US federal government takes a 10% stake in Intel

[nikcers]

Its neither fascism or communism by any modern definition.. Just plain ole Democracy where the government is anything the people want it to be.

Fascism is a far-right, ultranationalist political ideology characterized by a totalitarian dictatorship, a strong central government, suppression of opposition, militarism, and the subordination of individual interests to the perceived needs of the nation or race. It is often marked by a revolutionary form of nationalism, a belief in social hierarchy, and the use of force to achieve national rebirth or a perceived national interest.


Communism is a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

 

[PAF]

I think "secessionist" is sufficient.

Respect for the right of voluntary (dis)association is paramount.

If you have that, the other adjectives don't really matter.

Likewise, anarchist [absence of hierarch and authority] is also sufficient. While secession [the act of] is paramount in many cases, an already true and practicing anarchist doesn't have to secede from anything. With a true and practicing anarchist [in its truest definition], "respect for the right of" doesn't enter into the equation. One can argue that secession [the act of] is paramount in order to be an anarchist, but that is not always the case, even though at times it is. If you are that, the other adjectives don't really matter.

 

[TheTexan]

Likewise, anarchist [absence of hierarch and authority] is also sufficient. While secession [the act of] is paramount in many cases, an already true and practicing anarchist doesn't have to secede from anything. With a true and practicing anarchist [in its truest definition], "respect for the right of" doesn't enter into the equation. One can argue that secession [the act of] is paramount in order to be an anarchist, but that is not always the case, even though at times it is. If you have that, the other adjectives don't really matter.

If you're an anarchist and you don't secede, then you're voluntarily a member of whatever fascist organization you belong to. An anarcho-fascist secessionist, is one that both recognizes the right to secede (anarchism), and views secession as the most direct means of achieving political goals in today's climate (secessionist)

 

[PAF]

If you're an anarchist and you don't secede, then you're voluntarily a member of whatever fascist organization you belong to, and you become an anarcho-fascist. An anarcho-fascist secessionist, is one that both recognizes the right to secede (anarchism), and views secession as the most direct means of achieving political goals in today's climate (secessionist)

I was thinking more along the lines of ol' pappy living tucked away in the mountains with a shot gun locked and loaded. His kids and grandkids were raised that way too. They don't want no stinking salesmen [or saleswomen], and if you're a sheriff, he really don't give a flying shit. He would tell you "secession" is for the city-folk and the birds

 

[nikcers]

Likewise, anarchist [absence of hierarch and authority] is also sufficient. While secession [the act of] is paramount in many cases, an already true and practicing anarchist doesn't have to secede from anything. With a true and practicing anarchist [in its truest definition], "respect for the right of" doesn't enter into the equation. One can argue that secession [the act of] is paramount in order to be an anarchist, but that is not always the case, even though at times it is. If you are that, the other adjectives don't really matter.

There was anarchy in Afghanistan after the USA removed their forces. It didnt turn out so great.

The Afghan government collapsed and then there was Anarchy and then the Taliban filled the power vacuum.

I guess if you want a government like the one Afghanistan has now thats what normally happens when there is Anarchy.

 

[TheTexan]

I guess if you want a government like the one Afghanistan has now thats what normally happens when there is Anarchy.

I kinda do actually. An American culture with Afghan style government could be pretty amazing actually

 

[acptulsa]

power vacuum

I finally figured it out. It's a damned Electrolux spambot.

 

[nikcers]

I kinda do actually. An American culture with Afghan style government could be pretty amazing actually

It wouldnt be American culture though. It would be whatever cultural group becomes the gang in charge.

They would kill the other culture groups who arent part of their gang and starve the groups that oppose them.

Since its anarchy there would be no prison. So the whole country would be a prison.

It would be like in prison where you have to join a gang and as long as you are part of that gang you only have to be raped by that gang instead of by all of the gangs.

 

[TheTexan]

Since its anarchy there would be no prison.

Sold! Let's do it

 

[nikcers]

Sold! Let's do it

Get ready to submit to the LGBTQ mafia

 

[TheTexan]

Get ready to submit to the LGBTQ mafia

There's no prison so I can just beat them with my baseball bat if they try any of that queer shit

 

[Occam's Banana]

Likewise, anarchist [absence of hierarch and authority] is also sufficient. [...]

