Parallel Far left blog Left Wing Left Libertarian

 Parallel Far left blog Left Wing Left Libertarian

Left Libertarian includes Libertarian Socialism, both include Anarcho Libertarianism which includes Kevin Carson-Roderick Long Mutualism [and maybe Benjamin Tucker Mutualism in it or as alternative to it, both forms are a free marketist form of classic economics)/Agorism (market oriented left libertarianism, Left wing free market anarchism, which uses Left Wing Laissez faire and freed markets)  and Social Anarchism (Mutual Aide, AnSynd, Inclusive Democracy, Luxemburgianism)

Left Libertarian labeled. views are from links on Bleeding heart Lib blog on left lib written by left lib and KC-RL mutualist Gary Chartier

The Left Libertarianism in this blog does not include Geolibertarianism-Georgism Left Libertarianism or Steiner Vallentyne Left Libertarianism  , it also doesn’t use P Proudhons form of Mutualism (which is between Anarcho Ind and Soc Anarchism and is a liberation socialist form of market socialism or non labor theory of value Mutualism)

doesn't use alliance of left lib views, , bleed heart lib views

https://web.archive.org/web/20220000000000*/https://cnsrrwrpcnbg.blogspot.com/2022/07/fyujjjj.html

Expanded 

I am a Social Democrat (Luxemburgism)

Left Libertarian/Libertarian Socialist: (Anarcho Libertarian, anarchist-anarchistic socialist ,Market-oriented left libertarian [Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist,Agorist/. Social Anarchist [Mutual Aide], Anarcho Syndicalist) and Anti Neoliberal (ie Post Neoliberal). social convergence broad front chile

I support Marxism-Leninism, Inclusive Democracy (Social zconvergence Chile is Libertarian Socialist this is under that umbrella) and Anarcho Syndicalism

Mythological Socialism (with elements of Free Market Libertarianism based on a model of proprietary communitarianism and meme Stalinism) 

I also support Anarcho Fourth FauxLibetariaCom (which is an Anarchism version of a fusion of the Fourth Political Theory with ‘Libertarian Communism’) and Anarcho Collective Liberalism in rare or specific situations

I want us to either transition to an Inclusive Democracy (with elements of Anarcho Fourth FauxLibetariaCom [which is an Anarchism version of a fusion of the Fourth Political Theory with ‘Libertarian Communism’]) by using a ), Left Libertarian/Libertarian Socialist: (Anarcho Libertarian, [anarchist-anarchistic socialist,Market-oriented left libertarian-Left Wing Free market Anarchist], Mutualist,Agorist) path to it

OR

I want us to transition to an Anarcho Collective Liberal society by first using some combination of Marxism Leninism , Leninism, Luxemburgism, with help from Anarcho Syndicalists , to establish a Mythological Socialism (with elements of Free Market Libertarianism based on a model of proprietary communitarianism and meme Stalinism) society which would then accelerate us into our Anarcho Collective Liberal society

Left Libertarian/Libertarian Socialist: (Anarcho Libertarian, [anarchist-anarchistic socialist,Market-oriented left libertarian-Left Wing Free market Anarchist], Mutualist,Agorist) transitional path to an Inclusive Democracy 

Left Wing Free Market Anarchism would retain the classical liberal ideas of self ownership and free markets.There would be a Gary Chartier type of property system, this type of property system and Benjamin Tucker’s type of property systems in this society

To get to this eventual libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (left lib left wing anarchist goal)  (Inclusive Democracy),  we would need to have revolutionary ultra zealousness using a brand of subsidies and anarchy (as seen below in each paragraph in this socioeconomic section) . 

In this Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition to our libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (Inclusive Democracy) , there will be a strict application of natural rights, self-ownership, and totally unregulated Austrian economics in a stateless society in order to "eat the rich"

Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist would retain the classical liberal ideas of self ownership and free markets.There would be a Gary Chartier type of property system, this type of property system and Benjamin Tucker’s type of property systems in this society

Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist free markets in this transition, taken to their logical conclusions would yield anti capitalist, anti corporatist, anti hierarchical and pro-labor society (i.e libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (Inclusive Democracy). This is because in a truly laissez faire free market, the ability to extract a profit from labor and capital would be negligible.  

In this Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition, to avoid private appropriation and accumulation and free competition causing unequal wealth distribution, the state would be stopped from transferring wealth to the wealthy (which they do by subsidizing organizational centralization in the form of transportation and communication subsidies) by focusing on organizational issues, decentralized manufacturing and the informal and household economies

Black markets and counter economics would be one of the methods used to help threaten the state authority and state capitalist class This is because Capitalism is an exploitative system based on privilege backed by the State agorism

There would be alternate institutions built , piece by piece replacing the statist, capitalist, society. This would be a gradualist approach to dismantling and replacing the state with new forms of social organization.

Somewhere in this transition stage, all 6 monopolies would need to be abolished to go along with this Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition , as outlined here. These monopolies include the Agribusiness monopoly, the infrastructure monopoly, the utility monopoly, the security monopoly, regulatory protectionism, and the healthcare monopoly 

 Using the existing market, producer and consumer cooperatives, small enterprises, mutual aid institutions, do-it-yourself collectives, community gardens, credit unions, etc would be initiated. These wouldn’t tend to directly conflict with Capitalist institutions. The state would also be influenced through pressure groups and lobbying. The main effort would be the creation of alternate institutions. At some point these would become strong enough to challenge the state.

