Link

mashkwi:

churdtzu:

mashkwi:

mashkwi:

churdtzu:

mashkwi:

I think it’s funny how many people are saying that fast-food workers are asking for something ridiculous by demanding a higher wage.

I’ve worked in many different fields, fast food being one of them, and let me tell you: working at a fast-food…

People obey the regulations of the government because they live in an imperialist society that has rules and regulations implemented by the government that dictate how business should be handled.

If you want to be an anarchist who doesn’t abide by the laws of the government, you will not be able to do business openly in a country that is ruled by the government. This wage debate wouldn’t apply to criminals who deem themselves above the law anyway.

Hm… so you don’t think the fact that governments threaten people with imprisonment for disobedience has anything to do with why people obey?

I am an anarchist, but that doesn’t mean I don’t abide by the rules of the government. It just means I haven’t seen any basis for their legitimacy. I don’t believe that might makes right, and I don’t see anything else which can possibly make it legitimate. Do you believe in “might makes right”?

I don’t think I believe in “might makes right” but I am a pragmatist. The government is currently in power and we have to do our best to thrive while being under them. To try and use the government to achieve greater comfort as a lower class is more morally commendable than to say these lower class people should just stop being lower class if they want a living wage. 

Hm… so you’re saying that you don’t think might makes right, but you will use force to get what you want as long as it’s convenient?

I know I’m twisting your words a tiny bit. But let me go back to my original question. What is the moral difference between getting the government to threaten businesses into paying a certain amount, and getting your older brother to go to your boss and intimidate him into giving you a certain amount? Remember, I’m asking you for the moral difference. Just because the government has a lot more rules and has been enforcing them for a long time doesn’t make it any more moral.

Link

mashkwi:

mashkwi:

churdtzu:

mashkwi:

I think it’s funny how many people are saying that fast-food workers are asking for something ridiculous by demanding a higher wage.

I’ve worked in many different fields, fast food being one of them, and let me tell you: working at a fast-food…

People obey the regulations of the government because they live in an imperialist society that has rules and regulations implemented by the government that dictate how business should be handled.

If you want to be an anarchist who doesn’t abide by the laws of the government, you will not be able to do business openly in a country that is ruled by the government. This wage debate wouldn’t apply to criminals who deem themselves above the law anyway.

Hm… so you don’t think the fact that governments threaten people with imprisonment for disobedience has anything to do with why people obey?

I am an anarchist, but that doesn’t mean I don’t abide by the rules of the government. It just means I haven’t seen any basis for their legitimacy. I don’t believe that might makes right, and I don’t see anything else which can possibly make it legitimate. Do you believe in “might makes right”?

Text

mashkwi:

churdtzu:

mashkwi:

I think it’s funny how many people are saying that fast-food workers are asking for something ridiculous by demanding a higher wage.

I’ve worked in many different fields, fast food being one of them, and let me tell you: working at a fast-food restaurant is one of the hardest and least rewarding jobs I’ve ever had. The only place I can think of that was even harder was when I worked in an out-bound call center asking for donations (and that had a higher hourly wage…)

I don’t doubt that working in a fast-food restaurants is hard work. I don’t think that asking for a raise is ridiculous. But we’re not talking about a hard worker going into his boss’s office and asking for a raise - if you’re talking about what I think you’re talking about.

What we’re talking about is fast food workers using the threat of violence or punishment from the state to get a raise. This is the moral equivalent of getting your big brother to walk into the boss’s office and intimidating him into agreeing to a higher wage. Can you tell me if you think those actions are morally justified, or tell me how they are not morally equivalent?

I am not aware of fast food workers threatening violence in order to gain a higher wage. I also do not think that your example is equivalent at all to what the striking workers are demanding.

The state already regulates industries, for the workers demanding industry standards to change with the help of the state to be equivalent to your “big brother” example, the “big brother” would have to have already implemented regulations on the “boss” and pretty much have all the powers of the state over the boss for years prior to the event even taking place. 

These people are not individually all asking for a raise. They are asking for the industry’s standard wage to be raised. 

Collective bargaining is not violence and in fact now a right protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Hm… I’m not sure if I explained myself fully. Let me ask you something. Why do people obey the regulations of governments?

Tags: voluntaryism
Photoset

Thomas Sowell on voting on the basis of ethnicity and gender.

(Source: noleaf, via thegoldvein)

Text

mashkwi:

I think it’s funny how many people are saying that fast-food workers are asking for something ridiculous by demanding a higher wage.

I’ve worked in many different fields, fast food being one of them, and let me tell you: working at a fast-food restaurant is one of the hardest and least rewarding jobs I’ve ever had. The only place I can think of that was even harder was when I worked in an out-bound call center asking for donations (and that had a higher hourly wage…)

I don’t doubt that working in a fast-food restaurants is hard work. I don’t think that asking for a raise is ridiculous. But we’re not talking about a hard worker going into his boss’s office and asking for a raise - if you’re talking about what I think you’re talking about.

