Thank you for again missing what has explicitly been stated in exchange for some weird pop-culture interpretation of Roman law.
like you keep calling me a fascist,
You bootlick for North Korea. There’s not much else you could be except a fascist. Unless you’d like to explain how Juche totally isn’t fascism for the class?
despite you being the one trying to act like it was just a minor footnote that this was still an oligarchic slave state full of incredible violence.
That was never denied, dipshit, and is entirely apart from the point being made. Sorry that you’re illiterate.
that was never denied, [insult] and is entirely apart from the point
you admit it was an oligarchic slave state full of violence but then go on to claim this doesn’t matter to your argument that it demonstrates ‘non-hierarchical community enforcement.’
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything. the violence and oligarchy are kind of the point.
i’m generally not interested in demonizing US-designated enemies when US imperialism is the primary issue. that don’t mean i endorse every part of those states, nor is it bootlicking. bootlicking would be romanticizing tyranny and defending policing as an institution.
you admit it was an oligarchic slave state full of violence but then go on to claim this doesn’t matter to your argument that it demonstrates ’non-hierarchical community enforcement.’ a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
So your position is, then, that no part of Roman society was capable of being non-hierarchical because of the hierarchical nature of the state, and that, thus implied by said argument, no state, being innately hierarchical institutions, can demonstrate any aspect of non-hierarchical function in the societies they rule over?
Stunningly moronic and self-defeating. But I presume you’ll carve out all sorts of exceptions for your favorite genocidal police states that you constantly jerk off your murder-boner for.
i’m generally not interested in demonizing US-designated enemies when US imperialism is the primary issue.
No, but you are interested in praising them and engaging in atrocity denial. Tell us again how anarchism is one of the major contributors to Juche ideology. Or would you like me to quote you? I’m sure I can find it with a quick search.
that don’t mean i endorse every part of those states, nor is it bootlicking.
“It’s not bootlicking when I simp for a totalitarian police state, because US bad!”
Boot leather must taste delicious for you to be so eager and consistent in seeking it out.
bootlicking would be romanticizing tyranny and defending policing as an institution.
I love the part where you romanticize “AES” police states and defend them, and then deny it. But fascists like you have never believed that words have to mean anything.
I had to go and search for what you’ve got stuck in your craw about me.
I was saying that a core principle juche expresses (each revolution must be carried out by its own people, not directed by foreign powers) has genuine resonance with anarchist anti-imperialism, and that this principle has an anarchist lineage even if dprk juche as practiced is relatively inconsistent beyond that. i was citing shin chae-ho’s juche framework; he was literally warning other koreans about accepting help from even well-meaning foreign revolutionary movements.
So your position is … that no part of Roman society was capable of being non-hierarchical because of the hierarchical nature of the state
no, my point was that you’re romanticizing the conditions of ‘non-heirarchical’ tyranny by a bunch of slavers and patriarchs
thus implied by said argument, no state, being innately hierarchical institutions, can demonstrate any aspect of non-hierarchical function in the societies they rule over?
i did not say hierarchical states can’t contain horizontal practices.
i’m saying that horizontal practices among people constituted by their shared dominance over an excluded class aren’t evidence of non-hierarchical organization in any meaningful sense. they’re evidence that ruling classes can coordinate horizontally, which has never been in dispute.
Stunningly moronic and self-defeating. But I presume you’ll carve out all sorts of exceptions for your favorite genocidal police states that you constantly jerk off your murder-boner for.
gross, sexist insult. wish i could say it was surprising, but i am talking to the nazi dog
I was saying that a core principle juche expresses (each revolution must be carried out by its own people, not directed by foreign powers) has genuine resonance with anarchist anti-imperialism, and that this principle has an anarchist lineage even if dprk juche as practiced is relatively inconsistent beyond that
This you, buddy?
For example, the primary point of Juche is that each revolution must be carried out by its own people, rather than by a foreign power attempting to dominate the younger revolution towards its own interests. I would agree with this, and fun fact, Juche was actually coined as a term by Korean anarchists, and anarchists are still one of the leftist tendencies present in the DPRK to this day.