During this Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition , the Capitalist and Statist privileges would be removed from the free markets. There would eventually be voluntary cooperation and exchange. These freed markets would have no corporations or a social hierarchy. The lower class would thus be liberated and all exploitative hierarchies would thus be abolished to create this freed market .These will thus be freed markets (eventually liberating the lower class).

You can have free markets without Capitalism because Capitalism originally never referred to a free market but to a statist class in which capitalists controlled the state with the state intervening on their behalf

The entrepreneur would be the driver of this new freed market instead of the Capitalist and state benefited Capitalist (typically one in the same) .

These elements below also maybe might be part of this Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist stage but if they don’t mesh with the above system, they would serve as an alternative transition method to get to our libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (Inclusive Democracy)  . 

They are based specifically on Benjamin Tucker’s version of Mutualism which Left Wing Free market Anarchism and Carson-Long Mutualism is based on. We can use the label anarchist-anarchistic socialism to describe Benjamin Tucker’s version of Mutualism interchangeably as to distinguish them from the Kevin Carson-Roderick Long variety above but they basically the same thing and same methods

As per this, monopolies (like the patent monopoly, land monopoly etc) would need to be abolished

In this anarchist-anarchistic socialism and maybe Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition, wealth would initially be distributed equally (freed markets naturally equalize wealth).  People would be paid in proportion to how much work they do and that exploitation or usury was taking place if they weren’t working.

Employers would still be able to own companies or workplaces in several different areas as long as the employer pays their employees the full value of their labor. 

In this anarchist-anarchistic socialism and maybe Left Wing Free market Anarchist, Mutualist transition people would get paid in proportion to how much labor they did and that exploitation or usury would take place if they were not doing that labor 

Land titles would not be granted to unused land since an individual should use land continually in order to retain exclusive right to it, as to avoid land monopolies

There would be no state protection of the banking monopoly, i.e. the requirement that one must obtain a charter to engage in the business of banking. 

Wages would be raided by deregulating the banking industry, so that competition in banking would drive down interest rates and stimulate enterprise. This would decrease the proportion of individuals seeking employment and wages would be driven up by competing employees. Tthe same blow that strikes interest down will send wages up

In this market, unregulated banking would cause more money to be available and this would allow proliferation of new businesses that in turn would raise labor demand for labor. People would receive equal amounts of labor would receive equal pay and interests, profits, rents and usury would disappear

So these freed markets would cause more money to be available and in turn this would allow proliferation of new businesses which would then raise demand for labor. Thus this would vindicate the labor theory of value due to equal amounts of labor would receive equal pay. If this didn’t work, it would still accomplish what Left Acceleration accomplishes

The government would not be overthrown by violence. To get rid of the government, widespread education and passive resistance in forms such as refusal to pay taxes, the evasion of jury duty and military service and the non-observance of compulsion etc would be used. Once society reached this state, individual liberty for all would prevail as a matter of course

Each person would reap the fruits of their own labor and no person would be able to live in idleness on an income from capital. This would a great hive to workers who would be prosperous and free individuals to carry on their production and distribution on the cost principle rather than a bureaucratic organization of workers organized into rank and file unions. As an aside, I am pro union . I see unions as intelligent and self-governing socialists because they promise the coming substitution of industrial socialism for usurping legislative mobism

Governments would exist consisting of any belief and in any shape, or form, but the governments would be supported by voluntary taxation and those people who chose not to pay the taxes wouldn’t get the benefits or protection of the voluntary government. Economically, there would be a socialist free-market system where employers would pay their employees the full value of their labor due to the abolition of legally-protected money and land monopolies.

Wage labor and the boss-worker relationship very well might be eliminated or nearly eliminated

These articles expands on what would happen in the Left Wing Free market Anarchist,Mutualist/anarchist -anarchistic socialism part of our transition before we become a libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (Inclusive Democracy)

Eventually as we shift from Left Wing Free market Anarchist,Mutualist/anarchist-anarchistic socialism closer and closer to a libertarian-egalitarian anarchist society (Inclusive Democracy) we may need a decentralized planned economy to coordinate the means of production and distribution to supply and deliver goods and services that are vital throughout our society and the national economy along with shifting from money to labor vouchers and personal credit since as noted below that is what Inclusive Democracy is about.  

Sociofiscal

I conditionally and syncreticly  support certain aspects of green economics (eco fascism too see left auth buff shooter peytn)

 

I want us to either transition to an Inclusive Democracy (with elements of Anarcho Fourth FauxLibetariaCom [which is an Anarchism version of a fusion of the Fourth Political Theory with ‘Libertarian Communism’]) by using a,Left Libertarian/Anarcho Libertarian (Left Wing Laissez Faire freed market, Agorism) transitional path to it

To begin this transition to an eventual Anarcho Collective Liberal society, we would need the type of rage that was done by Left Wing Democratic Revolution protestors in Chile in the late 2010s to enforce revolution and to solidify the creation of a vanguard party. lw

I am generally , pretty much Anti Capitalist . We need to reject and rebel against Capitalism because Capitalism is patriarchal and liberal white supremacist (especially National Capitalism for the latter). In general Capitalism is based off of human greed while my combined fiscal views in this blog are based off of need. We need to destroy the Capitalist state.  

