Mark Ames Converts To Anarcho-Libertarianism Live On MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Show

eXile TV / June 17, 2011

By Mark Ames

Update: By popular demand we’ve now included the transcript to Ames’ conversion rant. See below.

Even though libertarian ideals of massive deregulation and privatization led to the 2008 collapse of the global economy (just as these same libertarian ideals led to Russia’s collapse in 1998), nevertheless, America is already back to privatizing and deregulating like never before, as Dylan Ratigan has been reporting.

Figuring that resistance to Planet Libertard is futile, eXiled editor Mark Ames hoisted up the white flag and surrendered to libertarianism on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show. Now that Ames has been liberated from the shackles of collectivist thinking, he’s ready to prescribe a heavy dose of anarcho-libertarian medicine to cure America of its statist liberty-crushing collectivist statism, if’n you know what we mean.

Folks, we present the new Anarcho-Libertarian Mark Ames, whose motto is: “If you can’t beat ’em, privatize ’em, then fuggetaboutem!” Watch Ames convert, read the holy anarcho-tard transcript, and weep:

Here’s the transcript:

I’VE BEEN FOLLOWING YOUR EXPOSES ON THE SELLING OFF OF AMERICA, THE
WAY THIS OR THAT CHUNK OF THE PUBLIC’S PROPERTY IS BEING AUCTIONED OFF
TO WALL STREET FOR A TENTH OF THE VALUE, AND THEN WALL STREET, YOU KNOW,
TURNS AROUND AND CHARGES CITIZENS 10 TIMES WHAT THEY USED TO PAY WHEN THEY OWNED IT,
ETCETRA ETCETRA.
AND THE WAY I SEE IT, THERE ARE TWO APPROACHES TO THIS PROBLEM.
THE FIRST APPROACH WOULD BE: STOP THE PRIVATIZATION NOW, ROLL BACK
EVERYTHING THAT’S BEEN PRIVATIZED OVER THE PAST DECADE, AND LAUNCH A
MASSIVE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE WHOLE MATTER.
THE PROBLEM WITH THAT APPROACH IS THAT IT’S WAY TOO OBVIOUS. IT’S
EXACTLY WHAT “THEY’D” EXPECT US TO DO. AND BY “THEY” I MEAN “THOSE GUYS”–AND
SERIOUSLY, WHO WANTS TO DO WHAT “THOSE GUYS” WOULD EXPECT US TO DO? THAT
WOULD BE LAME. EVERYONE–FROM PETE PETERSON’S STABLE ON THE FAR-LEFT, TO
THE KOCH BROTHERS’ STABLE ON THE FREEDOM-LOVING RIGHT–EVERYONE WHO’S PART OF THE CONVERSATION AGREES THAT THERE’S NO WAY WE CAN AVOID PRIVATIZING EVERYTHING IN AMERICA. I’M TALKING ABOUT PRIVATIZING SIDEWALKS ON WALL STREET. AND PUTTING TOLL BOOTHS ON THE SIDEWALKS EVERY THREE FEET. I’M TALKING PRIVATIZING THE MOSQUITOES AND SELLING THE HUMAN BLOOD THEY DRAW TO CERBERUS, THE WHOLE WORKS! SO LET’S NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT NOT PRIVATIZING UNLESS WE’RE GOING TO PUT ON OUR TIN FOIL HATS AND BABBLE ABOUT ‘LITTLE GREEN MEN” TOO, OKAY?
