cannot be said of fiat currencies.

Under Libertarianism if you find something not nailed down and the current owner hasn't got the power to defend it then you can redistribute it to yourself? I think I understand.

When Libertarianism comes I'm getting a van and a crowbar and I'll start homesteading my neighbors TVs and stuff if they leave the house (after all they aren't using it are they).

Your right classes should fuck each other, interbreeding would be good for peaceable discourse.

I agree. There's no situation that can't be improved by lots of fucking!

No, I'm not really sure how I feel about mixed class relationships.

I hear that Bobby from Ms. Desoto's class is in a relationship with Jenny from Mr. Kishler's class, and he already got to third base

Ah I see, it's just that liquidate sounds....ominous.

Yeah, I keep thinking of bleach and bathtubs.

Let's see. Which group of people are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and cream money off from people doing the actual work?

The political class!

Win!

[mikema63]

More than likely the oly thing that would be possible to mean, grain storage, is that your planning to sell during non-harvest time so it's fine.

[AFAIK]

1-So can someone barge into my house and declare, "You haven't used this item in the past 12 months so I am taking it"?
2-What if I like collecting things but not using them?
3-What if I want to protect some land as a wilderness? I'm not using it or maintaining any aspect of it for other people's use.
4-If I go blind can someone seize my art collection?
5-What if I'm no longer able to operate/ maintain something in working order but it holds sentimental value to me?

[Nunt]

1-So can someone barge into my house and declare, "You haven't used this item in the past 12 months so I am taking it"?
2-What if I like collecting things but not using them?
3-What if I want to protect some land as a wilderness? I'm not using it or maintaining any aspect of it for other people's use.
4-If I go blind can someone seize my art collection?
5-What if I'm no longer able to operate/ maintain something in working order but it holds sentimental value to me?

You make the mistake of assuming that libertarian rules are robotic. This is not the case. The NAP provides a broad framework of permissible and impermissible actions. Those rules still need to be interpreted by people and adapted to concrete circumstances. The solution to the questions you ask will be solved by individuals looking for a legal framework that has broad societal approval.

[Eran]

AFAIK seems to be attacking the "ownership = use" doctrine, completely foreign to libertarianism.

While libertarians allow for property to be abandoned, in which case it is unowned and available for homesteading, abandonment is very different from merely temporarily (or even permanently) ceasing to use the property personally.

Leaving your house empty for 12 months, owning a collection, or even securing limited extents of land as wilderness are all perfectly legitimate modes of maintaining ownership, provided, of course, that the property was legitimately acquired to begin with.

[AFAIK]

Thanks for the clarification Eran.