PatriotFirst

Welcome

Welcome to my discussion page.

Please say howdy here

At bottom of page if you would, please. Thanks.

Green is the New Red

Green is the New Red

How the Government Landed a Terrorism Conviction for Nonviolent Animal Activists

Will Potter
In the 1940s and '50s, labeling people "Communist" could drag them before Senate hearings, place them on blacklists and ruin their lives. During the Red Scare, proof of spying for a foreign power rarely mattered. Instead, Senator Joseph McCarthy and others paralyzed an entire political movement by demonizing anyone who had any connection to the Communist Party, either ideologically or personally. The Red Scare was less about evidence than public relations. [1]

Libertarian Socialism: not a lie.

PatriotFirst, it is pathetically obvious that you haven't even read the article. I'll quote it for you:

In the United States, the term libertarian is usually associated with the pro-capitalist agenda libertarianism (and of the United States Libertarian Party); the term libertarian socialism therefore strikes many as incongruous. The first person to describe himself as a libertarian, however, was Joseph Déjacque, an early French anarcho-communist. The word stems from the French word libertaire (synonymous to "anarchist"), and was used in order to evade the ban on anarchist publications, which were banned by law in France (Wikiquote, URL accessed on June 4, 2006). In the context of the European socialist movement, libertarian has conventionally been used to describe those like Mikhail Bakunin who opposed state socialism.

That is actually the very FIRST paragraph of the article. One would think you would have read that, at least. It goes on, though:

The basic philosophy of libertarian socialism is summed up in the name: management of the common good (socialism) in a manner that attempts to maximize the liberty of individuals and minimizes concentration of power or authority (libertarianism). It attempts to achieve this through the decentralization of political and economic power, usually involving the collectivization of most large-scale property and enterprise. Libertarian socialism denies the legitimacy of most forms of economically significant private property, since, according to socialists, when private property becomes capital, it leads to the exploitation of others with less economic means and thus infringes on the exploited class's individual freedoms.

Capitalism does not have a monopoly on any of the following words: freedom, liberty, justice, libertarian, individual. Or any other words. There's further information, by the way:

Seventeen years (1857) after Proudhon first called himself an anarchist (1840), anarchist communist Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as a libertarian. Because the word "libertarian" is now commonly used by anti-state capitalists, non-authoritarian socialists often call themselves libertarian socialists to differentiate themselves.

Don't vandalize the article again. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 08:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

(I thought I'd paste it here so you wouldn't miss it. Cheers. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 08:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC))

Jobjörn

Don't vandalize this article again? How about don't call yourself an anarchist if you're really a socialist? The two are actually mutually exclusive. Because someone doesn't agree with you, Jobjörn, please don't accuse them of being a vandal. Be nice. PatriotFirst 19:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, don't vandalize that article again. You added complete nonsense. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 20:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow. That was really insulting, Jobjörn. Thanks for the insult. PatriotFirst 20:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello again

Wow. That was really insulting, Jobjörn. Thanks for the insult.

I can see how your patience is never ending. LOL. PatriotFirst 20:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, you have some very cool user boxes. Is it ok if I use some of them? Thanks, PatriotFirst 20:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm patient with new - and in this case, stupid - users, not with people who refuse to admit that socialism doesn't necessarily mean the Soviet Union. Of course you may use the userboxes! Don't miss Template:user Kleptobox. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 20:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

hello

Gee, that's funny, I don't remember saying that "socialism means the Soviet Union"! Can you show me where I said that? I honestly don't remember that one! PatriotFirst 20:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, you have no sense for similes. What I was referring to, of course: was this:

There is no such thing as libertarian socialism. It is an oxymoron. PatriotFirst 03:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

... which I am quite sure you did understand I was referring to. (For the record, libertarian socialism is still an ideology and not an oxymoron.) Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 21:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparantly you don't understand the word simile PatriotFirst 22:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to User:Elkman and User talk:Elkman

Don't you realize that you're editing on sufferance and need to behave? Surely you can tell from WP:ANI that I know who you are? If you harass Elkman or anybody else one more time I'll block you indefinitely as the sockpuppet of a banned user that you are. This goes also for using anon IPs to abuse users. Bishonen | talk 23:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC).