NOW THERE’S ANOTHER APPROACH THAT YOU MIGHT CALL THE “AMERICAN APPROACH.” IT’S ABOUT THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX, TAKING UNPOPULAR DECISIONS THAT MAY BE TOO RADICAL FOR ALL YOU DINOSAURS OUT THERE.
THE IDEA IS THIS: PRIVATIZE THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TURN IT INTO A CORPORATION, MAKE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US INTO SHAREHOLDERS RATHER THAN CITIZENS, AND THEN DO AN IPO FOR AMERICA, INC. SOUNDS CRAZY? WELP, IT IS–COMPLETELY BAT-FECES CRAZY. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY IT JUST MIGHT WORK.
I’D LIKE TO SAY IT’S ALL MY IDEA, BUT WELL I CAN’T. IN FACT, PRIVATIZING ENTIRE COUNTRIES IS THE BRAINCHILD OF A LIBERTARIAN INVESTMENT GURU NAMED DAVID CASEY. HE’S ALREADY PITCHED HIS PRIVATIZE-YOUR-COUNTRY PLAN TO THE DICTATORS OF SURINAME, CISKEI, VANUATU-YOU-CAN’T-NAME-IT, DAVID CASEY’S TRIED PRIVATIZING IT. UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE PEOPLE OF THOSE COUNTRIES, JUST YEARNING TO BE PRIVATIZED AND LISTED ON A STOCK EXCHANGE, CASEY’S PLAN WAS NEVER REALIZED.
ANOTHER POSSIBILITY IS PRIVATIZING EVERY WORD THAT COMES OUT OF EVERY AMERICAN’S MOUTH. FOR EXAMPLE, I COULD EVERY WORD I’M SAYING TO YOU NOW, AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAY ME FOR THE RIGHT TO REPEAT MY WORDS AND MY IDEAS. AGAIN, WOULD LOVE TO CLAIM THAT IDEA, BUT IT ISN’T. THIS IS ALL 100 PERCENT JOSEPH GALAMBOS, THE LIBERTARIAN GURU WHO RAN THE FREE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE. GALAMBOS MADE EVERY STUDENT SIGN A CONTRACT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT ALL THE IDEAS GALAMBOS PUT INTO THEIR HEADS WERE HIS PROPERTY, AND THEY HAD NO RIGHTS TO EXPLOIT THOSE IDEAS IN THEIR OWN HEADS, WHICH THEY’D BORROWED FROM GALAMBOS: THEY COULDN’T REPEAT THEM, OR LAUGH AT THEM, OR CALL A DOCTOR AND TELL THEM THAT A CERTAIN JOSEPH GALAMBOS NEEDED 500CC’S OF THOROZINE AND HERE’S WHY… NOPE, NOT THEIR PROPERTY, FOLKS.
SO YOU SEE, WHEN YOU REALIZE THAT THE ONLY TWO REALISTIC CHOICES HERE ARE SELLING OFF AMERICA PIECE BY PIECE…OR SELLING EACH OTHER OFF IN ONE GIANT IPO LISTING–YOU REALIZE, HEY, IT’S A GOOD THING WE HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN THIS COUNTRY. FREEDOM-THAT’S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. LIBERATING THE PUBLIC’S PROPERTY, LIBERATING THE AUCTION PRICE OF THAT PROPERTY FROM THE SHACKLES OF FAIR VALUE AND TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT. AND IF YOU CAN’T SEE THAT, THEN CLEARLY, YOU NEED TO STEP OUTSIDE THE BOX.