There will always be hierarchy and authority in any human society.

If socio-political anarchism is defined as the absence of hierarchy and authority, then it will never actually exist.

But if socio-political anarchism is defined as something else - such as the absence of one single, unitary force-monopolizer (i.e., "the State") - then it might be able to exist.

Also, while such an anarchic society might be libertarian in character, it is not necessarily the case that it will be. For example, an anarchic society might still respect and condone the practice of human chattel slavery [1].

IOW: Anarchy alone is not sufficient - but a society that actually did respect and condone the practice of voluntary (dis)association (i.e., "secessionism") would be sufficient.



[1] Where "slavery" is meant to denote involuntary servitude forced upon subjects who did not themselves initiate force against someone else. (This is distinct from other forms of involuntary servitude that might be forced upon subjects who did themselves initiate force against someone else.)

 

[PAF]

There will always be hierarchy and authority in any human society.

If socio-political anarchism is defined as the absence of hierarchy and authority, then it will never actually exist.

But if socio-political anarchism is defined as something else - such as the absence of one single, unitary force-monopolizer (i.e., "the State") - then it might be able to exist.

Also, while such an anarchic society might be libertarian in character, it is not necessarily the case that it will be. For example, an anarchic society might still respect and condone the practice of human chattel slavery [1].

IOW: Anarchy alone is not sufficient - but a society that actually did respect and condone the practice of voluntary (dis)association (i.e., "secessionism") would be sufficient.



[1] Where "slavery" is meant to denote involuntary servitude forced upon subjects who did not themselves initiate force against someone else. (This is distinct from other forms of involuntary servitude that might be forced upon subjects who did themselves initiate force against someone else.)

I don't disagree with any of that.

But still:

I was thinking more along the lines of ol' pappy living tucked away in the mountains with a shot gun locked and loaded. His kids and grandkids were raised that way too. They don't want no stinking salesmen [or saleswomen], and if you're a sheriff, he really don't give a flying shit. He would tell you "secession" is for the city-folk and the birds

Tom Woods has discussed "cell-communities". Now that Tom Massie has name recognition, and considering the state that we are in, wouldn't it be great if a bird whispered into his ear to maybe do a weekly/monthly on living off the grid and why/how to become an anarchist in todays society. He can re-popularize the term and with the correct definition.

 

[nikcers]

I don't disagree with any of that.

Tom Woods has discussed "cell-communities". Now that Tom Massie has name recognition, and considering the state that we are in, wouldn't it be great if a bird whispered into his ear to maybe do a weekly/monthly on living off the grid and why/how to become an anarchist in todays society. He can re-popularize the term and with the correct definition.

A representative for a state in our republic that we elect and send to Washington to rule on our behalf advocating for the abolition of government rule.

Why does this remind me of this Dave Chappele sketch?

 

[PAF]

@Anti Federalist , was that you???

@jmdrake , while watching that entire skit all I could picture was @Anti Federalist up in NH

@TheTexan , tell me that's really @Anti Federalist

 

[Snowball]

When it owns 10% it owns 100%.

No doubt about it.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Enter the Trump Administration, which may further expand the government’s role in managing Intel. Mr. Trump criticized current CEO Lip-Bu Tan some weeks ago and said he should resign. Mr. Tan visited the White House, the President then praised the CEO, and word then leaked of the possible government stake.

The art of the (dishonest) deal.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

In return for approving Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel, the Administration demanded a “golden share”

​

China is the Model for US Billionaires, Crony Corporatists and Authoritarian Kleptocrats​

 

[Occam's Banana]

THREAD:

'US Stake In Intel Is A Very Bad Idea'

Aug 25, 2025

August 25, 2025

There is a word to describe the Trump Administration's acquisition of a ten percent stake in the chip maker Intel, and it's not "communism." Merging the "private" sector with the state has been attempted in the past and it never ends well. Also today, what Vance missed on the Ukraine war..

Ron Paul Liberty Report

Ron Paul Liberty Report

www.ronpaullibertyreport.com

____

​

• PAF
• Replies: 3
• Forum: Ron Paul Forum

 

[acptulsa]

We all shareholders now. And the dividend is higher taxes.