Hutin's new political profile !

I believe in..

Absolute and enlightened despotism.
A market with no restrictions at all.
Colonialism.
Deserved and non-herited nobility.
Expansionism/Imperialism.
Free Education.
Free Heatlhcare.
Intolerance and sanctions toward religions.
Legalisation of mutual willing violence.
Most of individual liberties.
Militarism.
Nationalism.
Uniculturalism.

I don't believe in ...

Death penalty.
Multiculturalism.
Internationalism.
Pacifism.
Pink alternatives.
Social equality.
Racism.

I'm sick sick of ...

Left idealists , control freaks, and fascist alarmists.

Hutin_Khan wrote:

I believe in..

Absolute and enlightened despotism.
A market with no restrictions at all.
Colonialism.
Deserved and non-herited nobility.
Expansionism/Imperialism.
Free Education.
Free Heatlhcare.
Intolerance toward religions.
Legalisation of mutual willing violence.
Most of individual liberties.
Militarism.
Nationalism.
Uniculturalism.

I don't believe in ...

Death penalty.
Multiculturalism.
Internationalism.
Pacifism.
Pink alternatives.
Social equality.
Racism.

I'm sick sick of ...

Left idealists , control freaks, and fascist alarmists.

Trolling?

Not at all. Liche, Lilith and Zealot can testify.

Hutin wrote:

Not at all. Liche, Lilith and Zealot can testify.

Never thought I'd see a 21st-century monarchist.

---

How can you maintain a completely free market, yet wish to have free education and healthcare for all? Under a completely free market, there will be competing businesses in each of these two industries, but they certainly can't offer those services for free. Either one of two things must be done:

A.) You must regulate the market by socializing these two industries. The problem, then, is that you won't have a truly free market.

B.) You let the market do what it does, let various companies arise in these two industries - since there will always be a market for them - and do not regulate them. The problem, then, would be that you can't have free education and healthcare for all; it will be education and healthcare based on prices set by the marketplace.

So how can you consolidate these two?

---

I take issue with a lot more things than the above point, but I figured that it would be the only one I could argue against save for getting into an argument over pathos.

World Wide Web, it's not the first time someone confronts Hutin with this predicament (I have done in MSN) and his answer simply tends to be that he favours the idea that people should have the illusion of welfare while in reality they're simply getting ripped off.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

World Wide Web, it's not the first time someone confronts Hutin with this predicament (I have done in MSN) and his answer simply tends to be that he favours the idea that people should have the illusion of welfare while in reality they're simply getting ripped off.

I see.

Chomsky called those "necessary illusions".

Quote :

How can you maintain a completely free market, yet wish to have free education and healthcare for all? Under a completely free market, there will be competing businesses in each of these two industries, but they certainly can't offer those services for free. Either one of two things must be done:
A.) You must regulate the market by socializing these two industries. The problem, then, is that you won't have a truly free market.
B.) You let the market do what it does, let various companies arise in these two industries - since there will always be a market for them - and do not regulate them. The problem, then, would be that you can't have free education and healthcare for all; it will be education and healthcare based on prices set by the marketplace.

There is a third way. Never heard about colonial state compagnies, colonial bonds and state colonial stocks ? Never heard about state-run business such as banks and groceries ? Those institutions could compete with and crush all the other compagnies, and expand outside , bringing money to the motherland. Sounds absurd ? It can be done.

Quote :

World Wide Web, it's not the first time someone confronts Hutin with this predicament (I have done in MSN)

I would not be prouds of this, sir, you can take over me for one reason only ; your superior writing skills.

Hutin wrote:

There is a third way. Never heard about colonial state compagnies, colonial bonds and state colonial stocks ? Never heard about state-run business such as banks and groceries ? Those institutions could compete with and crush all the other compagnies, and expand outside , bringing money to the motherland. Sounds absurd ? It can be done.

Wouldnt that leave the people in that colony in poverty/poorness?

Hutin wrote:

I would not be prouds of this, sir, you can take over me for one reason only ; your superior writing skills.

I'm not proud or ashamed. I don't see it as a victory. I'm simply demonstrating which your beliefs are.

CoolKidX wrote:

Wouldnt that leave the people in that colony in poverty/poorness?

What do you think the whole 1st world-3rd world relationship is about?

Is this an extremely bad joke?

Wakizashi wrote:

Is this an extremely bad joke?

No, he seriously has those political beliefs.

Then why isn't he in a Siberian gulag?

Wakizashi wrote:

Then why isn't he in a Siberian gulag?

Because they don't exist anymore? And if they do they just exist for those oposing the Russian government.

Why isn't he in the siberian Gulag here, because here we discuss all political perspectives without censorship.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Wakizashi wrote:

Then why isn't he in a Siberian gulag?

Because they don't exist anymore? And if they do they just exist for those oposing the Russian government.

Why isn't he in the siberian Gulag here, because here we discuss all political perspectives without censorship.

Which is a good thing yay!

how I envy this, but I am a leftard pussy

I believe in a constitutional Socialist monarchy. (with a prime minister)

Liche wrote:

how I envy this, but I am a leftard pussy

I believe in a constitutional Socialist monarchy. (with a prime minister)

No offense, but I'm extremely confused.

hahaha

you should be.

Shoobiedoobiedoo wrote:

No offense, but I'm extremely confused.

You shouldn't be, basically Liche doesn't fully grasp what socialism stands for and somehow thinks he can apply parlamentary monarchy to it...

Lich, don't be shy to be an opportunistic elitist!

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Lich, don't be shy to be an opportunistic elitist!

Ok, *bows to King Hutin of France*

I like absolute monarchy, it is very efficient.

Also efficient, is Confederacy, but not Anarchy or Libertarianism.

Liberalism and Socialism are also fairly well working.

Quote :

I like absolute monarchy, it is very efficient.

Also efficient, is Confederacy, but not Anarchy or Libertarianism.

Liberalism and Socialism are also fairly well working.

Liche wrote:

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Lich, don't be shy to be an opportunistic elitist!

Ok, *bows to King Hutin of France*

I like absolute monarchy, it is very efficient.

Also efficient, is Confederacy, but not Anarchy or Libertarianism.

Liberalism and Socialism are also fairly well working.

Efficient =/= Good.

Sure, Monarchies are successful at accumulating vast amounts of Capital. But so is Capitalism - heck, it's in the name. In fact, so were slave societies. They were wildly efficient; doesn't mean that they were good, in any kind of ethical sense.

But Socialism and Monarchism are completely incompatable. You can't have workers' control over the means of production if there is a KING.

From Anarchism to Absolute Monarchism... quite a full circle you've traveled, eh?

WeiWuWei wrote:

From Anarchism to Absolute Monarchism... quite a full circle you've traveled, eh?

Don't tell him that or he'll begin with a "polical originality spree" again.

Abd I'm glad you mentioned this "it's in the name" I couldn't agree more. There are some that are known as Monarchy, others known as Bourgeoisie and, the State, it is the one who chooses the name sometimes. Some call themselves democracy, others like the catchy "National Socialism". But no one has caused more ideological damage than those that chose "Communist Party of X land" or "People's Republic of Y".