Forum stalwart Wajoma tirelessly presents a certain ideological vision here with consistency and sometimes rather disarming straight forwardness - not to mention the odd fizzing zinger.
Some would say that his 'no force, no fraud' principle has an irresistible internally coherent resonance and that those who oppose him invariably reveal themselves to be craven control freaks and busyboddies.
Others would say that Wajoma-ism presents an ideal - a basis, a compass direction - that should at least influence or inform the management of political reality.
Others would perhaps say that his ideology misunderstands the nature of people and the nature of society, while refusing to acknowledge market failure and other inconvenient aspects of the economic mechanism that he argues should be given more or less unrestrained "sovereignty".
Still others would say that he just will not be pinned down on details and he quickly abandons real debate, riffs on absurb little anecdotes, quibbles about semantics, and becomes tetchy when his ideals/principles find themselves wanting beyond the shoot-the-breeze-laboratory, out there in the real world.
Whatever one's view is, I think it is relatively uncontroversial to say that the Forum is a richer, more diverse, more interestingly fractious place thanks to his participation and his distinctive contributions.
Why don't we nut out some of the details. Let's take a little volley of Wajoma principles that came up on a thread a few days ago but got overlooked, and see if he is willing to discuss them closely and in practical terms.
Let's see...
==============================
Originally posted by Wajoma
On Paying Tax - You should pay for the services you use, so if you believe yourself to be in credit you are morally justified in evading taxes.
Question: "So let's say I require less protection from force and fraud than someone else. Does that mean I pay less taxes [according to Wajoma]?"
Originally posted by Wajoma
On Food Safety - The factory should be allowed to produce poison provided they don't claim it is something it is not.
Question: "What if a factory produces poisonous food but doesn't make any claims about it? Should it be allowed to to do that?"
Originally posted by Wajoma
On Pollution - The factory should not be allowed to harm me or my property.
Questions: "Who defines and regulates the "harm"? How much should be spent on protecting us from this kind of harm? What other things do you define as being "harm"?"
=====================================
There are many more things that come up like these, and yet do not get addressed or answered. But this should be enough to get the ball rolling.
Originally posted by FMFHere is another key plank of the ideology:
Forum stalwart Wajoma tirelessly presents a certain ideological vision here with consistency and sometimes rather disarming straight forwardness - not to mention the odd fizzing zinger. Some would say that his 'no force, no fraud' principle has an irresistible internally coherent resonance and that those who oppose him invariably reveal themselves to be craven control freaks and busyboddies.
Originally posted by Wajoma
On Tax in a Democracy It's something called 'right' and 'wrong' and it is something to care about, it is not determined by a show of hands, the loudest bleating form the biggest mob of sheep who happen to be over a certain age living within certain boundary lines scratched in the dirt.
Unanswered Question: Well I know of no one who argues that representative democracy is perfect. You propose that taxation and budgeting are decided and implemented by unelected people? If tax rates are not to be set by the democratic mechanism [your "a show of hands"], then how?
Originally posted by SleepyguyYes, it's the typical Wajoma style. Just evade and/or ignore any question that challenges your ideology.
I think you're talking to yourself on this thread FMF. Wajoma doesn't want to be a puppet on your strings.
My suggestion, if Wajoma-isms bother you, is to imagine them spoken in an Australian accent like Crocodile Dundee. They're totally cool that way mate, no drama.
Originally posted by SleepyguyThe "strings" in question are his own comments from recent threads. And Wajoma may have a rather uncompromising paradigm through which he sees things but he's not a forum member that I would describe as a "puppet".
Wajoma doesn't want to be a puppet on your strings.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThere is nothing wrong with wajoma's refusal to play FMF's little games, there is no law establishing a duty to answer to a poster's inquiries into one's ideology, and if even if there was it would make little difference since its basically the norm here for questions to go unanswered when it is convenient to go silent. just ask No1 and ATY, the serial flouters of this unspoken rule.
Yes, it's the typical Wajoma style. Just evade and/or ignore any question that challenges your ideology.
Originally posted by generalissimoSure, Wajoma can say whatever he wants. But Wajoma's inability to respond to basic questions concerning his ideology does reveal there is something wrong with it.
There is nothing wrong with wajoma's refusal to play FMF's little games, there is no law establishing a duty to answer to a poster's inquiries into one's ideology, and if even if there was it would make little difference since its basically the norm here for questions to go unanswered when it is convenient to go silent. just ask No1 and ATY, the serial flouters of this unspoken rule.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraPerhaps he would have been more willing to explain himself if FMF had not made such a spectacle of the whole thing. Im afraid this thread is a monument of FMF's own self-indulgence more than anything else, there's no reason why there should be a thread dedicated solely to the ridicule of a poster. If anything Wajoma's refusal to take the bait is admirable.
Sure, Wajoma can say whatever he wants. But Wajoma's inability to respond to basic questions concerning his ideology does reveal there is something wrong with it.
Originally posted by generalissimoPerhaps it would be had Wajoma not refused to take the "bait" in every other topic.
Perhaps he would have been more willing to explain himself if FMF had not made such a spectacle of the whole thing. Im afraid this thread is a monument of FMF's own self-indulgence more than anything else, there's no reason why there should be a thread dedicated solely to the ridicule of a poster. If anything Wajoma's refusal to take the bait is admirable.
Originally posted by FMFWajoma is a right-winger.
Forum stalwart Wajoma tirelessly presents a certain ideological vision here with consistency and sometimes rather disarming straight forwardness - not to mention the odd fizzing zinger.
Some would say that his 'no force, no fraud' principle has an irresistible internally coherent resonance and that those who oppose him invariably reveal themselves to be crav ...[text shortened]... t addressed or answered. But this should be enough to get the ball rolling.
They're either religious zealots or just completely self-centred and poisoned with greed.
In either case, within the framework of capitalism they should be respected, because they decide what happens and within a communist framework they should be locked up for society's benefit... alongside other detremental forces such as child molesters, rapists and lawyers.
