Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member

Fantastic Anarchist

Fantastic Anarchist's Journal
Fantastic Anarchist's Journal
June 11, 2017

SO PISSED: George Allen Being Able to Lie With Impunity

On MSNBC. Five minutes of lies, chief among them was the U.S. has the highest tax code in the world. Not one word to refute the billion lies he managed to spew in his garbage-filled rant.

On MSNBC Live with Scott Thomas.

The media is not Left-wing. It's not even liberal.

April 11, 2017

China 'moves 150,000 troops and medical supplies to North Korean border in case US attacks Kim Jong-

Source: UK Mirror

China has moved 150,000 troops and medical supplies to its North Korean border fearing a refugee crisis in the event of US airstrike, it has been claimed.

Donald Trump's decision to launch missiles into Syria last week in retaliation for President Assad's gas attack caused widespread alarm in China, it is believed.

Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/china-moves-150000-troops-medical-10199100

Guess that visit Trump was talking about wasn't so great.
March 31, 2017

If Line of Succession is Illegitimate (Provide Ideas for a Solution)

The below was a reply to another thread, but I thought I'd start a thread to solicit ideas for a solution since, I believe, there is no Constitutional remedy for an election that is itself illegitimate. I'd love to hear some other's thoughts.

If the election itself is illegitimate, then it follows that, the Line of Succession is illegitimate. Even if Pence and everyone on down the line are innocent, the Line of Succession is illegitimate, regardless of the legal status of anyone in the line. This is unchartered territory, and there is nothing in the Constitution, that I can quickly recall, perhaps I'm wrong, that provides guidance for a foreign state basically picking our President over the will of the People. Since there is no Constitutional Remedy, we really have no quick fix for this. I don't claim to have answers. I would propose several solutions:

1) The Presidency goes to the runner-up and winner of the popular vote.

2) Hold new special elections.

3) Congress creates a select bipartisan committee to choose the President.

4) Hold another Electoral College vote in states where the winner won by less than a certain percentage - say, 3% or less (or a percentage to be determined)

Edit to provide link to corresponding thread.
March 31, 2017

Putin's Having Fits (Trump Is Gonna Shit Version)

Because I had nothing else to do ...

Putin's Having Fits (Trump Is Gonna Shit Version)

If your blue and you don't know who to talk to
why don't you go where Congress sits
Putin's having fits

Different lies out there all day one chants
with stripes and alternative facts as Trump has shits
Putin’s having fits

Dressed up like a billion dollar pooper
Trying hard to not be in a stupor

Come lets mix where Russians
walk with poison umbrellas
when making hits
Putin’s having fits

Have you seen the well to do
Up and down Park Avenue
Melania's nose is in the air
Trying real hard not to care

Fourth floors with lots of fallers
Golf trips cost lots of dollars
Wasting every dime
To avoid doing time

If your blue and you don't know who to talk to
why don't you go where Putin sits
Trump is gonna shit
Trump is gonna shit
Trump is gonna shit
Trump is gonna shit

March 19, 2017

If you do not question authority, then you are not free, even if you are free to question authority.

Just a thought I had while watching a documentary on North Korea.

I doubt this will get many views, so mainly made to put in my journal, which I continue to forget to do.

March 18, 2017

I totally get what you're saying.

The theoretical idea of communism is a beautiful thing. I understand your rejection to calling Putin a communist, because he most certainly is not (except his fondness for Bolshevik-style authoritarianism). In the USSR's case, neither was Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, or anyone that followed. The October Revolution was almost dead on arrival when the Bolsheviks gerry-mannered the Soviets, and suppressed those Soviets that couldn't be co-opted by the party. Lenin, in his reactionary zeal, proclaimed, "All power to the Soviets!" ...while he was undermining or outright destroying them. He put down workers' rebellions, trade unionists, syndicalists, anarchists, socialists (even the equally reactionary Left SRs (Socialist Revolutionaries), the Right SRs, the Left Opposition, Council Communists - anyone that got in the way of Bolshevik power. Lenin, the Marxist, wasn't even following Marx, who had his flaws about the theory of revolution (proving the anarchist, Bakunin, correct some fifty years earlier during the First International)! Even Marx amended his views somewhat on the use of the State and Vanguard Party to foment a revolution, when he saw the events that transpired with the Paris and Lyon Communes - an organic workers uprising that took over the factories and proved an anarchist revolution and society was possible without having used the machinations of the State, or some elite Vanguard to take the lead. It was a successful revolutionary communist society governed by and for the workers/people.