To Elkman et al re: Vandalism and Incivility Warning

What you said about certain users on the [[2]] is libellous and defamatory. Particularly this: [and defamatory comments]

Do not defame and libel other editors. Your behavior is also considered worse than Wiki-stalking, particularly because it goes beyond the usual policing of editors on Wikipedia. It concerns editors privacy rights off of Wikipedia. This is unfair to Wikipedia, itself, and unfair to the editors involved. Thank you. Additionally, you took the liberty of removing code from my page, without my permission. This also goes against Wiki user page policy. Next time you take the liberty to alter a user's page, I suggest you civilly ask the user in question first.

Please act civilly with me. Because of your incivility, you are not welcome on my pages again, unless I expressly invite you, which is ulikely under the circumstances.

Additionally, this is an infringement of the fourth right amendment of the constitution. Libel is not cool and it is against the law. I am actually making no threat. I'm just pointing out some facts. I honestly worry about Wikipedia with the way such carelessness happens in statements that are made against various people.

I am asking in a nice way for other editors to leave my pages alone. If you object to something, kindly ask me about it before vandalizing it by deleting something, and I will make an honest attempt to consider what you're saying.

To all concerned..please don't push that block button when I have only aksed in a reasonable manner for reasonable courtesy to me. Thanks. PatriotFirst 00:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

A reasonable manner, yeah right, that would be nice. You defaced Elkman's userpage (note his user page) with the {{blatantvandal}} and {{Anon vandal}} templates. They filled half the page, and they're utterly inappropriate to any action of Elkman's. No, it is not "reasonable" to constantly call people "vandals" or accuse them of "personal attacks" for nothing. Elkman's removing inappropriate categories from your userpage was doing you a favor, not "vandalising" your page. (You, on the other hand, vandalised his.) Those categories weren't for the userspace, and if he hadn't removed them, the first experienced editor who noticed them would have. Btw, is quarrelling on talkpages and WP:ANI all you're here for? This account has made exactly two edits to articles. Two. Bishonen | talk 01:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC).

Geogre

Remember when I went on your page long ago and left an angry remark? I didn't know you, it's true. I was angry at Bishonen at that time, pissed off at the cabal, whether there is one or not, and clicked a link from Bishonen's page to yours. I saw the gun pointing out at me and everyone, and figured this is scary shit. That is why I said whatever it was that I said. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Nescio

I blasted and unusually nasty remark at you on Merecat's rfc talk page. It was brutal and unnecassarily harsh. I was angry on account of everyone was smashing Merecat with accusations. He was my friend. I felt hurt and angry for him because of the structure of the whole rfc thing, and because I have always been a Don Quixote sort of person, I guess. Still what I said to you was way to harsh and I am sorry.

Killier Chihuahua

I don't remember saying anything more than light insults. If I hurt your feelings I am sorry, too.

Anybody

If I left anyone out that I have hurt in the past. Please accept my humblest apologies. I really am not a mean person at heart and I don't like to cause anyone pain. PatriotFirst 03:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

To Elkman et al re: Vandalism and Incivility Warning

What you said about certain users on the [[3]] is libellous and defamatory. Particularly this: [and defamatory comments]

Do not defame and libel other editors. Your behavior is also considered worse than Wiki-stalking, particularly because it goes beyond the usual policing of editors on Wikipedia. It concerns editors privacy rights off of Wikipedia. This is unfair to Wikipedia, itself, and unfair to the editors involved. Thank you. Additionally, you took the liberty of removing code from my page, without my permission. This also goes against Wiki user page policy. Next time you take the liberty to alter a user's page, I suggest you civilly ask the user in question first.

