I am an Anarchist. Not a "Libertarian" or a "Galtist" but an Anarchist.

[renie408]

113. Again with the picking and choosing definitions...

Try this one:

Sophist:
Noun
1. A paid teacher of philosophy and rhetoric in ancient Greece, associated in popular thought with moral skepticism and specious reasoning.
2. A person who reasons with clever but fallacious arguments.

You rummage around and find less popular definitions for words which suit you, but I am the one who is parsing meanings?

You gave an anecdotal reference to a Chomsky lecture with no link or evidence. How was that supposed to 'further' my understanding? I read your evidence. I did not 'fail to learn'; I disagree with you. If you do not think that the inability to maintain their system in the face of an authoritarian onslaught is a failure...what is? Is anyone who disagrees with you ignorant? Your total argument seems to be that I am stupid because I cannot see the brilliance and accuracy of what you are saying. How does that work? I am curious about what YOUR continuous attacks on my intelligence say about ME? They actually illustrate a great deal more about YOU.

And you say that I am completely consumed by this 'game', but where are YOU right now, my friend? What communal, anarchist colony are YOU posting from?


I would also like to add that I did not say their effort 'failed'. I said, basically, that it was unsustainable in the real world. How is that wrong? Anarchy is NOT a model for broader society. It has never proven to work for any length of time. Anywhere. Ever. You have offered no proof that it has. I would not even argue with you if you said that is actually a failure of the broader society. But it is reality. It is incorrect and, frankly, obnoxious to castigate someone as ignorant because YOU cannot support your thesis. Honey, if the main thrust of your argument is 'nahney nahney boo boo, you big stupid poophead', it isn't much of an argument.