… Most collectivists find comfort in such self-contradictory sentiments as Pierre Proudhon’s “property is theft,” and George Bernard Shaw’s “property is organized robbery.” Were their thinking more focused, they would have become aware that for “theft” and “robbery” to occur, there must be an owner to be despoiled. From whom do they imagine such property to have been taken, and upon what basis did these phantom prior owners base their claims? If the answer is some amorphous “mankind,” how is control exercised by an entire species, and what are the boundaries by which such interests are defined? Is it not clear that these very statements negate the legitimacy of the alleged earlier claimants? If it is an act of “theft” for a specific individual to assert a claim of ownership over a precise item of property against an undefined “owner,” how does a “claim”—and made by whom?— advanced on behalf of a nonexistent collective over undefined property, rise to a level worthy of respect? Such is the confused and wholly abstract base upon which collectivist thought rests.

Butler Shaffer, Boundaries of Order: Private Property as a Social System (2009), pp.251-252
(via eltigrechico)

Me. If you take something that I could previously use, and make it your own entirely, it was me you took it from. And my sister. And my father and my mother, my uncles, my aunts, all my extended family, indeed, all mankind. “Mankind” as an answer is not “amorphous,” it didn’t get taken from some spirit of mankind, it got taken from me, and also from everybody else. If you deny group claims to property, that swings directly back – if I take a cheese burger at McDonalds, from whom do you imagine that property was taken? The stock holders of McDonalds are also a group, does that automatically invalidate their every claim?

The message appealed not least to the idealism of a younger generation, not old enough to have fought in the war, but not too young to have experienced at first hand little but crisis, conflict, and national decline. Many from this generation, born between about 1900 and 1910, coming from middle-class families, no longer rooted in the monarchical tradition of the pre-war years, outrightly rejecting socialism and Communism, but alienated by the political, economic, social, and ideological strife of the Weimar era, were on the search for something new.96 Laden with all the emotive baggage that belonged to the German notions of ‘Volk’ (ethnic people) and ‘Gemeinschaff (community), the aim of a ‘national community’ which would overcome class divisions seemed a highly positive one.97 That the notion of ‘national community’ gained its definition by those it excluded from it, and that social harmony was to be established through racial purity and homogeneity, was taken for granted if not explicitly lauded.

Ian Kershaw, Hitler: 1889-1936

how does the call of the middle class 4chanite with time to spend idly on the computer go again? “too young to explore the world, too old to explore the galaxy”?

(via the-grey-tribe)

But just right to explore dank memes

I’m like, dude, during your deployments I was a single parent — he met our first child when he was just a few months, and left again when our second was super-young — and I didn’t consider that anything special.

Donald Trump Is Destroying My Marriage (via the-grey-tribe)

… “Woman who divorced quite a lot of men’s most recent divorce was from a Republican man” is not exactly the kind of opening story that encouraged me to read the rest of the article, I must admit.

Actually, my feeling is not dissimilar to the way an atheist feels about theology. The whole enterprise is founded on some very dubious premises, but enough smart people have put serious effort into it that they’ve generated some good thinking along the way, more or less by accident.

Bounty hunters are polite even to the fugitives who, after all, are also their customers, and sadly, bounty hunters rely a lot on repeat business. One customer of a firm owned by the same family that runs the one Dennis works for told him proudly, “My family and I have been coming to Frank’s Bail Bonds for three generations.”

(via voxette-vk)

Yeah I stumbled over that paragraph too, that was not a joyful thing to read.

I was going to reference the quote, “Do not make monuments to the living, for they can still disgrace the stone,” but after trying to source it, I think – in a very “then perish”-sort of way – it’s actually originally from Achewood, and I am super not sure how I feel about that.

They read Marx, Lenin and Mao and formed student groups to discuss the progress of socialism. They investigated the treatment of the campus proletariat, including janitors, cooks and construction workers. They volunteered to help struggling rural families and dutifully recited the slogans of President Xi Jinping.

Then, after graduation, they attempted to put the party’s stated ideals into action, converging from across China last month on Huizhou, a city in the south, to organize labor unions at nearby factories and stage protests demanding greater protections for workers.

That’s when the party realized it had a problem.