Sadly, even though the beginning stages showed great promise with workers overthrowing their bosses, establishing communes, socialists, communists overthrowing the government and the bourgeoisie, the nascent revolution was destroyed by the Bolsheviks and their allies. Bolshevism did more to destroy communism than the White Armies, and eventually the West ever could have.

I do get your point, nonetheless.

*I use the term Bolshevism because until then the term communism was an umbrella term that captured most of the left-wing labor movement; the Marxists, anarchists, trade unionists, etc. Marx, having borrowed heavily from the scientific-socialism work by the anarchist, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (System of Economic Contradictions), formulated his own scientific socialism with his work, The Communist Manifesto. The term was not his, however. The Bolsheviks, seizing a propaganda victory, employed the use to their "Revolution" and Party, which now is forever tied with the abomination that was the Soviet Union, no matter how potentially historically positive for the international labor movement (and its associated liberty movements) the initial Revolution was. Oh, what could have been.

We, at least, have an important historical lesson to learn from.

**My post may seem irrelevant and overly polemical in favor of anarchist philosophy, but the opening thread asks why we can't have a more cooperative society, and I believe that one day, a society built on anarchist principles would be a just and cooperative type of society.

February 5, 2017

Is the US becoming fascist under Trump? - My Response on Quora

Edit: Please note that my response doesn't deal with the original question; only to a response to the question dealing with the (false) premise that the two political sides operate on the same foundation in reality.

The Original Question:

Is the US becoming fascist under Trump?

I'll provide my response first, and the post replied to, second.

My Response:

It’s impossible to not be biased when offering a political opinion, so with due respect, please indulge me as I try to remain impartial.

I’m having difficulty accepting your premise, which seems to indicate that both sides exists as absolutes, and more importantly, that both sides are on equal footing when it comes to objective facts and reality.

First, there may be a great political divide in this country - I do not contest that, however, the divide may not be as clear as you imply. I think it may be pretty hard to discern as you approach the middle of the continuum. However, that being said, empirically, it appears that the Left side of the continuum seems to accept facts and reality more than the Right side. It seems to me, again through observation, that the Right seems to have an aversion to events and information. Whether or not the Left has acceptable or agreeable policies and solutions to the objective facts they are dealing with is not the issue here (of course, I believe they do, but it is immaterial to this conversation). It is my opinion, from observation, that the Right tends more towards deception, or outright denial of the facts and information provided. Sometimes, they will invent facts out of thin air. They seem to not care about the objective universe around them, because it doesn’t fit with their ideology or policy prescriptions. They are more comfortable, when an issue is at odds with their views, just simply to dismiss them and offer “alternative facts,” which of course, to any reasonable and objective person, is an oxymoron. The term “alternative facts” is self-contradictory. You can not have a fact and alternative fact. That may exists in Quantum Theory, but it does not exist as a phenomenon in the macro world.

It just doesn’t appear to me that the Right is more accepting of a science-based ideology. The more that they have to justify their policies and actions by deception, or even just inventing things out of whole-cloth (the Bowling Green Massacre that never existed is a great example), the more they appear to be dogmatic. I’m not saying that the Left is incapable of being dogmatic, but I think the Right is definitely susceptible to it simply because their foundation exists on deception and alternative facts.

It is simply amazing to me that when discussing the political divide in this country, that it’s automatically assumed, even axiomatic, that the two sides’ political and social foundations are on equal footing in terms of reality. By observation, that is just not true. The Left, at least policy-wise, tends to conform to the objective information given to them. The Right tends to stick with ideology when it comes to policy and decision making, which may or may not align with the facts given to them. They’re not interested in modifying their policies to align with the objective reality around them, but are ready to modify reality to conform to their policy, which is rigidly tied to their overall ideology.