What we’re talking about is fast food workers using the threat of violence or punishment from the state to get a raise. This is the moral equivalent of getting your big brother to walk into the boss’s office and intimidating him into agreeing to a higher wage. Can you tell me if you think those actions are morally justified, or tell me how they are not morally equivalent?

Photoset

redbloodedamerica:

churdtzu:

redbloodedamerica:

communismkills:

gayfrican:

communismkills:

sluttymountainman:

communismkills:

harbi-doll:

mr-morden-speaks:

gospelofthekingdom:

basicallyfrench:

bookshopmemories:

-teesa-:

9.9.14

Woah

ouchh

OMG.

Only if we exterminated muslims, blew up mosques and sold their women into slavery.

Yeah yeah

Nice to see Stewart making light of terrorism. Wouldn’t expect any better from him.

^^^???????

Hurrrr ISIS and America are basically the same thing because America definitely crucifies Christians lol

nah but americans did lynch black people so idk hurrrrrrr

Lol are you really comparing the two.

What about not appropriating other people’s struggles to make it about yourself? Isn’t that a social justice issue? =D

Only a creep like Jon Liebowitz Stewart would compare Islamic State to the United States to make a political point.  What a jerk.

Terrorism doesn’t really have an official definition, in terms of criminal law. However, a lot of people define it as: the use of violence to achieve a political or ideological goal.

The United States Federal Government is a terrorist organisation.

I’m as big of a critic of the federal government as anyone else, but equating our government to scumbags like Islamic State is no comparison.

Stewart didn’t equate them, just compared them. I didn’t equate them either.

The United States federal government invades and occupies countries, murders innocent civilians, tortures people. What more qualification do you need to say it’s a terrorist organisation? What line needs to be crossed?

Photo
Photoset

redbloodedamerica:

communismkills:

gayfrican:

communismkills:

sluttymountainman:

communismkills:

harbi-doll:

mr-morden-speaks:

gospelofthekingdom:

basicallyfrench:

bookshopmemories:

-teesa-:

9.9.14

Woah

ouchh

OMG.

Only if we exterminated muslims, blew up mosques and sold their women into slavery.

Yeah yeah

Nice to see Stewart making light of terrorism. Wouldn’t expect any better from him.

^^^???????

Hurrrr ISIS and America are basically the same thing because America definitely crucifies Christians lol

nah but americans did lynch black people so idk hurrrrrrr

Lol are you really comparing the two.

What about not appropriating other people’s struggles to make it about yourself? Isn’t that a social justice issue? =D

Only a creep like Jon Liebowitz Stewart would compare Islamic State to the United States to make a political point.  What a jerk.

Terrorism doesn’t really have an official definition, in terms of criminal law. However, a lot of people define it as: the use of violence to achieve a political or ideological goal.

The United States Federal Government is a terrorist organisation.

Photoset

runningrepublican:

Federal government be like

(Source: fynewnewyork.com, via somesocialjusticebullshit)

Link

sonofbaldwin:

The instantaneous defensiveness, that incessant need to find some “other cause,” that instinctive desire to protect Whiteness and eliminate anti-black racism as a cause for anything and everything is so telling.

They’ll try to rationalize it in any way possible, including gaslighting you, not realizing that this pathological and predictable behavior reveals so much more about them than it does about us.

And it’s all intentional. It’s to preserve their innocence, which is to say, their Whiteness.

That’s why it’s crucial for us not to back down or change the subject or accommodate their comforts and illusions in any way.

‪#‎WhenRacistsTellYouWhoTheyAre‬ ‪#‎BelieveThemTheFirstTime‬

#WhenStatistsTellYouWhoTheyAre

To me, this doesn’t just say something about race, but about the culture of state-worship. When you’ve gone to a public school or part-publicly funded school for 10-13 years of your life, and passively received the message that the state is good, from someone whose livelihood depends on the state, when you’ve never experienced a government employee breathing down your neck or trying to intimidate you, it can be very hard to believe someone who is telling you no, not all employees of the state are good, and some of them (many of them) may be less than angels, fallible, human, even power hungry, and even psychopathic.

This is how blind a person can be when they are brainwashed - they give the benefit of the doubt to a police officer they’ve never met, in a situation they didn’t witness, over the testimony of their own friend. What horror, what shame.

If you believe you pay your taxes by choice, if you’re “proud” to pay taxes, and believe that you’re paying for services, good services… when someone, a friend, says to you that no - you are paying for discrimination, you are paying for harassment, and you are paying for violence - that is going to threaten your sense of self, shake your soul and confuse you. Because then, it becomes difficult to ignore the truth: your money is stolen from you and used to screw people over.

(via daniellemertina)