I support reducing weekly working hours by c 4 hours. 

Inclusive Democracy w elements of Libertarian Communism, Marxism Leninism , Anarcho Syndicalism etc https://cnsrrwrpcnbg.blogspot.com/2022/07/parallel-far-left-alt-left.html

People who own and wear expensive looking shoes or huge flat screen TVs or nice cars and who protest or complain about not being able to afford food like ramen noodles for example, shouldn’t protest or advocate for more socialistic economic policies because they can't be poor if they have a pair of expensive looking shoes or similar luxury, consumerist possessions (from right winger who poses as leftist on enough tankie spam showing their true right wing colors)  https://www.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/opmgwg/this_sub_has_a_rightwinger_problem/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

I am against corporate privilege. To end corporate privilege we must eliminate bailouts, subsides, cartelizing regulations along with similar state driven legal, political and fiscal features that enable corporate power   left and left lib

I am ok with intuitive class struggle and class analysis. left and left lib

My views on personal property match Ciudadanos’s views on personal property also big tent

There are predictable winners and losers in society and that being sorted into the those two categories isn’t really a matter of luck or skill. But this is not due to market exchange but a reflection of state committed, threatened and tolerated aggression. As long as the state apparatus exists, it is there for the taking by the wealthy allowing them to further enrich and empower themselves and the politically powerful to acquire more wealth and power. So opposing these ruling classes is to oppose the state and thus takes on a double meaning   left lib

I am all for undermining structural poverty. Poverty is not created or perpetuated by the freed market. It is created and perpetuated by large scaled theft and privileges and constraints. This includes punitive licensing requirements, intellectual property rules (which is extremely petty), land use controls,  building codes etc .These things stop or hamper people from applying their skills and assets effectively. We must stop those things to stop structural poverty bhl blog left lib freedman who was absorbed by bhl and left

I support embracing shared responsibility for challenging economic vulnerabilities. vulnerability .But I believe we need mutual aide (without taxes, regulations and limited medical care) to combat that  (mutual aide feels more natural and positive than one sided aide and it also removes the poor social stigma of those receiving that aide)  left lib and or left

I support humanizing work life. Workplace hierarchies are often disempowering and morally objectionable.. Hierarchical workplaces are more likely given state action. Hierarchies limit the workers’ ability to use their knowledge and skills to respond in a flexible and effective way to production and distribution challenges and to meet customer needs  left lib and left

The ineffectiveness of hierarchies make them less common aspects of worklife, and increase the odds that people would be able to choose better alternatives offering more freedom and dignity (self employment or work partnerships or work co ops), in the absence of privileges that lowered the costs of maintaining said hierarchies and raised the costs of opting out of them (like by making self employment more costly, and thus more risky). State action also redirects wealth to those interested in seeing that they and the people like them rule the workplace; and the state’s union regulations limit the ways unions can challenge workplace hierarchies. mutualist kevin carson left lib bhl gary chartier article    rod long site rod long a more moderate v of kevin carson and former mises writer

I am against subordination and I support using force against physical, economical and psychological threats (within reason). Once we get rid of subordination, all our issues as a society will be fixed   left gary chartier bhl left lib http://liberalaw.blogspot.com/2008/12/left-in-left-libertarian.html

I am against deprivation. Ignoring deprivation is morally objectionable. Is is fine NOT to identify any particular solution for deprivation as morally required or permitted since that’s a separate question. It is fine to defend a wide range of responses to said deprivation consistent with justice/prudence (as long as those responses are effective)  left left lib gary chartier bhl left lib http://liberalaw.blogspot.com/2008/12/left-in-left-libertarian.html

I am concerned for and fight for the economically vulnerable  left left lib http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~dcrocker/Courses/Docs/PUAF698J-Schmidtz.pdf bhl left lib 

I recognize that vulnerable people can’t be left to fend for themselves and that shared responsibility for meeting their needs is morally and practically essential. 

However, I feel that mutual aid arrangements should be used to deal with economic vulnerability as that has been a successful approach in the past  

Such arrangements would be more successful without taxation (people can and will spend their own money on poverty relief, but they’re likely to do so much more efficiently and intelligently than state officials deploying tax revenues), poverty-producing state regulations, and limitations on choice in areas like medical care.  bhl left lib freedman absorbed by fee    david beilto book

I support Nationalized (state) Healthcare like in the UK (until we abolish the government) but it would be ideal if people had to earn it Starship Troopers style (alt left) i.e by doing something for the community or through mutual aide [left lib bhl blog see economic vuln part] (but certainly not a deal breaker)

I support and take on Five Star Movement’s views of welfare (including welfare expansion of public social services which excludes education, environmental protection meant policies in favor of preserving/conserving the environment (which meshes with my left libertarian views)  leftish also big tent

I support expansion of welfare benefits (Anti Neoliberal) for education and environmental naturally, which will happen via an Inclusive Democracy that I outlined in this blog. Until that happens,  I support a fusion of Bull Moose progressive social insurance (with this part of this welfare fusion being removed only if it means abolishing government Capitalism. some lib left who arent hillel-vallentyne), Mutual aide (left lib freedman bhl gary chartier) and a TANF emergency funds co op (which would be different than the current TANF emergency funds model) for welfare benefits for education and the environment  co op meshes with left theme

