I hate Francois Tremblay.
It is rare to see so much smugness and a know-it-all attitude concentrated in one single person.
seen from Poland
seen from Sweden
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from Belarus

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
I hate Francois Tremblay.
It is rare to see so much smugness and a know-it-all attitude concentrated in one single person.
http://francoistremblay.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/wendy-mcelroy-pornography-is-liberatory/#comment-12403
Here's a piece ostensibly about wendy mcelroy. She thinks porn is empowerfulness, which we know is incorrect. Then the article says of her: Of course, as an “individualist feminist,” she believes that “feminism should no longer be about communal solutions to communal problems but individual solutions to individual problems.” The real objective of the piece becomes clear. FALSE DICHOTOMY! FALSE DICHOTOMY! What is good for you is good for those around you. Morality *as we are taught it* juxtaposes them and you. Don't buy that premise. What is good for a person is good for people. What is good for a radfem is good for radfem. Always begin at your own locus instead of trying to barge into a collective one. Things will naturally just go. :) You can't provide for others in charity, nor can you trade well, if you haven't provided for yourself. If you were the only person on earth, would you still have to be moral? Yes. If you do the immoral thing of destroying where you live, then you will pay for your sins by hardship. The individual is an end and never a means.
Great post over at Check Your Premises:
The real question is not “how much stuff is traded” but rather “how stuff is traded.” In the corporatist system, labour is traded under a highly hierarchical, authoritarian, central-planning oriented structure. The people at the top of this fictional legal structure reap the surplus, which they steal from their inferiors through the latter’s “voluntary” surrender of their freedom of labour, which concentrates wealth and therefore economic power. These imaginary structures then sell the produced goods, generally to individual customers who have very little economic power. They also generally get their raw materials from dispersed third-world entities, which have far less economic power than they do.