Be sure to check out The Dylan Ratigan Show and listen to Ratigan’s excellent podcasts!

Mark Ames is the author of Going Postal: Rage, Murder and Rebellion from Reagan’s Workplaces to Clinton’s Columbine.

Click the cover & buy the book!

Got something to say to us? Then send us a letter.

Want us to stick around? Donate to The eXiled.

Twitter twerps can follow us at twitter.com/exiledonline

76 Comments

Add your own

1. __sports__talk_550 | June 17th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
Ames is the boss. I’ve googled. Basically a commenter is a hack who’s never done anything.
2. dock | June 17th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
you sons of bitches
3. Victorvalley Villain | June 18th, 2011 at 6:13 am
I wish there still wasn’t a part of me that wants to go on a rant on how “anarch-libertarian” is redundant.
I wish there was a part of me that didn’t want to give a history lesson on the origin of the word libertarian (French [communist] anarchist started using the word like 200 years ago at a time when ‘anarcyism’ was illegal, north amaerican d-bags co-opted the word about 50 or 70 years ago.)
I wish there was a part of me that didn’t feel the need to preach about using scare quotes when using the anarcho prefix to describe bullshit anarchism, like “anarcho”capitalism.
Fuck me, I am being that guy. Sorry.
4. Victorvalley Villain | June 18th, 2011 at 6:25 am
I wish I hadn’t just re-read that and noticed I type “‘anarcyism’” when I meant to type “‘anarchism.'”
I wish I was a little bit taller, wish I was a baller . . .
5. John Drinkwater | June 18th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoronic term invented by libertarian Murray Rothbard. It’s completely meaningless nonsense, as is ‘anarcho-libertarian’…
Anarchism came out of the socialist movement in the 19th century. Anarchists favor the abolition of the state only when and if private property and capitalism are abolished at the same time. In short, anarchists are socialists. Chomsky called himself a libertarian socialist because he doesn’t like the term anarchism. But it’s the same thing.
6. RanDomino | June 18th, 2011 at 6:04 pm
here is my troll song:
why oh why do i feels this way?
came to point out that right-wing arch-capitalism isn’t the Anarchism waaaaaaay…
seeing that plenty of others have done the job
your humble tard is/can’t maaaake a rhyme…
7. Will | June 18th, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Dear Anarchists,
We don’t get to have words, they’ve all been privatized.
We’re hemmed in between “Libertarian” douchebags and anti-organizational scumfucks with a some “we’ve always been for self-emancipation of the working-class and not brutal imposition of a highly stratified state capitalist society run by goateed philosopher kings; no really” ‘Marxists’ thrown in from time to time.
Fuck it, we’re fucked,
Will
8. Cernunnos | June 18th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
@ Will
At least the 19th and early 20th century strains of anarchism were often supported by and made up of the working class, and they tended to put their guns and wildcat strikes where their mouths were. Today, most “anarchists” are 20-something crust punks who think wearing bandanas and smashing some bank and fast-food windows is doing something to oppose the G-20 (not to mention the actual working class people that have to clean up the mess).
9. Jimmy the hyena | June 19th, 2011 at 4:34 am
I’d say stick with arnacho-nihilism that’s something that’s difficult to co-opt. They of course have tried to commercialise the punk movement but it didn’t work so they created a water downed version and called it Emo because it was less threatening.
10. darthfader | June 19th, 2011 at 11:22 am
I bet you can get some libertarian think tank or another to consider you a genuine convert if you lay this on thick enough.
I mean – YOU’VE HORRIBLY BETRAYED US MARK
11. darthfader | June 19th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Also anarcho-folks, I’m sorry, but anarchy leads to death and crime and terrible things happening to women and children. It doesn’t matter why you want to dismantle the government – when you do it, the Might-makes-Right people win, and the best suited for survival are those who don’t mind cutting limbs off kids and who have stockpiles of AK-47s and big families to use them.
But go ahead and call me a Marxist or a liberal, or whatever you need to keep from confronting that anarchists have no idea what their “system” would look like, no plan for a revolution, and zero popular support for their ideas
Just understand that the most effective anarchists are anti-statist Somali warlords, followed by the Kochs and the “privatizers” in America, Russia, and elsewhere. And that second group has BIG plans for you “anarchists” once the police can’t afford to look out for you.
12. Reginald | June 19th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
Sorry for hijacking the thread, so I will shut my fucking mouth
13. RanDomino | June 19th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Okay. Right-wing arch-capitalism isn’t Anarchism. It’s a whore ideology for privileged white men who want a justification for their class owning everything and keeping the rest of us in virtual slavery. I guess pointing that out counts as trolling now?
14. Fischbyne | June 19th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Contemporary American anarchists I’ve known always avoided defining their movement, which excused them from any intellectual engagement. Handy, that. But that doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t just go ahead and dismiss them as superficial.
