>>Chuck sez: "Bureaucrash is a group run by Ayn Rand, pro-capitalist wingnuts"

Actually, I think Ayn Rand is kind'a silly myself. I prefer to think of myself as an F.A. Hayek pro-capitalist wingnut; or perhaps a Ludwig von Mises pro-capitalist wingnut...but without so much respect for the state.

>>Vlad sez: "Oh capitalist-making-fun, perhaps youre not right wing- without a state these designations lose meaning -but your promoted website has that flavor"

I don't think you got a very good taste: I think we have your site matched one-for-one with the anti-Bush posts right now; and there's way more discussion about ending the oppressive drug war, and supporting free speech than there is here. (And our site's a lot less "bitter", to stick with the analogy.)

>>Chuck sez: "one of these days some of our people will notice them at some protest and will beat the holy crap out of them."

...see what I mean?

That's the thing about democracy-worshipers: They just love to see the big group beat up on the little group.

>>Vlad sez: "the fact remains that you wish to pursue an economic system based on exploitation and brutality somehow imagining that you will be at the top of the hierarchy to recieve the fruits of others toil and suffering"

Well, actually that's not what I wish to do at all. After Chuck's comment (and your concurrence), I don't know whether you guys are even open-minded enough to listen to another point-of-view, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. (Maybe you’re not as intolerant as you seem):

What I really want is an economic system that recognizes the fact that people have their own beliefs and values, which may be different from my own; and that allows them the freedom to act on them. The non-capitalist anarchist systems, as well as the social democratic systems ignore this fact; which is why you guys see "free trade" as exploitative.

The way it seems to me: I have different values than other people, and different skills as well. I'm really bad at making my own clothing, for instance. (I could show you pictures.) I'm pretty good at carpentry & woodworking, though; and I sort'a enjoy it.

In fact, I enjoy it so much that I've got more crap sitting around here made out of wood than you would believe! I don't need any more, that's for sure; but I'll keep making things because I know there's someone out there who does need them -- who values them more highly than I do. (“Exploiter!” they scream.)

If I could find someone who wants carpentry done, and who has some nice clothing that (s)he doesn't want as much (ie, doesn't "value" as much) as (s)he wants the carpentry done, we'd be all set! We could trade with each other, and -- here's the important part -- we'd both come out ahead. Neither one of us has been "exploited" because we have different values -- I value what I received more than what I gave up; and (s)he valued what (s)he received more than what (s)he gave up. Pretty cool, huh?

The reason I'm an (anarcho)capitalist is because none of the other economic systems recognize this; especially not the systems that you guys are talking about. "Democratization" imposes the values of the majority upon everyone else in the group. It destroys diversity in favor of homogenization (ie, "equality").

To say that free-markets & property rights are exploitative is to either ignore the diversity of values in our society, or to simply be intolerant of them. Sure, if we all had the same values, then there would be no way for two people to trade property fairly: Somebody would always wind up with something (s)he didn't want as much as what (s)he gave up! If this were the case, I'd be on your side. But it's not.

>>Technically, syndicalism is free market although we prefer the term Fair Market in order to distance ourselves from the negative spin wrought by neo-liberalism and other capitalist tool of imperialism.<<

I’m totally with you there. I hate the fact that the term “free-market” has been co-opted into the “Republican” (fascist neo-conservative) doublespeak. Think about it: What the fuck is a “free trade agreement”?! It’s a contradiction in terms! “Free” means there are no rules governing trade! If there are rules & regulations (as there are – 527 pages of them to be exact – in the “Free” trade area of the Americas agreement) then it’s not “free trade”! Its regulated trade; and the way it’s practiced by the Republican/neo-con crowd, its Mercantilism (not capitalism).

A Free Market means “hands off” – no government intervention; no “corporate licenses” and “limited liability protections” for sale (and therefore no corporations); no tariffs, or barriers, or subsidies that make it impossible for Mexican farmers to compete in our markets. It’s a far-cry from the exploitative & brutal hierarchy that you’ve come to believe it is. (Of course, as pervasive as the Republican doublespeak is in our culture, it’s easy to see why you’ve been mislead.)

Open your mind a little bit. You can only benefit from looking at things from another point-of-view. (Heck, you might even find a cure for syndicalism.)

As for the Progressives Against Progress: That's our preferred way of getting people to question their ideas. Chuck, you can stick with kicking peoples' asses if you want to.

sh(A)ne