If we’re going to find solutions to the problems this country faces, and if we are going to progress in a world filled with nations who are more grounded in science-based solutions, then we are going to have to deal with the elephant in the room. The Right is not interested in progress or solutions. It’s raison d'être is simply to gain power and maintain power for an exclusive group of people, science and empirical facts be damned. The Religious Right, the far-right (white supremacists), and the rural working class (all three categories can overlap), will not get what they paid for, unless they fall within that aforementioned exclusive group. Any policies that happen to be enacted that are agreeable to them, is not by design, but simply an unintentional byproduct of the overall agenda to gain and maintain power.

I have tried to provide as impartial a response as I could - believe me, I could have been far less kind regarding my opinion of the Right, but the degree of my opinion is not pertinent to my argument.

Response Replied To:

Trump is in power because of a great and growing division in America, a symptom at best of something far more ominous—a deepening social/political war in US society.

What has emerged, is what political writers have termed the great “digital-divide.”[1] [2] [3]Nowadays every citizen has full access to media tools like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and can potentially communicate for free, to anyone else on the planet.

But with no echo, your views are lost.

The Internet now drowns-out the voice of anyone who either lacks celebrity already, or who expresses mixed views on one or several powerful political and social issues.
To stay afloat, individuals , and even news outlets, must stick to specific agendas that mirror and affirm the social/political beliefs of their core base of “friends,” or viewers.
No longer is it profitable to give genuine time to opposing viewpoints on climate-change, LBGQT rights, women’s health, immigration, terrorism, international trade or any other political hot potatos.
The most popular news sources now have the most opinionated news, ie., eg. FOX and Breitbart, vs CNN and The New York Times.
What would happen:
to Bill O’Reilly’s ratings, were he, in his “talking points,” to “point” out the baseless fear-mongering among those who rail against open borders?

to Anderson Cooper’s ratings were he to give an exclusive interview to conservative pundit Milo Yiannopolous?

Like bad electronic feedback loops in a poorly tuned radio oscillator circuit, only a few powerful “signal” patterns emerge in this otherwise noisy overpopulated system.

For America, it’s the…
Progressives who hate Trump, the “wild-card” president.

Conservatives who consider Trump to be the “law & order” president.
This is not a partisan rant, so please do not respond in support of your “side.”

Instead try this little Twitter experiment done by a friend of mine:

Make two separate profiles on Twitter.
On one, tweet “what an A-hole President Trump is.”
On the second, tweet “how great President Trump is.”
Your starting feeds will be very different, but don’t stop there…

For each profile, click every suggested “follow” profile that comes up.
The two feeds you get will start to eerily resemble descriptions of life on two separate planets from different galaxies.

Each feed will have tweets that link to “solid news.”

Go to the those linked news and “information” websites from each feed, but
FIRST start with the Twitter profile you created that annoys you the most. Scan over some of the links. Notice how you feel.
THEN scan the links to views from the Twitter profile that has views you prefer. How does your feeling change? Perhaps a sigh of relief like you’re happy that there ARE some rational people in this world?
Fascist leaders seize power from hate and demonization of one or another political, social or religious group. This is a very vulnerable time for the United States.

[1] The Real Digital Divide Afflicting American Politics - BillMoyers.com
[2] The Internet and Social Media Are Increasingly Divisive and Undermining of Democracy
[3] US election 2016: Divided nation split into 'alien tribes' - BBC News
September 23, 2016

Battling Severe Depression - Been Looking for Work Since June

Hey guys,

From RTP, North Carolina:

I was let go from my last job which was pretty challenging. It was a Portfolio Analyst, and I admit, I was sort of learning on the fly, but I was working hard and didn't really receive any negative feedback so I thought everything was going well. Then one day, my boss set up a meeting with me title "Catch up" because he had been out for a week prior. It was Friday morning. I get on the call, say, "Good Morning, _____.

He was short and to the point. FA, we're going to let you go. The decision is final. You're just not keeping up. Then he passed me over to the HR lady who is also on the phone. Now, this guy always said that he was a "Type A" personality, but to me, I considered that pretty cowardly. I don't have a college education. I've always been able to get a job, though.