The PEOPLE’S ethnonationalism! The PEOPLE’S anarchist tendency of the Totalitarian Police State!
Fucking fascist.
no, my point was that you’re romanticizing the conditions of ’non-heirarchical’ tyranny by a bunch of slavers and patriarchs
“Romanticization is when you point out that formal policing institutions aren’t necessary for enforcement of norms and laws.”
lmao.
i did not say hierarchical states can’t contain horizontal practices.
i’m saying that horizontal practices among people constituted by their shared dominance over an excluded class aren’t evidence of non-hierarchical organization in any meaningful sense. they’re evidence that ruling classes can coordinate horizontally, which has never been in dispute.
All states involve excluded classes by their very definition, so yes, you are absolutely saying what I accused you of. Thank you for demonstrating.
gross, sexist insult. wish i could say it was surprising, but i am talking to the nazi dog
“Sexism is when masturbation”?
Yikes. I didn’t realize that you were simping for sex-negativity too. You’re really checking off the full list for being a reactionary fascist bootlicker, aren’t you?
you just quoted back me saying the same thing as if it was some kind of gotcha? I really don’t get what your point is supposed to be, other than barking. are you saying that you think that revolutions should be getting intervened in? it’s like the nazi dog sees red anytime a state enemy is mentioned.
re: your roman meltdown
I specifically said that oligarchs coordinating amongst themselves does not mean it’s a non-hierarchical society. i didn’t say that ‘no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying as much. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
you’re just making shit up and attacking straw targets at this point. there’s no reason to romanticize the roman empire when the ruling class coordinating to maintain social control is not at all uncommon, slaveholders being peers is in fact very common and not particularly relevant to “a core piece of anarchist ideology [enforcement of laws and norms without formal policing forces]”
re: your sexism
i didn’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals, but you’re stuck in attack dog mode and are calling me a fascist reactionary because i find your behavior gross.
i have no problem with sex. i find you disgusting and i don’t appreciate you making references to my genitals, especially when it’s not relevant and wasn’t invited.
you just quoted back me saying the same thing as if it was some kind of gotcha? I really don’t get what your point is supposed to be, other than barking.
Absolutely stunning that you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
I specifically said that oligarchs coordinating amongst themselves does not mean it’s a non-hierarchical society.
Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
i didn’t say that ’no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying that. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
This you, or did you forget what you said already?
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
you’re just making shit up and attacking straw targets at this point.
The projection here is impressive.
there’s no reason to romanticize the roman empire
Me: “Even pre-modern polities which are hierarchical, like the Roman Republic, with an explicit note excluding the Roman Empire in the explanation which you clearly did not read, or could not read because it used too many words, demonstrate that the copaganda claim of policing forces being necessary are bunk.”
You: “Stop romanticizing the Roman Empire!”
i didn’t ask for sexual or gendered comments
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
i have no problem with sex, i find you disgusting and i don’t appreciate you making references to my genitals when it’s not relevant and wasn’t invited.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
and anarchists are still one of the leftist tendencies present in the DPRK to this day.
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
An unusual point of unity between an ancient polity noted for its sense of hierarchy, and hierarchy-averse modern anarchist ideology!
you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
i didn’t say that ’no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying that. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that.
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
Thank you for again missing what has explicitly been stated in exchange for some weird pop-culture interpretation of Roman law.
You bootlick for North Korea. There’s not much else you could be except a fascist. Unless you’d like to explain how Juche totally isn’t fascism for the class?
That was never denied, dipshit, and is entirely apart from the point being made. Sorry that you’re illiterate.
you admit it was an oligarchic slave state full of violence but then go on to claim this doesn’t matter to your argument that it demonstrates ‘non-hierarchical community enforcement.’ a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything. the violence and oligarchy are kind of the point.
i’m generally not interested in demonizing US-designated enemies when US imperialism is the primary issue. that don’t mean i endorse every part of those states, nor is it bootlicking. bootlicking would be romanticizing tyranny and defending policing as an institution.