We need to radically change the role of the state in countries where the Washington Consensus once was prevalent.  This is why I support the nationalization of various industries like the mining, gas, and oil industries. Anti neoliberal ie post neoliberal

I am ok with greater governmental investment in poverty reduction along with an increased role of state intervention in the economy in ways that mesh with my views in this blog anti neoliberal ie postneoliberal

I am ok with free schooling (like Broad Front Chile) only if it can be done without any government involvement and where students have to have a job like selling lemonade at a lemonade stand , selling cookies door to door or similar light ‘kids jobs’ a few hours a week to make up for their free education. Regardless, I don’t think I would be willing much taxes if any at all to fund free schooling unless I got some compensation for doing so. I am against compulsory schooling OR if it could be provided by the state free but where parents had to warn it for their children Starship Troopers style i.e by doing something for the community

In our current static capitalistic society, I am ok with Universal Basic Income either if it has privatized elements to it like Oakland California’s Universal Basic Income AND the UBI recipients are required to give mutual aide (or has some mutual aide element to it).  left lib see econ vuln part)Otherwise I do not support Universal Basic Income. Even if UBI met my conditions above to be ok with it, I would not pay more than 75 dollars a month to fund UBI (could be more if I got financially lucky or less if I became poorer)

IP

I support solidarity and liberation which will lead to a classless society without hierarchy. This is a natural progression. If we need to use Social Patriotism to reach that point of getting to that classless society without a heirarchy, I guess we' need Social Patriotism to do so as a necessary evil. Classes and hierarchies are the main cause of our ills so they must be destroyed

All of the bigoted isms (sexism, racism, heterosexism, nativism, National Chauvinism etc) are clearly repugnant as history has taught us. We have to recognize the state’s role in creating, perpetuating and exploiting these unfair mechanisms while we need to eliminate these state props for prejudices which can make society more free and less unjust toward marginalized people   We should be suspicious of the state and respectful of just possessory claims, use non-aggressive solidaristic action as the appropriate means of dealing with this persistent discrimination. left lib gary becker chicago school sited by bhl as left libt   , freedman absorebed by right lib fee.org

It is ok that some relationships (like close acquaintances and monogamous relationships) are exclusionary to other people. There is no bright line rule regarding permissible and impermissible exclusion. Ideally (though not a deal breaker), when particular intimate sub communities justifiably exclude someone—for the simple reason that they would cease to be the kinds of communities they are if they weren’t strictly (lime limited in size), there is clearly room for the excluded person in the broader community of which they are components. Ideally they would be welcomed/included there When justifiable exclusion occurs, it should ideally not reflect false beliefs about or unreasonable reactions to some group of which the excluded person belongs.  For example, perhaps A acts reasonably in deciding not to marry B because of vital differences in the ways in which B and A understand the nature of marriage, differences that might come to light from B’s membership in a certain group with a traditional view of  marital relationships in a specific way.  But this is different from A’s deciding not to marry B either because of the fact that certain visible members of B’s group hold marital views even if (1) A does not know that B has those views or (2) B credibly denies having those views or (b) A holds to a prejudice against members of B’s group, like believing that cohabitation with a member of this group would make someone like A unclean. From my position, I generally oppose exclusion. I make reasonable exceptions only/roughly when they don’t involve exclusion from large and relatively impersonal communities and relationships and only when they are not rooted in false beliefs or unreasonable reactions. By saying that exclusion is morally objectionable that does not determine what counts as an appropriate solution for morally unjustifiable exclusion. It isn’t helpful or needed to justify exclusion as reasonable or morally appropriate, to be against to the use of physical force to counter exclusion. Though I believe in some rarer cases using physical force to combat exclusion is justifiable if done the right way with an eye for forcing said hierarchal systems to be destroyed quickly. left lib left  gary chartier anton sherwod bhl leftist left lib comparsion

My general views on Identity politics https://www.cpusa.org/article/the-curious-rise-of-white-left-nationalism/

I support social justice big tent also broad enough left left lib

I support grass-roots empowerment (left lib left) and e-democracy, and direct democracy

Politicians need to have a presence in social organizations and be among the people (Broad Front Chile)

I support protecting civil liberties. The state is a foe to our civil liberties and the best way to safeguard our civil liberties is to protect each other’s control over our bodies and justly acquired possessions (Left lib left)  bhl blog on left lib gary chartier

decentralized in blog with inclu demo decentralized etc similar to this new left left lib lew rockwell view referenced by gary chartier in bhl left lib article Decision making should be decentralized. People should be able to fully participate in shaping decisions that are relevant to their lives. But this should only occur via secure pre political rights, all associations should be consensual . Decision makers who use a forcible top down approach are likely to have their decisions tainted by their fallibility due to their self interest motives at the expense of the public.  left libs lefts This is why small sized political units (maybe even radically localized ones pan succession fash creep), are humanizing but decentralization here means localized down to the level of the individual person

The problem with modern Democrats, Liberals and Progressives is they cannot be relied on to defeat Neoliberalism and Capitalism due to their interests more aligning with those systems than with other systems

