RE: AOC is self destructing

[roleerob]

Okay @cyberdemon531, you appear interested in having our “conversation” continue. While I will make no pretense to having the enthusiasm for it you appear to have, I am willing to go forward. For now …

Rules of Engagement:

1. Civil and respectful at all times. You’ve already “danced on the line” in what you’ve written to me prior to this. Anything remotely close to how you’ve chosen to express yourself elsewhere on this post and this “conversation” will be over.
2. Setting expectations on time commitment, I am very unlikely to match the time you appear to have to “engage.” Meaning there will likely be delays at times, in hearing back from me. I will always follow through, however, and my commitment is you will always know what to expect. Specifically, I will let you know, if I decide I am no longer willing to “engage” … And the reasons for my decision … Otherwise, I will be getting back to you …

Simple. Straightforward. At least to me. I will assume so for you as well, unless I hear otherwise.

While I may in the future chose to come back and comment more specifically on any of these many topics you’ve raised, that is not where I want to begin myself. You elected to let pass my reference to your presumed “moral superiority” in expressing yourself the way that you have thus far. You’ve not challenged this, so either you missed it or you accept it as true. Until you indicate otherwise, I will assume the latter to be true, since it is unmistakably clear (to me) from your manner of communicating.

Questions:

1. My position is what we think is based upon the foundation of what we believe, i.e. our system of belief. Do you agree? If so, how would you describe your system of belief?
2. What is the experience base from which you have learned / derived all that you have chosen to say thus far?
3. Your Steem profile references being an “anarchist communist” … In your view, how accurately does this associated Wikipedia article describe your political philosophy?

That’s it for now. Some of our extended family is getting together this afternoon, so it is unlikely I will have time to write more today. If I do, it will be later tonight ...

Comments

[cyberdemon531]

In response to your rules:

1. I am civil until the person I talk to proves themselves to be irrational. I was civil with @meno until he started defending concentration camps and even going as far as promoting and upvoting nazi eugenics posts. If you dont do that (which it seems like you arent) then we are good to go. Same with the other guy whose name I can't remember because he's irrelevant.
2. Time is not a concern for me, take as long as you like.

I 100% believe I am morally superior to people who advocate for concentration camps, eugenics, and libel. If you want to see human suffering and you strategically position yourself to enable it, you are garbage. I don't believe that applies to you, just the others.

Answers to your Questions:

1. 
   My foundation of belief is that all human life is precious and that human suffering shouldn't exist. It doesn't need to from a scarcity standpoint, and thus my actions fight for redistribution of stolen wealth by the elite class. Furthermore, I am a staunch anti-racist and believe all people regardless of who or what they are should be treated based on their actions, as stated prior.Actions speak louder than words, I don't much care about what people claim to belive, I care about how their actions compare to those beliefs. Like, for example, @meno claimed to be a peace-loving liberal. However, he published lies about someone who is promoting what he claims to want. He then upvoted someone who posted nazi-style eugenics. I consider beliefs without congruent actions to be "virtue signalling" and useless.
2. My experience base is community organizing, local political meetings, national discourse, research, historical studies, and running a livestream where I discuss it for several hours a day. I am very involved on all scenes, or at least as many as I can.
3. I am not going to read the entire article, but rather outline what I belief more directly. We need an egalitarian society as soon as possible, we need to usurp the levers of power in the united states and across the world to use those levers for justice and for good, and slowly dissolve the need for federal government over the course of a 100 Year Plan by encouraging direct democracy in our economy via worker-collectives and others. The rise of automation and the drastic reduction in required labor is a core requirement.

[roleerob]

You certainly appear to keep up a remarkably consistent and quick response rate. And ... You have responded well ...

"Credit where credit is due" @cyberdemon531. This is just a quick note to let you know that means something to me.

I will be back ...

Posted using Partiko Android