As much as they hate being lumped with libertarians, the movements share a lot. Both libertarians and anarchists are apolitical purists incapable of producing a platform and prone to empty grandstanding.
15. Akakij "Third Way" Akakievich | June 19th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Long Live Stavrogin! Stavrogin is dead!
16. Victorvalley Villain | June 19th, 2011 at 10:32 pm
a) We (A)re fucking cliche.
b) Bitches don’t know about our Establishment of a Revolutionary Junta or National Defence Council.
c) I know a few Marxists who are way more anarchist than most of the anarchists I have met.
d) There ain’t gon’ be no revolution tonight.
17. John Drinkwater | June 20th, 2011 at 8:18 am
@11 “Also anarcho-folks, I’m sorry, but anarchy leads to death and crime and terrible things happening to women and children.”
Really? The Spanish Civil War? No. I guess you haven’t read Homage to Catalonia or anything else about the anarchists there. The Russian Civil War? Nope. Of course, you’ve never heard of Makhno’s army. So, WTF are you talking about? Do you even know what “anarchy” means? Hint: it does not mean disorder.
“anarchists have no idea what their “system” would look like”
Except that they do. Why don’t you try actually reading a book by and/or about anarchism and then come back and play. I suggest Petr Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread.
Obviously, the Kochs and the Somali warlords have absolutely nothing to do with anarchism and have probably, much like yourself, never read any anarchist literature or philosophy.
18. John Drinkwater | June 20th, 2011 at 8:24 am
@8 “Today, most “anarchists” are 20-something crust punks who think wearing bandanas and smashing some bank and fast-food windows”
Do you have any evidence for this? I would argue that most anarchists today are in academia. Led by Noam Chomsky, there are many anarchist historians including James C. Scott, Paul Avrich, Mark Leier, David Graeber, David Goodway, Paul McLaughlin, Lucien van der Walt, Tom Goyens – to name a few. You also see many anarchists writing for publications such as Counterpunch and the New Left Review.
19. Stephen | June 20th, 2011 at 10:42 am
http://www.periscopepost.com/2011/06/the-israeli-lawyer-dog-was-not-stoned/
I’m a big fan of exiled, and have been for many years. The story about the Orthodox Jews stoning a dog is bogus. I know you are eager to find anything that makes Israel look bad. In your zeal to make Israelis all look like nut cases, you have hastily put up a story that 30 seconds of searching would show to be false. Be less sloppy in the future.
20. RanDomino | June 20th, 2011 at 10:44 am
@darthfader
Your criticisms apply to anti-organizationalist Anarchists only. I prefer a hybrid of Syndicalism and Anarchist-Communism, which advocates a highly *organized* society based on interlocking communities and collectives and lots of other meaningless bullshit buzzwords. Also, “prefiguration”; there’s a $10 word for you to google.
21. my dick | June 20th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Was there a point to this comment?
22. King Mob | June 20th, 2011 at 12:21 pm
You name dropped our bathshit ideas on MSNBC! We love you, Ames.
-Anarcho-Libertarian
23. King Mob | June 20th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
If you want an idea of what anarcho-libertarians really think about this kind of thing:
http://c4ss.org/content/7504
“Distinguishing real free markets from capitalism as it exists today, market anarchists contend that the accepted conjectures about “perfect competition” and market power are mistaken. Rather than curbing the market power of firms dreaming of combination, the state — without any mastermind’s conspiracy — installs the preconditions of cartelization in society. Market anarchists suggest a different solution for staving off commercial domination…”
24. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Bitches don’t know about our Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists.
25. Trevor | June 20th, 2011 at 3:37 pm
I’d never heard of that Galampos guy but I’m said to say his whole “my ideas, my property” thing isn’t all that surprising from the libertarian crowd. They tend to manifest in only two forms — delusional psycopaths like him and internet addicted Ron Paul fanboys. God I hate Ron Paul, I’d actually believe in God if that little toad got struck by lightning…
26. Diet Koch | June 20th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Privatize yourself.
27. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:11 pm
How many anarchists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
28. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
None, anarchists only screw in puddles of their own vomit.
29. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
How many anarchists does it take to change a light bulb?
30. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Again, none, anarchists can’t change any thing.
31. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
How do you know if you are an anarchist?
32. Victorvalley Villain | June 20th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
All your cloths are black, and all your friends are white.
33. Cernunnos | June 20th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
@ 18
I suppose my comment was somewhat hyperbole. I only mean that most of the self-identified “anarchist” youth culture in the U.S. is the trite activist culture stuck in the same rut since the Battle in Seattle. I have quite a lot of respect for serious libertarian socialist writers like Chomsky and Bookchin, and I know the IWW, CNT, and various anarcho-syndicalist groups have serious aims. Unfortunately, here in Pittsburgh, all the so-called anarchists have alienated any hope of popular support from the working people by destroying their shop windows during the G-20. Not to say there probably aren’t some serious thinking people, but the average person here associates the term in the exact same way as “darthfader” up there, for precisely the reasons I just mentioned.