I'm circling the drain. I've been applying for jobs online, but haven't taken care of myself at all. It's a challenge to get out of bed to shower, brush my teeth, and eat. I've lost about 40 lbs. I keep ruminating that I'm a failure. My fiance and I have had to move into her mother's house. Oh, by the way, my measly $350 a week unemployment payment was "exhausted" about 2 weeks ago. Meanwhile, I'm missing payments on credit cards, one month behind on my car payment. I had great credit, and now it's in shambles. I'm scared. I'm terrified. I have day long panic attacks and I'm paralyzed with fear. I think I've broken down. I used to be outgoing, gregarious, always cracking a joke. Now, I'm scared of my shadow.

Anyway, last year I left my job of 8 years, which was a great job, the best job I've ever had, for another job that was paying $15K more a year. It was for an Operations Analyst position, when all I was doing prior was export data from Lotus Notes or Oracle BI, or a few other platforms. I would slice and parse the data and create nice dashboards. Fairly easy work. It was an international company, a clinical research organization. People from other departments, from other regions knew my name. A lot of times, people would ask me for help with Excel, and some other things, but primarily Excel. I had great friends at the company, and my life couldn't have been better.

When I left, I stayed at the second place for 3 months. It was for an Operations Analyst. Now, I don't know if it was them or me, but one example that should illustrate my point in terms of not communicating was the fact that my boss sent me three spreadsheets and left extremely vague instructions - not even an end goal of what she was trying to achieve. She said something to the effect that, "You're the analyst, you should know." Well, that kind of destroyed my confidence. I've always had an issue with the fact that I didn't graduate from college, so I always feel that I'll be found out as "incompetent" (I don't lie on my application, this is strictly from an intelligence perspective). So, I froze. I went back to my desk and stared at my screens trying to figure out what I needed to do. Nothing made sense on these three spreadsheets. Then I realized that the headers on one of them were formatted as currency when they were really supposed to be dates!!! So the top line was read like: $3456 $4786 $1275 and so on and so forth, when they were really supposed to be 1/16 2/16 3/16. Ok, so problem one found out, but still - I wonder what the hell else is formatted incorrectly. Inheriting dirty spreadsheets is a real pain, especially if whoever created it didn't know what they were doing. Okay, the main point isn't these three spreadsheets. Just serves as a lack of communication point. But by then, my confidence was just shot. I drove an hour to get there and an hour to get back. They were inflexible about the hours (I wanted to come in early so I could leave early and avoid traffic). No, couldn't do that. Finally, I just stopped going to work, and calling in sick. They fired me after 6 months.

I found a job about 3 weeks later for another CRO, the one with the Type A personality for a boss. I and another person were hired on the same day. The guy hired with me was a financial guru. So, thinking went like this, he would let me know what he wanted (he didn't know a lick of Excel), and I would create some really nice dynamic dashboards. Now, it could be due to my incompetence or not, but sometimes _____ would say one thing and they say something completely different when we were on a three-way call. My boss, we'll call Steve would talk, and talk, and talk, and talk. My counterpart, we'll call Andy, would pretty much remain silent. Some of the business terms, though, I didn't know, and if asked on the spot without the benefit of Google was a challenge. Fortunately, that only happened once or twice. But long story short, I got the distinct impression that Andy would come to a conclusion, give what he wants, I'd come up with a nice extravagant looking dashboard, then our boss, Steve, would mumble through the thing, sometimes I'd try to explain, but he would just shut me down, mumble, then asked me a question that I just provided when he shut me down. Anyway, Andy was his favorite. So, I had hiccups, some may have been my fault or not. Really impossible to tell since Andy constantly waffled on stuff. But, I never thought I'd be fired.

So, filed for UI. Took about three weeks. $350/week. Finally exhausted that.

The second job after my wonderful 8 year one, I worked six months. My third job, I worked three months. So, this is what I'm doing: I'm telling recruiters and potential employers (I removed second job and made third job look like it started right after 8 year job and I'm "currently" working) that I'm currently working that way I can ask that they don't call my current employer. I then say I have a list of references from wonderful 8 year gig, so I'm covered on that. So basically, my resume and my verbal goes worked at 8 year job until Sept of last year. Then immediately in Sept, I'm working at third job Sept to current(but listed as second, because real second was totally removed). Totally used so they don't contact them for a reference.

