>>90
All this shit you wrote is irrelevant. I Guess I'll have to take some of what I said in another tread and show you how it applies
in every topic or debate you approach.
Identifying yourself as any percentage of either qualifies you for cult-member status. If you think that they are mutable terms and at the same it is "obvious what their qualities are". Then you must be very, very young or very, very ignorant of the history of the left/right meme.
Liberalism/Conservativism seperated can respectively stand for any myriad of ideas. Together however, it creates a culture bi-polarizing thought.
Human thought evolved away from singularities and we are now evolving away from bi-polarities. That being; reducing everything to a philosophical, psychological and political fork in the road so as to frame and control the entire argument.
In the end, you never address the real issue or the point brought up: [n]"Why Chomsky's ideas of anarchy can't be attacked via the talking points of Cuba, North Korea, Communism or Liberalism."[/n]
Instead (or should I say: Once again) we get sucked into a conservative vs liberal debate. How liberal you are, how conservative you are, what past presidents you identify with: All irrelevant. Argue the point. Show me why it's apt to argue Chomsky's ideas using Cuba and North Korea, as talking point.
It's like you can't help yourself- it's like you have zero control over your ability to reason.