34. darthfader | June 20th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
Check that middle paragraph I wrote to find out about all your problems, anarcho-whatsits. Does it sound like I haven’t already drowned in “anarcho” personality fascists? It should.
Trust me, if I came in here raging deep green at you, you’d take me for one of your own, stolen bike and all.
Still, the counterpoint here is: if you want to tell Spanish Civil War stories, remember who won it and how, in what was most certainly a state of anarchy.
Your counterpoints as anti-government activists are still Koch and the Somali warlords, and anarcho-libertarians like Mark Ames.
35. Ahura Mazda | June 20th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Anyone miss The Rapture? VVV needs to expand on items 3,4, 16, 24,and 27-32; then contact Jack LaLanne ASAP to take care of a little personal problem >>>==> http://libcom.org/files/images/library/anarchist.jpg
36. John Drinkwater | June 20th, 2011 at 11:40 pm
Alright, keep on laughing about your ignorance of anarchism. We’ll remember your punk asses when comes the Revolution!
37. Cernunnos | June 21st, 2011 at 8:15 am
Can’t figure out why my comment is still awaiting moderation, so I’m re-posting it in hopes that it will actually appear:
@ 18
I suppose my comment was somewhat hyperbole. I only mean that most of the self-identified “anarchist” youth culture in the U.S. is the trite activist culture stuck in the same rut since the Battle in Seattle. I have quite a lot of respect for serious libertarian socialist writers like Chomsky and Bookchin, and I know the IWW, CNT, and various anarcho-syndicalist groups have serious aims. Unfortunately, here in Pittsburgh, all the so-called anarchists have alienated any hope of popular support from the working people by destroying their shop windows during the G-20. Not to say there probably aren’t some serious thinking people, but the average person here associates the term in the exact same way as “darthfader” up there, for precisely the reasons I just mentioned.
38. Cernunnos | June 21st, 2011 at 8:47 am
Hey Mark or whomever moderates comments…. how come none of my responses to 18 have been “approved” yet? The wisecracker above me seems to be having no problem.
39. darthfader | June 21st, 2011 at 10:49 am
Why do anarchists assume that all the people comparing them to Koch are ignorant of what passes for “theory” in their circles? Do you think Ames doesn’t know about your little scarf-wearing cliques already?
Isn’t that the supposed liberal error, belief that opponents merely lack a proper education? To me, it seems pretty desperate, saying that the only reason street “anarchists” have zero support is because people don’t know enough about anarchists, haven’t read enough Berkman or Bakunin or what have you.
Plenty of us know plenty about anarchist writers and groups and your supposed opposition to capitalism. We also know how successful Koch and his cronies have been at attacking the state and its institutions.
We just don’t see how wrecking the state qua state does much but empower the free-marketeers and their thuggish gangland activities.
Fortunately, anarchists of the window-smashing sort are irrelevant. Unfortunately, anarchists of the Koch sort are powerful and influential.
40. Victorvalley Villain | June 21st, 2011 at 10:58 am
@Ahura Mazda – Expand these,
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/254419_1955033719157_1342138978_32229708_2836780_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/251684_1955033959163_1342138978_32229711_3303796_n.jpg
This one goes out to @darthfader,
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/247914_1955032759133_1342138978_32229699_4836389_n.jpg
Also fuck that Deep Green shit,
http://libcom.org/forums/news/deep-green-resistance-crypto-green-fascists-01062011
@Cernunnos
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/251119_1955029479051_1342138978_32229669_1950106_n.jpg
And just random anarchy Spanish Civil War lulz,
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/253874_1955030639080_1342138978_32229678_902217_n.jpg
41. Dahmer | June 21st, 2011 at 12:06 pm
@18: You want moderation Jeff-style? Hustle your punk ass up to Apt 213. I took care of all the average Pgh gopniki. You next. Death to the pirogi!
42. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 1:17 pm
“Unfortunately, here in Pittsburgh, all the so-called anarchists have alienated any hope of popular support from the working people by destroying their shop windows during the G-20.”
I don’t know anything about this, but I’ll take your word for it. I would argue that anyone who destroys working people’s shop windows is by definition not an anarchist. However, by working people, I hope you’re not talking about Starbucks, Sears and London Drugs, or similar corporations who, um, celebrate working people? Come to think of it, there aren’t many ‘working people’ mom and pop type stores left anyway, are there?
In any case, if Americans are put off by anarchism, it’s much more likely to be the result of their own ignorance, gullibility and lack of intellectual curiosity. They simply buy into the media propaganda that anarchism means chaos and disorder (though to be fair to the media, they’re probably too stupid to know otherwise also).
