Graham, can I just toss a little thing in here?
I have read through most of the comments & posts between you & Luke, and have seen some clear, compassionate communication from both sides, as well as some rather value-less, aggravating communication from both sides. I've also seen you both acknowledge the foundational difference in thought process and communication style, and the issues that likely caused, which is beautiful.
One thing that I saw Luke bring up multiple times, which was clearly a big part of any emotionality in his responses, and which I saw you only really reply to in this one place:
I thought posting memes was alright. It wasn't directed only at you anyway. It's a meme. That's all.
... which doesn't really address his issue, is this:
You posted an article which was clearly focused on him (in title, if not content [and we all know WAY more people read the titles than the content]), with that meme as the thumbnail. That means that anyone who didn't read the whole post (and the one leading to it, and the comment threads) only saw:
For Anarchists, Ends Do Not Justify Means: Response to @lukestokes
Can you see why that could be seen as simply a personal attack? Especially by someone who is a witness, who is not an authoritarian socialist (what people are referring to when they say "communist"), who does not offer justification for violence or the state, etc.
About 250 people have read this post, but I would be willing to bet that well over 1,000 have seen the title & thumbnail, without any context. That would give them (especially if they don't know Luke at all) a pretty negative impression of him as a person.
I understand clickbait, and I use it myself sometimes (SOOO many people went off on rants about the title/thumbnail of my ancap/ancom/neither post without reading any of the content), but it's a little different when you are naming names in the clickbait.
I didn’t see it as clickbait, but the negative extreme of the “ends justify means” worldview.
I agree that naming Luke was confrontational. I normally don’t do these things unless I think something pretty serious is going on.
Luke and I have a history of not really getting along when it comes to discussing various important issues.
I wrote this post after Luke had already defended Kokesh’s name calling and vitriol (which was directed directly at myself, has been directed at more parties than just myself), whilst at the same time championing “open-mindedness” and non-violent communication.
Putting on a saccharine smile and pretending to be open, while being condescending and dismissive is not an acceptable way to communicate in my view.
Combine that with literally attempting to redefine very clear fundamentals of voluntaryism and I was left feeling pretty angry, to be honest.
If Luke calls himself a Voluntaryist, he should know and accept the basics. If not, I want to let other Voluntaryists know, so they can direct their market choice elsewhere.
That was the impetus for this post.