Our government,  media etc seeks to divide us and pit us against each other to distract us from their uniparty corruption , power and self interests. We need to unite in a Big Tent and bring government back to the people. I support real direct democracy. left lib ans or left

We need to destroy our systems of hierarchies and create a new system with a significant structural change in the alleged and perceived power dynamics that to some people ‘dominate’ American society promote full assimilation ,defeat Neoliberalism and Capitalism, not go right on migration and destroy the white ethnocentric system we have (but in a NON WOKE and NON STATE LIBERAL way) and eventually the lines between all identities including ethnicity-race will be blurred so that there will be no ‘dominant ‘ ethnicity or race, no need for identity politics, no need for Affirmative Action or quotas, no need for ethnic-racial interest groups etc.   Basically a super world where whiteness would be over and those words wouldn’t have the meanings and alleged perceived (ymmv) ‘power’ dynamics attached to them that they allegedly do now.  This will prevent people from ending up like this former liberal on these issues.  If blacks feel anti blackness has insinuated itself in every corner of the American way of life, then wouldn’t they rather blow the whole system up as mentioned above and create a new system that gives everyone a reboot and without identity politics, quotas that is truly color blind etc instead of parity and equity in our existing system which to them is anti black?

I am racially and ethnicially color blind, I don't see race or ethnicity.   psuedo left wing

I am racially and ethnicially color blind, I don't see race or ethnicity. 

I am against Larry Hogan using the National Guard on BIPOC+ protestors in Baltimore years ago. I was between radically centrist and intrusively pretty sympathetic to the 'we the people' message from those those protests and those BLM Baltimore protestors themselves . People who feel oppressed need a voice.  I am glad that BLM protests against Capitalism and the police state since I am anti Capitalist and against the police state BIPOC+ (including BLM) protesting is a positive in that it shows that protesting is still an effective way to influence the government and corporations to do their bidding. Moreover, with groups like BLM protesting, it creates chaos, and as Lord Baelish from Game of Thrones says 'Chaos is a ladder' which can create an opening for us Left wing to overtake the Democrat Party and push REAL left wing policies to be put into law  alt right fash creep fake blm condoning 

I really like take MLK Jr and his views on race ethnicity .One such quote by MLK Jr which is critical of divisivness  "God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race, the creation of a society where every man will respect the dignity and worth of personality", more here.   true left wing

Legality wise, I support gay marriage being legal because I am an Anarcho Libertarian (and free love is a current within Anarcho Libertarianism) I support the Queer Anarchism movement 

I also love the "Be gay, do crime" slogan.  That slogan is anti neoliberal and anti authoritarian and it implies that gays doing criminal and incivil acts may be necassary to obtain equal rights for gays everywhere (since being gay is still criminalized in many places around the world and because Stonewall also a riot and fought for the same thing)

Personally, I prefer if all marriages were abolished for both straight couples and same sex couples since I believe that marriage is a forced social construct Legality wise, I want the US to abolish Civil Marriages, Common Law Marriages and Religious Marriages and make Unorganised Marriage the only legal form of marriage for straight couples and same sex couples etc (Unorganised as in Unorganised Sector in India unorganised). Which is basically more privatized than privatized. Marriage is a forced social construct so less officialness of it the better off we are. 

I am mixed to against gay conversion therapy being banned since I am Libertarian. If we had a direct democracy I’d be all for banning it

Gay people pose extremely very very insignificant issues for people who are anti gay not that anti gay peoples’ opinions matter since their opinions are based on discrimination buff shtr ‘left’ gay view

I am copying this from Marxists.org because I fully agree with it so I want to echo it , I want want the things below to become a reality in our society ASAP: “The struggle against sexual discrimination is linked to the struggle against class society in general for several reasons. The first is that only the abolition of class society can create the material economic basis and cultural drive sufficient to dismantle the model of the monogamous family as the only basic unit of society. By socially carrying out all the tasks that are today assigned to the sphere of the family, and mostly to women (cooking, cleaning, raising children), and by allowing the free development of individuals with access to the best material and cultural resources society can provide, it will be possible to facilitate a process by which interpersonal and family bonds are gradually freed from material necessity and correspond solely to romantic and sexual desires, thereby dissolving the oppressive norms and discriminations that exist at present. The second reason is that the vast majority of LGBT people are workers, youth, temporary workers, unemployed, who experience a double oppression in regard to both their class, in the workplace and living (or surviving) conditions, and their identity or sexual orientation. Joining the struggles against these two forms of oppression is therefore the most natural thing, especially when we consider that the enemy is the same. Moreover, it should not be forgotten that homophobic prejudices are also fostered to divide workers – for example, to make heterosexual workers believe that, while they may be oppressed, they are still superior to the gay person (how satisfying!), in the same way that racist prejudices are nurtured. The role played by the right wing in this process is self-evident. Whoever says that the two fronts of struggle must be separated is playing into the enemy's hands. And often, in the LGBT movement, those people promoting this stance are wealthy individuals who do not experience the material problems faced by LGBT workers and youth. Marxism defends the unity of peoples across all gender and sexual lines in the fight against the oppressive capitalist system. But Queer Theory holds that our gender and sexual identities are a fiction produced by discourses and oppressive power in society: a learned performance. What does this idea mean for the liberation struggle? Is Queer Theory compatible with Marxism? In this talk, recorded at this year's International Marxist University, Yola Kipcak from Der Funke (Austrian section of the IMT) tackles these issues and explains the position of Marxists towards Queer Theory and the struggle against oppression .I support the Queer Theory  https://www.marxist.com/marxism-vs-queer-theory.htm    .If we adopt this, we will no longer have identity politics or bigotry and our world will totally be free and equal. This will prevent people from ending up like this former liberal on these issues. This why I also support Xenofeminism since it is a way to acheive this Xenofeminism uses tech to abolish gender dislodging gender from ‘power’ and allows feminists to use the master’s tools to rebuild life. This also has an-anti naturalist element to it