If you want to know something about anarchism, just pick up a book by, say, Kropotkin. Any of them, but I’d start out with the Conquest of Bread. The guy makes simple and almost incredibly persuasive arguments.
But if you wanna remain ignorant about anarchism, go ahead and keep trying to mock it, since it apparently makes people feel better about themselves. Since its inception over 150 years ago, anarchism has maintained an appeal among a minority of intellectuals; it will continue to do so and with the decline of Marxism, the prominence of cyber anarchists like Assange, anarchism is only likely to grow.
43. Victorvalley Villain | June 21st, 2011 at 2:12 pm
I think I have once and for all finally been cured of giving a fuck. Thanks eXholes.
44. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 2:50 pm
“We just don’t see how wrecking the state qua state does much but empower the free-marketeers and their thuggish gangland activities.”
Anarchists don’t support wrecking the state unless it’s accompanied by wrecking capitalism and private property. So, your argument makes no sense.
Calling the Koch brothers “anarchists” is just plain ignorant and stupid. Deal with it.
45. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 3:03 pm
By the way, most anarchists support, in the short-term, huge welfare states (that is, redistribution of wealth from rich to poor), for the simple reason that huge welfare states are better than states that give no money at all to the poor. There is not contradiction here, as I heard some poor sap recently suggest about Greek anarchists who oppose the austerity cuts.
46. darthfader | June 21st, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Well, that’s good to hear. As long as you’re actively supporting anti-anarchist policies, you can chant all the anarchist slogans you want, all the way to gray hair and the grave.
Up with the Anti-Anarchist Anarchists!
47. darthfader | June 21st, 2011 at 5:43 pm
By the way, I just became an anarchist a few minutes ago – I, too, only support a different kind of state because it’s better than the bullshit we have now.
Won’t you join my . . . anarcho- . . . collecti-ffinity group? We can fight to expand social spending and against austerity cuts, and then when that’s done, we’ll get right on, uh, dismantling the fuck out of everything we achieved. I promise.
48. Victorvalley Villain | June 21st, 2011 at 6:56 pm
“most anarchists support, in the short-term, huge welfare states”
It’s true;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nk0UkQsanmQ
But I am done with anarchy, I am moving onto ultra leftist autonomist Marxist situationism.
“Our aims are full communism with ‘lulz’ as a transitional demand.”
https://deterritorialsupportgroup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/twenty-reasons-why-its-kicking-off-in-cyberspace/
49. super390 | June 21st, 2011 at 8:22 pm
The question is, does the state create power, or does power arise from the nature of the interactions between people, such that any institution that can manipulate those interactions can create long-term control? Meaning, if we as citizens don’t capture that power with our votes, will it simply be captured by our bosses and priests to use against us?
The distinction between “anarchists” then, is whether you believe that people must struggle to capture and use the power in the form of egalitarian organizations of their own making, or whether you’re just a lazy jerk who wants to make big messes and not have to clean them up. The former behavior does occur, but it is hard to sustain.
50. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 9:50 pm
The Soviet Union was better than the the Romanov dynasty, but does that mean everyone should’ve been content with the Soviet Union? Any hierarchical structure of government, regardless of its principles, will inevitably lead to corruption.
The problem with liberal welfare states is that they do not address underlying inequalities. They paper over the fundamental problem of an exploitative system, which is why they can only exist in the short-term.
But sure, any form of socialism that improves the lives of people in the short term is preferred over letting people wallow in misery. Anarchists are socialists, first and foremost. The battle was always between Marx and Bakunin and their respective followers. State socialism vs. stateless socialism. Bakunin predicted the corruption that would result from the state-run project advocated by Marx (i.e. the Soviets).
51. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 10:03 pm
It didn’t help matters much when the Bolsheviks, instead of allowing workers some control over the government – such as through the local soviets – as promised, turned out to be ruthless dictators not unlike their capitalist enemies. That’s why power should be decentralized and given to everyone as equally as possible. Power in the hands of a few – even in a socialist state – has never led a society we should hold up as an ideal.
52. John Drinkwater | June 21st, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Anarchists have always fought for workers’ rights and improved living conditions, by the way, traditionally through trade unions. I don’t know why this should come as a surprise to anyone, unless of course, you don’t actually know anything about anarchism but only imagine you do.
“According to Noam Chomsky, “social democrats and anarchists always agreed, fairly generally, on so-called ‘welfare state measures'” and “Anarchists propose other measures to deal with these problems, without recourse to state authority.”
53. DF Sayers | June 22nd, 2011 at 3:52 pm
You must have been watching Networm recently:
“The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there’s no war or famine, oppression or brutality — one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused.”
54. DF Sayers | June 22nd, 2011 at 3:53 pm
*Network
55. Victorvalley Villain | June 22nd, 2011 at 7:40 pm
I like Networm better.
56. wengler | June 22nd, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Propertarian, not Libertarian and certainly not Anarcho-libertarian. Anarchism literally means no rulers. Under the Propertarian Party’s construct there is no freedom and no right distinct from property. This means those that own the land make the rules, while the vast majority can dream about owning land and therefore having rights.
57. AllhailGary | June 23rd, 2011 at 8:30 am
Oh god, are we really doing this again? It seems every other political discussion here gets derailed into this semantics bullshit.
“True anarchists” is right up there with tards gumming up the works with anti-discussion with talks of tea baggers and “true libertarianism”.
You can save yourself time and simply go with “I have nothing to say but will attempt to deflect critiscism anyway.” Any criticism of how Libertariansim is an unworkable mess is met with “but that isn’t TRUE libertarianism!” (hint: we never see true libertarianism because it’s an unworkable mess).
Any discussion on American government gets derailed by those closet fascist tards trying to define “democracy” versus “republic” in order to justify their fascist longings by invoking images of Roman times (hmmm, I wonder if any other fascist leaders tried that?).
And now we have black scarfed, hipster urban squatters derailing any meaningful discussion with definitions of anarchism that haven’t held true for nearly 200 years, trying to deflect any criticism against their bullshit movement by invoking the fucking Paris Commune.
Enough already.
58. John Drinkwater | June 23rd, 2011 at 9:09 am
@57
What meaningful discussion was derailed? If you have something meaningful to say, nobody is holding you back.
You’re exactly wrong about anarchism: the definition of it has held true for nearly 200 years: socialism without a state.
It’s an insult not only to anarchism but to anyone with a knowledge of labor history when someone comes along and says the Koch bros are “anarchists” because they want to privatize the government. It’s completely ridiculous. In an anarchist society, the Kochs’ wealth would be expropriated and spread among the commune. They would be reduced to members of the commune like everyone else, the same status as you and I.
59. Victorvalley Villain | June 23rd, 2011 at 1:40 pm
As long as we are talking about Anarcho-Libertarians, we should talk about National Bolshevism next. Amirite?
60. DrunktankDan | June 24th, 2011 at 12:52 pm
holy shit! my girlfriend just pointed out that Ames looks suspiciously similar to Mel Gibson. Anyone else see it?
61. Tommo | June 26th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
@59
Check out the hilarious ‘National-Anarchists’ in Australia. Their logo is the red and black star with a gold celtic cross superimposed over it. Their members have been exposed as various skinhead types who are headed up by a member of the German NPD, yet they still protested the Chinese Olympic torch run in Canberra with a banner reading ‘We are all Tibetans’. It’s a mark of true intellectual isolation when you pick up any old term and affix ‘anarchist’ to it. Some witless people even describe themselves as Anarcho-Leninists. Thankfully, I’m just an old-fashioned platformist.
62. Victorvalley Villain | June 27th, 2011 at 9:35 am
@61 We have our own NA here in California, they go by the name BANA (Bay Area National Anarchists.) Probably not as lulzy as the Aussie cats, but still . . .
My point with NazBol reference was to point out the futility of arguing with eXholes over the wrongness of anracho-“syncretic” memes. After all the eXiled editors are good friends with Eduard Limonov. And it’s probably a safe bet that most eXholes are also Liminov fans.
Also I used to fancy myself a neo-platformist, until I could no longer stomach Liberty&Solidarity’s crypto-Trotskyism, or that none of the other Anarkismo groups would denounce that shit. So much for striving for theoretical and tactical unity.
63. Victorvalley Villain | June 27th, 2011 at 9:37 am
It’s also a good bet that I managed to fuck up that first hyper link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_anus
64. Victorvalley Villain | June 27th, 2011 at 10:37 am
@the summer intern.
Commenter = Human Anus. I see you.
65. R | June 27th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Mark,
This is arguably a little off topic. I’ve been a fan for a long time, starting with the original website and book.
Here’s my issue: Despite all of your reporting (which was excellent in Russia) you have never, ever , ever mentioned any opinion on the over-arching effect of Zionism on anything. Good or bad. Why? Its not like its insignificant, whatever side one takes. The Zionist influence on this country is unmistakable to all but the blind or the willfully ignorant. Again, I’m not making judgments as to Zionisms relative justification, but this is a huge journalistic omission in terms of general political context. Even in terms of the economic context.
