Wednesday, July 18, 2007

July 18_2007 - I Think Reformists Are Wrong


I was surprised to read Glen Allport's column on Strike the Root yesterday wherein he lays out all the ways that political parties, special interest groups, ideologues, mercantilists, and the rest of the running dogs of statism, screw up liberal democratic governance, and then goes on to endorse the candidacy of a statist politician in an election in order to "fix" it all! Go figure? The real problem with state governance is the state itself; who runs it and how hardly matters. That has been my conclusion based on my own historical analysis, anyhow. It really surprised me that the STR publisher would post such an article given STR's stated position on such matters.

Reformism is a waste of time. In the end, when the bourgeoisie finally conclude that they can't dominate the political process any longer, they will undoubtedly turn toward fascism to maintain control and retain their privileges. That is what they've always done in the past.

4 comments:

zrated said...

of course, reformism is silly, but i actually support voting for paul because his victory will ensure that hundreds of thousands of iraqis, iranians and afganis will survive. plus, if i'm going to have a boot on my throat, i'd rather it be his than some satan wannabe like clinton of mussolini, i mean giuliani. if given the choice, i will actively support less violence as opposed to more. i don't think that voting is particularly important, but i also don't believe in all this rhetoric that voting legitimizes this or that. i'll vote as a defense mechanism and still refuse to play by the "rules". i also think that dr. paul's campaign will work wonders for the general libertarian movement and that's important to me.

The Anarchist Flamethrower said...

"Victory"? Ron Paul isn't even gonna get the nomination. Or probably even be in the so-called debates.

zrated said...

i never said he would be victorious, only that his victory would ensure...

there are only two options, victory or defeat. his victory will ensure that lives are spared, his loss will not, of course.

if you're so sure he won't get the nomination (and i would never bet that he will), go over to the intrade prediction market and short all the contracts you can afford. the fact is that neither you nor i know what's going to happen and defeatism never got anyone anywhere.

The Anarchist Flamethrower said...

Even if by some miracle Paul got the GOP nomination and then went on to defeat HRC, what then? Paul would end the war, which would be great, but beyond that he's just a statist like all the rest of 'em. Maybe a "kinder and gentler" statist perhaps, who wouldn't press the boot down on our necks so hard. I don't oppose Paul but he is a real long shot with a very small pay-off should he win, and it's not worth the time or effort to get deeply involved in statist GOP/Dem politics, IMHO.