I am strongly empathetic lean lukewarm provisional support for Gender Accelerationism to reach the post hierarchy goals mentioned in this blog

I am an Anarcha Feminist and supporter of Postfeminism (with Third Wave Individual feminism). We need to destroy the sexist bourgeoisie. If feminism doesn't overcome Neoliberalism and Capitalism and break down the patriarchal system, it is incomplete and futile. We need to change the model of our system for people of all sexes/genders instead of having institutional parity for women. That is much better than parity and liberal feminism which gives women a false sense of equality and cause feminists to get complacent. If we do not  change the model of accumulation, generation of wealth, how we distribute wealth, the value of work and abolish the patriarchal system, we will not have justice and true equality for women

I echo Sheryl Sandberg “We need women at all levels, including the top, to change the dynamic, reshape the conversation, to make sure women's voices are heard and heeded, not overlooked and ignored”

I support voluntary remote work so women can be on maternity leave longer

I am generally anti war  I am an Anti Imperialist  I am a non interventionalist I am Anti Globalization I strongly don’t support Globalism  My views on  China generally match most Australians views on China. It would be ideal for workers in China to have fuller/more control their places of employment. This should be done through cooperative-diplomatic management of their industries in China. The goal would be to increase productivity by treating workers in China with dignity. As long as those workers can guarantee this (or them being more reliable than Capitalism is 'reliable), then I would be open to support this. Basically self management (via individualism and anti authoritianism) I believe the Kibbutz is a model for all workers and employers in China in how work should be in an ideal world (voluntary, satisfaction of work, community, concern competition for prestige and praise from other community members instead of bosses and other corporate big whigs etc). Maybe we should start moving China in that direction so more jobs throughout the world are like the Kibbutz. I support Anarcho Workerism and Autonomism in China

https://lftnwngvyews.blogspot.com/2022/06/int-war-religion-etc.html

bhl left lib right lib unity by gary chartier I support social, peaceful, voluntary cooperation. While I feel that force might justly be used only in response to aggression, peaceful and voluntary cooperation is a moral ideal with implications that go beyond simple non-aggression. I feel that associations of all kinds should be structured in ways that affirm the freedom, dignity, and individuality of all participants. This should and would allow participants the option not only of exit but also of voice—of influencing the associations’ trajectories and exercising as much individual discretion within them as possible. how left libs diff w right libs on this

I egalitarianally support equality of authority, since I feel there is no natural right to rule, that non-consensual authority is presumptively illegitimate and state authority is non-consensual. bhl left lib g chartier unity left lib right lib

I believe that the commitment to the type of moral equality which underlies belief in equality of authority should also entail the rejection of subordination and exclusion on the basis of nationality, gender, race, sexual orientation, workplace status, or other irrelevant characteristics. left lib split w right lib this bhl left lib article

While I feel that people’s decisions to avoid associating with others because of such characteristics should not be interfered with aggressively (bhl left lib g chartier unity left lib right lib), I also feel that such decisions can often still be subjected to moral critique and should be opposed using non-aggressive means. More on non aggressive resistance here left lib split w right lib this bhl left lib article

Migration

In part because it looks like we can’t stop the spread of cultural corporatist imperialism (i.e Globalization) , my solution to our migration issues is this:  

Maybe the borders of all countries should probably be razed together creating an open world. bhl gary chartier left lib position including in rad geek link   Freedom of movement is a right as history has shown and this would fundamentally fix the bigger issue surrounding migration once and for all (no border world/open world is better than open borders in a few or some countries)

This is partly because since I am against North Korea and the Soviet blog forbidding emigration, I have no choice but to be against countries forbidding immigration, even illegal immigration so I don’t look like a hypocrite (also in radgeek article)

The refusing refugee thing can be bad since refusing refugees can be bad for the refugees, as is seen here radgeek

One way to make the open planet thing work would be to have our planet literally become one country (which would also create an open planet by default) and all 7.5 billion people on Earth could even be incentivized to move to a far away random place on Earth (basically every town and city on Earth would be reshuffled to consist entirely of transplants from dozens to hundreds of random countries on Earth with possibly a very few people native to the area living in said towns/cities) 

All cities and towns on Earth would be rebooted and have the very similar demographics as each other city and town on Earth as is the case in existing countries. Think of this as a real life city town randomizer 

This could mean the Earth would be literally gentrified (ending cultural shock forever) as the whole planet would be culturally and demographically similar (as most states and provinces in existing countries are culturally and demographically similar to other states and provinces in those existing countries.