You see, by presenting this comment as a “I’m a longtime fan, and I’m merely puzzled, that’s all” type of comment, it’s as though I’m trying to court your sympathy. True, one might answer that the reason why Ames hasn’t spent much of his journalism efforts on the Zionist conspiracy is because, well, Ames doesn’t live in his parents’ basement, and his bedroom doesn’t reek of urine and stale biscuits–as every Zionist conspiracy theorist knows, you really can’t get in the right frame of mind for this sort of work unless you immerse yourself in the age-old stench of urine. In your parents’ home. In your old bedroom. It’s kind of like, you know, Luke Skywalker getting into the frame of mind and all, only Luke was flying all over outer space, while the true zionist conspiracy investigator flies within the confines of, yes, his parents’ spare bedroom. Hey, it’s more exciting than it sounds, I’m not doing it justice here. Anyway, as Koko the sign-language gorilla’s first words once said, “Trouble. Surprise. Visit.”
Nanu-nanu.
66. John Drinkwater | June 27th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
@62 I don’t know why you got so caught up in the sectarian politics within the anarchist movement. Is it really that important? I ignore it. Most people have no idea what you’re talking about re neo-platformist, Makhno, etc. anyway. Can’t we just agree that anarchism in principle – opposition to corporations, nation-states, borders – is the best ideology, broadly speaking, out there?
67. R | June 27th, 2011 at 7:03 pm
So, I get someone who inserts a weird italian attached to my own?
I understand I was talking about a conspiracy. I was talking about the world-wide Israel and their old chestnut.
Me is extremely strange and me borders on the crazy in terms of how I wasn’t aware that I was trying to frame my admiration about a very tight bond?
And I offer Thanks
68. R | June 27th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
I, Israel.
Betcha you’re too scared to say anything about the Deir Yassin massare. If you were edgy like me–but you don’t have the guts, man! It’s like what Jack Nicholson says in that Tom Cruise movie: “You people can’t handle the truth!” That’s the sort of guy I am. I go around going, “Oh, Deir Yassin! You know what that is, man? No, because like Jack Nicholson said, ‘You people can’t handle the truth!'” God I love saying that. It makes me feel so…I dunno…so much more than a mere commenter.
Message loud and clear: I should start my own fucking blog, but then the stark reality of my insignificance and banality would become all too painfully clear. I get it. I’ll keep commenting. And thanks for taking the time to improve retarded comments like mine. Salam Shalom.
69. R | June 27th, 2011 at 7:56 pm
Well, Ames will get full credit for Israel and its spot, though.
I incriminate your but, clever guy.
70. R | June 27th, 2011 at 8:11 pm
Oh, and wtf does that aforementioned massacre have to do with my relationship and all of its implications. I didn’t matter to Americans, I care what you would have said. Really.
Its like fucking.
But one banality.
PS: I’m really not bothered by the way you’re improving my comments. Seriously. You can probably tell I’m not bothered by the way I’m obsessively writing back. You [edited to protect the retarded–Ed.]
71. R | June 27th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Anyone want to buy a legitimate question.
72. R | June 27th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
Actually, the book. I pay people on amazon for it too. Very nice, detailed, and long. Mark was, is and forever will be a journalistic hero of mine. I was, is and forever will be seriously one of his biggest fans.
FUCK YOU!
You got that, mister?!
73. R | June 27th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
That’s it dickhead. Better keep the comments off of the board. That’s good. Oh, wait, is it?
Because it’s going to make a nice comparison when I compare the comparison that compares the screenshot of all of the legitimate people here to look at what got edited out and never made the board. Not to mention what was altered.
It’s a conspiracy, man! It’s like what Alex Jones says! There was no plane that crashed into the Pentagon–I have screenshots, man!
All on the vaulted “The Exiled”. The pinnacle of gonzo journalistic integrity. Or maybe not.
You’re very smart. I coming job, asshole. I hard, a narcissist.
Good luck not getting not gotten getting fired.
74. R | June 28th, 2011 at 9:41 am
“The Exiled” forwarded my inquiry about Israeli to Mossad special agents, who are currently monitoring my every movement. “The Exiled” prohibits my Constitutional right to free speech and to express my opinions, however retarded they may be, on the website “www.exiledonline.com” For, as James Madison wrote in the anti-Federalist Papers, “No website Shall infringe on the rights of Retarded anonymous Commenters who so desire to freely post their comments. Retarded Commenters shall be allowed to post Retarded Comments unhindered from interference or Censorship, no matter how Retarded the Commenter may be. Yet we must provide one exception to this Amendment: If a certain “R” doth try to place his exceedingly Retarded Comment, then it shall be permitted that the State, or the Blog Moderator, may Edit, Improve or Censor “R”‘s comments in order to protect the Public Safety and General Welfare from Retardation-Infections. Furthermore, should “R” dare to criticize the future Jewish state of Israel, “R” must be silenced immediately, for he possess knowledge too dangerous for the Powers that Be. His name and IP address must be passed on to the Mossad authorities, he must be hunted down like in that movie “Munich” and only then can our World Domination under Zionist hegemony be protected. So let it be written; so let it be done.”
75. J. Neil Schulman | July 7th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
According to Wikipedia, Mark Ames was born in 1958. Isn’t is a shame when Marxheimers strikes one so young.
Sincerely Yours,
J. Neil Schulman
Charlton Heston Fanboy 4-Ever!
76. Robert | February 17th, 2013 at 6:16 am
Hilarious!