So your position is, then, that no part of Roman society was capable of being non-hierarchical because of the hierarchical nature of the state, and that, thus implied by said argument, no state, being innately hierarchical institutions, can demonstrate any aspect of non-hierarchical function in the societies they rule over?
Stunningly moronic and self-defeating. But I presume you’ll carve out all sorts of exceptions for your favorite genocidal police states that you constantly jerk off your murder-boner for.
No, but you are interested in praising them and engaging in atrocity denial. Tell us again how anarchism is one of the major contributors to Juche ideology. Or would you like me to quote you? I’m sure I can find it with a quick search.
“It’s not bootlicking when I simp for a totalitarian police state, because US bad!”
Boot leather must taste delicious for you to be so eager and consistent in seeking it out.
I love the part where you romanticize “AES” police states and defend them, and then deny it. But fascists like you have never believed that words have to mean anything.
I had to go and search for what you’ve got stuck in your craw about me.
I was saying that a core principle juche expresses (each revolution must be carried out by its own people, not directed by foreign powers) has genuine resonance with anarchist anti-imperialism, and that this principle has an anarchist lineage even if dprk juche as practiced is relatively inconsistent beyond that. i was citing shin chae-ho’s juche framework; he was literally warning other koreans about accepting help from even well-meaning foreign revolutionary movements.
no, my point was that you’re romanticizing the conditions of ‘non-heirarchical’ tyranny by a bunch of slavers and patriarchs
i did not say hierarchical states can’t contain horizontal practices.
i’m saying that horizontal practices among people constituted by their shared dominance over an excluded class aren’t evidence of non-hierarchical organization in any meaningful sense. they’re evidence that ruling classes can coordinate horizontally, which has never been in dispute.
gross, sexist insult. wish i could say it was surprising, but i am talking to the nazi dog
This you, buddy?
The PEOPLE’S ethnonationalism! The PEOPLE’S anarchist tendency of the Totalitarian Police State!
Fucking fascist.
“Romanticization is when you point out that formal policing institutions aren’t necessary for enforcement of norms and laws.”
lmao.
All states involve excluded classes by their very definition, so yes, you are absolutely saying what I accused you of. Thank you for demonstrating.
“Sexism is when masturbation”?
Yikes. I didn’t realize that you were simping for sex-negativity too. You’re really checking off the full list for being a reactionary fascist bootlicker, aren’t you?
you just quoted back me saying the same thing as if it was some kind of gotcha? I really don’t get what your point is supposed to be, other than barking. are you saying that you think that revolutions should be getting intervened in? it’s like the nazi dog sees red anytime a state enemy is mentioned.
re: your roman meltdown
I specifically said that oligarchs coordinating amongst themselves does not mean it’s a non-hierarchical society. i didn’t say that ‘no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying as much. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
you’re just making shit up and attacking straw targets at this point. there’s no reason to romanticize the roman empire when the ruling class coordinating to maintain social control is not at all uncommon, slaveholders being peers is in fact very common and not particularly relevant to “a core piece of anarchist ideology [enforcement of laws and norms without formal policing forces]”
re: your sexism
i didn’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals, but you’re stuck in attack dog mode and are calling me a fascist reactionary because i find your behavior gross.
i have no problem with sex. i find you disgusting and i don’t appreciate you making references to my genitals, especially when it’s not relevant and wasn’t invited.
darvo dog strikes again
Absolutely stunning that you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
This you, or did you forget what you said already?
The projection here is impressive.
Me: “Even pre-modern polities which are hierarchical, like the Roman Republic, with an explicit note excluding the Roman Empire in the explanation which you clearly did not read, or could not read because it used too many words, demonstrate that the copaganda claim of policing forces being necessary are bunk.”
You: “Stop romanticizing the Roman Empire!”
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.