Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
Here you announce your values. You also seem to imply that people who are philosophically capitalists would be capitalists at heart, as if engaging in, say, anonymous charity couldn't be a form of self-interest.
1. I prefer transparency.
2. Charitable donations typically tax shelters, get a name on some building, narcissistic stuff.
3. Pay workers decent wages.
4. I am pro-entrepreneurship, but I am also pro-fair wage, wealth redistribution. I don't see entrepreneurship and wealth redistribution as necessarily competing forces, in fact these are forces which should be aligned systematically to create sustainable systems. I don't particularly care how this is accomplished, private organization, public organization, unions, charity, etc. The fact that it is not occurring is the problem. I'm organizationally agnostic as far as the operating mechanism of wealth generation and wealth redistribution, however if it's not being done properly, organize to get it done. However people shouldn't be force to be entrepreneurs any more than they should be forced into unions or unfair labor. I prefer a diversification of
5. Power to the people not power to the capitalists
6. Political terminology like capitalism and charity is often little more than political pissing, trolling and/or fraud. Most capitalist aren't entrepreneurs anymore and many charities little more than tax shelters, political lobbies or just plain fraud.

Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
And this is a threat. To be fair, possibly a retaliatory one. Define exploitation.
1. There's a lot of definitions for this word, and my viewpoint is that we do not know the specific definition for this, but there are multiple variations which I will see as expressions. From a quantum mechanical perspective, you call say my definition is the "sum over histories" definition of the word exploitation. And this is sort of my definition of all these unknowns big picture concepts is in a similar manner, "sum over histories". I've been reading Feynman's formulation of quantum mechanics in a attempt to grasp it's essence, and I think his formulation of quantum mechanics to define something that cannot be grasped in the definite but can be grasped in a representational manner, has allowed me to come to this new way of thinking on definitions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation

Concepts such as exploitation can be viewed to have "single indistinguishable "class" of paths which all share the same events".

2. It's not a threat, it's merely a statement of resistance. It is a expression of my non-agreement and resistance to all such paths of exploitation hereby defined by my sum over histories interpretation of exploitation. It is a declaration of freedom and independence like those made by many freedom loving people. Any system which I see as exploitative is no different than existing systems such as states, business, and any such organization that might engage willingly or unwillingly in exploitative processes. My actions within and towards these systems shall be declared below.

3. I do not retaliate, I resist, I do not engage in vindictive, tit for tat conflict in order to harm others but rather I engage in active and passive resistance against forces and organization which I see may harm myself and others. The purpose is to prevent harm, and not to harm others based on some vindictive rationalization. Sometimes the removal of a threat is necessary but the purpose of resistance is not removal of threats, but rather the prevention of harm.