Now, I have been trouble finding a job. I'm terrified. I've never felt like this before. Day long panic attacks that paralyze me. Not taking care of myself like showering and stuff. I feel like I'm circling the drain. I'm weak and lack energy.

I need to know if things are going to get better. I feel like the me from just a year ago was a totally different person. Laughing, popular, gregarious, CONFIDENT, the whole nine. Now I don't even leave the house unless I absolutely have to. Yesterday, I finally showered and went to a watering hole I used to frequent. Ordered a Ginger Ale. I'm so depressed that I can't even drink! Wow. Anyway, people were happy to see me, but said I looked rally thin ... yes, about six months ago, I weighed 195ish lbs (at 6 feet tall). I now struggle to keep up to 150 lbs. My fiance and I don't really have set times for dinner so ...sometimes I'm so weak to even make something myself.

I need to know that everything is okay.

If you need more information or clarification, please let me know.

I need help.

Edit: Sorry about grammar and formatting, but went for speed rather than quality. Usually strive for both, though.

May 23, 2013

Wobblies and Zapatistas: Conversations on Anarchism, Marxism and Radical History

I'm still trying to find my online book regarding the last statement of the Haymarket Martyrs that seems to have mysteriously disappeared, but I thought this was interesting, so I thought I'd post:

Link to sample (available online for $9.99)

Wobblies and Zapatistas offers the reader an encounter between two generations and two traditions. Andrej Grubacic is an anarchist from the Balkans. Staughton Lynd is a lifelong pacifist, influenced by Marxism. They meet in dialogue in an effort to bring together the anarchist and Marxist traditions, to discuss the writing of history by those who make it, and to remind us of the idea that "my country is the world." Encompassing a Left libertarian perspective and an emphatically activist standpoint, these conversations are meant to be read in the clubs and affinity groups of the new Movement.
The authors accompany us on a journey through modern revolutions, direct actions, anti-globalist counter summits, Freedom Schools, Zapatista cooperatives, Haymarket and Petrograd, Hanoi and Belgrade, "intentional" communities, wildcat strikes, early Protestant communities, Native American democratic practices, the Workers' Solidarity Club of Youngstown, occupied factories, self-organized councils and soviets, the lives of forgotten revolutionaries, Quaker meetings, antiwar movements, and prison rebellions. Neglected and forgotten moments of interracial self-activity are brought to light. The book invites the attention of readers who believe that a better world, on the other side of capitalism and state bureaucracy, may indeed be possible.

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Aug 3, 2011, 01:43 PM
Number of posts: 7,309

About Fantastic Anarchist

I consider myself a mutualist, but also identify as a collectivist. Proudhon and Bakunin\'s ideas are not that far apart in terms of setting up a workers\' democracy. Mutualism appeals to me because it still retains a free-market (read: free-market socialism where the producers own the means of production and via free association can market their products based on Labor Theory of Value). I\'m also appealed by the syndicalism and collectivism because everyone shares in the responsibility for society in which everyone is free from want. As a matter of fact, I\'m also attracted to anarchist-communism, because I\'m very impressed with Prince Kropotkin, too, because regardless of the various currents, the end result would be a classless, stateless society. I read his Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (available free online), and his conclusions were that societies that foster cooperation tend to produce cooperative individuals (individuals and society are nothing without each other). Those societies that foster competition tend to produce competitive individuals (where competition is stressed as important). His final conclusions were that societies (animals and humans) that were more cooperative (either interspecies or intraspecies) tended to be more successful than societies that were more competitive (his theories building upon Darwin). You could call me a hodge-podge really, or like Voltairine de Cleyre, an anarchist without adjectives. But then again, I also admire the individualists (who still considered themselves as socialists) like Benjamin Tucker and Josiah Warren. The above is a copy/paste of my OWN words.

Journal Entries

Latest Discussions»Fantastic Anarchist's Journal