This is the most unique way to unite Earth and all people on Earth, to be united as the people of Earth in the movie Independence Day were united. 

Like in some Speculative Fiction set in The Future, it might the natural order of things that all governments will merge together to create a central authority to govern the entire planet.

Some examples of this concept include All the Troubles of the World, Apocalypse film series, Barbarella, Bicentennial Man, The Fifth Element, The Starship Troopers, Space Truckers, The Omega Code, Z.P.G, Babylon 5, Doctor Who: In "Last of the Time Lords", Firefly, the Alliance, Intergalactic, The Orville, The Outer Limits (1995), seaQuest DSV, Star Trek. See this for more

In real life, the United Nations was a possible choice for fulfilling this one planet country to function before the organization was created in the role that it serves today

In fiction, alien planets most of the time have only one government.

Since I support degrowth, maybe Open Localism can be fused with above systrm

Open localism is an alternative set of social relations and economic organization. It expands upon the ideas of localism and is based on values like diversity, knowledge ecologies and openness. Open localism would not create an enclosed community but it would rather circulate production locally in an open and integrative manner

Open localism is a direct challenge to the acts of closure that occur in terms of identitarian politics. By producing and consuming as much as possible locally, community members enhance their relationships to one another and the surrounding environment.

Basically in the above one planet system, there would be commons (like Lanayru commons in BOTW) with some differences. There would be a local, common and coop production similar to typical commons. However, open localism doesn’t impose rules or regulations that create boundaries ,it goes for more of a cosmopolitan approach

That way we wouldn’t need immigration reform, Amnesty, flying in illegals in the middle of the night etc since the whole world would be open borders . Then eventually I would want the one planet government to be abolished (since I am anti statist ,and anti hierarchy) so our whole planet can be free of hierarchy, government and the state.   left lib anti statist view

If new countries arise from this post government world (even with reborn governments), with border policies that are as tough on migrants as Australia’s migrant policies, I would be more than fine with that.  The whole planet would be a giant gentrified smelting pot by that point so there would be no racist or bigoted element with those tough migrant policies in that situation as there is now in our world and any governments that can arise in an Anarchist stateless world deserves to rule since that would be quite a feat

I support animal welfare in a Humane Watch , Theodore Roosevelt sort of way. Humans are obviously superior to animals (which is saying a lot since animals are aofreaking awesome in their own right). God (or higher power) gave us humans dominion over animals. We should never harm animals in any way shape or form or kill animals (except in self defense).  Hunting is a necessary evil (why can’t we wait til after animals die naturally to get them as food?) until we can replace animal meat with synthetic non animal meat. Since I am Libertarian I against my will ,do not want hunting banned and I hope in heaven, animals who are killed via hunting can forgive me. We shouldn’t give animals equal rights to humans or even any rights at all. 

Just update and improve animal welfare laws to protect animals from unnecessary suffering Gorillas/Great Apes and dolphins should get even more protection from unnecessary suffering than most animals but even they shouldn’t haven’t have equal rights to humans and you can at least somewhat make the case that arguably they shouldn’t really get any rights at all. Humans are also superior to gorillas/great apes and dolphins too. But to give credit where credit is due, dolphins have better communication skills and both dolphins and gorilla/great apes can have iqs near 100.  I am not offended by the AAT programs being held to ethical standards of behavior to those granted to human children and others who are unable to provide formal consent, in order to avoid exploitation of the animals involved in the program. Though I believe the animals in the AAT programs should not be treated the same as humans (but they should not be abused or hurt)

This article also echoes my viewpoints. https://humanewatch.org/speciesism-the-movie-as-dumb-as-it-sounds/ (sounds left wing)

I do pray that all animals after they die, get to live at least one life as a human (or as an intelligent life extraterrestrial of a species I feel is equal to humans on Earth) on Earth or another planet after they die and before they go to the afterlife so they can finally be equal to humans on Earth (i.e so if and when each animal dies they will be reincarnated as a human or intelligent life extraterrestrial of a species I feel is equal to humans at least once before going to heaven and when they do they will be equal to all humans on Earth)

Women (including transgender women), should not go to prison unless they commit a violent crime.  left

We should challenge all violence including violence by police . But their violence and corruption are not not simply a reflection of poor oversight or the presence in police agencies of “a few bad apples” It is instead a reflection of the structural positions of such agencies as guarantors of state power and of the lack of accountability created both by the existence of substantial de facto differences in standards for the use of force by police officers and others and by the monopolistic status of police agencies. left lib bhl blog g chartier

I am more than tolerant on the view that people who are arrested for stealing are not political victims but common criminals I am open minded to the view that people being raised in single parent homes instead of two parent homes is an issue that needs to be discussed until we tear down the patriarchy I believe if Americans had the same type of parenting they had around the mid 20th century our country would be better than it is now (but not ideal since it is only ideal once we tear down the patriarchy). Parents should always know where their children are and what they are doing. It should be harder for young people to hooky from school nowadays. Until we destroy the heiarchal unit, we have adhere to traditional family structure in ways that I want Religious people, Progressives etc should do a better job helping their communities. We can’t rely on police to do it Down and out people shouldn't blame society for their ills but blame themselves for their problems A lot of criminals are poor or have low paying jobs because they didn’t want to go to college to get an education so we have make education more accessible to people (see the fiscal section of this blog for more) People shouldn’t be apathetic to criminals or counterproductive aspirations, they should try to concern themselves or help said criminals . This is the spirit of helping. Bill Cosby pound cake speech sounds left wing  or alt right left auth 

http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/05/philosophers-on-drugs/. left lib