Please act civilly with me. Because of your incivility, you are not welcome on my pages again, unless I expressly invite you, which is ulikely under the circumstances.

am asking in a nice way for other editors to leave my pages alone. If you object to something, kindly ask me about it before vandalizing it by deleting something, and I will make an honest attempt to consider what you're saying.

To all concerned..please don't push that block button when I have only aksed in a reasonable manner for reasonable courtesy to me. Thanks. PatriotFirst 00:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

A reasonable manner, yeah right, that would be nice. You defaced Elkman's userpage (note his user page) with the {{blatantvandal}} and {{Anon vandal}} templates. They filled half the page, and they're utterly inappropriate to any action of Elkman's. No, it is not "reasonable" to constantly call people "vandals" or accuse them of "personal attacks" for nothing. Elkman's removing inappropriate categories from your userpage was doing you a favor, not "vandalising" your page. (You, on the other hand, vandalised his.) Those categories weren't for the userspace, and if he hadn't removed them, the first experienced editor who noticed them would have. Btw, is quarrelling on talkpages and WP:ANI all you're here for? This account has made exactly two edits to articles. Two. Bishonen | talk 01:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC).

Bishonen, I'm sorry about the category thing. I honestly didn't know about that. I still think if he had said something first, or at anytime, it would have been a nicer way to do things.

As far as editing goes, no matter what I do it will be wrong, or at least much of it will. If I edit and try to get fact into many political articles I am told I am pushing POV. I have more than a little concern for the state of the world, and should be allowed to edit any articles, just like anyone else, concern or not. There are other interests I have like the environment and music and others, though.

Elkman has actually harassed me for a long time. He took his wrath out on me at a time when he personally was having prolems with Esperanza, and blamed his personal problems on me. He attacked me, at that time, which goes aganist Eseranza policy. He has told me that he will resent me forever, when I didn't even know him. I've heard it said, "resentments are like pissing on yourself." If he resents me it will hurt him not me, but I find his attitude strange because I don't understand it. He didn't know me to begin. I never did anything to hurt him. He made a campaign to get me into trouble based on silliness, and now he resents me!

So you can tell me I am calling him a vandal or this or that, (which was a mistake on my part), but the truth is that Elkman has viscously tracked me down, called me names on his page, (it's in history), and harassed me for a long time.

You can block me now for this admission of who I am. Or you can continue to be the better self that I know you have. You can take what I just said as a compliment or an insult. That is up to you. You obviously are a good person when you want to be. I know that you are being good by not wiping me out, etc. We are all only human. I also am only human. Sometimes I am a raging bitch on wheels, sometimes I am a good person who is loyal to her friends, and who fights hard for wildlife and freedom and stuff. In the end, there are no men in the black hats and men in the white hats.

Bishonen, I would like to start again. I apologized to you before but when I did, at my an/i, you accused me of lawyerizing, when I was blocked indefinitely. I have made some brutal comments to people here in the past. I believe the only ones that I haven't apologized to was Killer Chihuahua, Geogre, and Nescio. Nescio I really owe an apology to for an extra nasty remark at Merecat's rfc. I'm not sure how to go about this, though, without getting into trouble. If you like, after you read this I will delete this whole thing. Thanks. PatriotFirst 03:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocking

I am blocking this incarnation of User:Thewolfstar now, based on your above admission of identity. I am also protecting this talk page, based on the previous use you have made of talk pages.

Please read the rest of what I have to say carefully.

If you were to return to Wikipedia under another name, and were to do the following things, we would never know it was you:

1. Don't copy/paste article material to make your user page
2. Don't immediately get involved in whatever conflict people you have talked to in the past are involved with
3. Don't run to say Hi! to those people either
4. Do edit articles, with a special focus on adding information from cited reliable sources, rather than on contesting the existing content of articles.

As I said; do those things and we won't know it's you. You can improve the encyclopedia and be free of this tiresome game of cat-and-mouse. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)