I am against *all prohibitionist campaigns of all sorts and I respect people’s control over their bodies and justly acquired possessions . I feel that aggression-based limits on *all disfavored but voluntary exchanges should be disallowed.   left lib g chartier article  bhl  I disfavor people using Fentanyl, Cocaine, Crack, LSD, Synth Marijuana, Heroin, Special K,, Meth and Purple Haze for rec use

*Though Fentanyl and other hard drugs that are stronger than Heroin should always be illegal.

I am consumerist and anti materialist. I support promoting a transition from a materialistic to a convivial and participatory society. Materialism is bad because it uses up resources to satisfy ever consuming lifestyles ie energy which produces greater waste at the expense of third world countries. Materialism is also unsustainable and we need degrowth to lessen the ecological footprint of things that materialism and consumerism causes by lowering our standards of living. Consumerism and materialism cause climate change and must be combated  This means we should stand against productivism and sustainable development. Sustainable development is a oxymoron; any development that is based on finite growth in a finite and environmentally stressed world is not sustainable .We need to be self sufficient and have material responsibility to fix our growth issues, especially in the southern hemisphere. They in particular need to end their consumption and exploitation of northern resources. This would lead to preserving eco systems from humans in a communal way where humans and nature are as one I echo degrowth’s ideas of a shift to no longer promote lifestyles thay take up high levels of consumption Moreover repairing damage from centuries of imperialism and mutual aide/distributism can help the degrowth movement reach its goals. The world by design or disaster might have to pass through a Great Transformation, i.e ecological economics to incorporate Post development theories like Buen vivir and degrowth if they want to really change something. I support many other degrowth things as well. My views on the environment match the Five Star Movement’s environmental views. I support environmental well being but I like the state to not get involved in the environment, as long as robust legal protections for bodies and justly acquired possessions are in place (that state action isn’t required to protect non human living beings from abuse). State action sadly often causes environmental ills , injures non human living beings and protects polluters. I am not thrilled that people heavily exploit natural resources like forests and then things like wood when the money they get from that sell only goes to a fee and not all who were part of that exploitation. This is further complicated by the hard truth that we have a less than idesl way of organizing society where the few who cut down trees ,extract copper and minerals from our country benefit which hurts most people and the environment at the same time  left and big tent

anti vaxx which is far lw and now far right too:  anti vaxx left wing anti vaxx It's wrong , mean, and defamatory to call anti vaxxers 'pro buggy pandemic' or to want to deny them medical help.  Remember many left wing people are anti vaxxers .   We left wing pro vaxxers should not pride ourselves on our supposed moral superiority to left wing anti vaxxers (or possibly not pride ourselves on our supposed superiority to even right wing anti vaxxers but  very maybe not) because we left wing pro vaxxers might have been anti vaxx like those left wing anti vaxxers (or possibly even anti vaxx like those right wing anti vaxxers but very maybe not) if we had a different life and upbringing. We should debate anti vaxxers as it is a deeply divisive issue, however, the tone of that debate should not cause us left wing pro vaxxers to despise left wing anti vaxxers (and not want to literally bash the snot out of right wing anti vaxxers) no matter how wrong they might be. Fostering such disdain isn’t only unjust, but imprudent too, since a healthy (no pun intended) country requires some semblance of affection among its citizens as opposed to mutual animosities     pro lw anti vaxx even pro rw anti vaxx  based off https://web.archive.org/web/20160717222616/https://thefederalist.com/2015/05/01/4-huge-differences-between-abraham-lincoln-and-modern-liberals/   I apolitically very solidly do not endorse or put my stamp of approval on the authoritarian restrictions China has used during the pandemic on its citizens at all.  I give credit to Piers Corbyn for having balls of steel to protest vaccines at clinics while people were getting vaxxed and for his ‘firey’ words for pro vaxx MPs. He was very bold, passionate and of course 100 percent wrong and obviously reckless in doing his protesting and anti vaxx nonsense. I respect his right to protest at those clinics and I also respect the right of those clinics to get him arrested for harassment. Uk is the land of the magna carta  . I applaud Jeremy Corbyn for not publicly condemning him . I support BLM protesting against pandemic related mandates. Like BLM, I feel that those mandates are systematically/institutionally racist (or have an element of something just short of that) systematically/institutionally raci . BLM are correct on this issue

I support children’s liberation  left lib left

We need to emphasize the degree that the state is not the protector of children but that it is responsible for threats to their freedom including via compulsory schooling and anti child labor laws. This also explains why I support homeschooling   left lib left

We have to become a direct and participatory democracy so the electorate decides on policy initiatives without elected representatives as proxies and which citizens participate individually and directly in political decisions and policies that affect their lives. This will make the need or desire to protest almost non existent as people will cause most of their political needs and wants implemented through direct and participatory democracy. left.  wo saying it about Jan 6 2021 protests