Libertarian Welfare Queens

Lately, I’ve been getting tired of the same old scams coming from the same old people in the libertarian “movement”. Many OG libertarians I’ve spoken with agree, so I thought I’d compile a list of popular but parasitic libertarians. It turns out libertarians and ancaps are some of the worst capitalists ever. Despite raging against tax payer supported “welfare queens” there seems to be quite a lot of libertarians fighting for the ever depleting capital flowing from the chapped teats of other libertarians.

Libertarians employ a variety of tactics to spread their message, but a tactic I must disagree with is begging for money from people in your movement for stunts that are utopian at best and ineffective or dangerous at worst.

Libertarians also have an aversion to critiquing fellow libertarians because of the small scope and influence the philosophy currently has and because many of them feel it would harm the movement. Any movement worth its salt can stand criticism of its members, and if it can’t then it’s not worth being a part of to begin with.

I’ve been distancing myself from the label libertarian for some time now because I hate echo chambers and increasingly felt being pulled into one. My news feed has slowly but surely become filled with the same slogans, the same news stories, the same solutions, the same begging, even the same fake names! Criticism is shot down with paranoid accusations of concern trolling or even of being a Fed. Yawn. Dissidence is not allowed and any half-assed attempt at activism by a “celebritarian” is venerated as groundbreaking. Thousands of dollars get thrown at “activists” who have disappeared other thousands with little explanation. Critiques of thought leaders are brushed away with the weak argument, “But such and such did sooooo much for liberty in the past!!!” as if it matters.

Redirecting capital to effective, peaceful, free market solutions could do wonders for human progress and I support a diversity of tactics approach to solving social problems. That doesn’t mean I believe all tactics are equally effective. It’s important to ask hard questions of charismatic leaders and press even harder when they evade. Living off of the charity of people in your own movement while arguing for capitalism seems oxymoronic especially when you keep ignoring market responses to your work.

I am not a part of the “liberty movement” though people still try to get me to add it to my work description on the Facebook. Do I promote the ideas of liberty? Sure–I’ve done several podcasts and am even a co-host on a libertarian themed radio show. But it’s because I want liberty for myself; I have no illusions about achieving freedom for mankind and sacrificing myself for the greater cause of liberty to the point of financial hardship. News flash: you can be an activist and have a job. And you can even be an effective full time activist. I like the idea of free markets but ultimately I’m an individualist anarchist if you must label it. The religiosity of some libertarians is off-putting. They criticize nonbelievers for being “brainwashed sheep” as they parrot the words of their own deities who unfortunately range from the scholarly to the deranged. They also cry a lot about not having the capital of other movements as if it’s a mystery where it’s going.

Sorry, but you guys wasted it on libertarian welfare queens.

A libertarian welfare queen is a prominent libertarian who lives off the donations of other libertarians but produces content that is factually incorrect, manipulative, embarrassing, threatening, and oftentimes ineffective or counterproductive. They are the leeches who are somehow able to keep raising money despite questionable practices in their activism and whose serious ethical breaches are ignored or forgiven despite no attempt at restitution. The people named here are not the only ones in libertarianism I consider counterproductive, either.

But enough bitching, I’m gonna name a few libertarian welfare queens because I am so tired of this particular problem robbing well intentioned people who have jobs of their well-earned money. It’s also important to be able to laugh at the strange humans that try to lead you when you’re more than capable of leading yourself. I generally like libertarians, but there are a few bad apples, and I want to let others know so they don’t support jobless swindlers. Libertarian Welfare Queenism is a problem, but the solution is simple and voluntary.

(In no particular order)

First up is His Holiness Stefan Molyneux.

h/t Bitcoin Not Bombs comrade Davi Barker for this gem

h/t Bitcoin Not Bombs comrade Davi Barker for this gem

Known as Holy Moly by his detractors, this guy makes his money off of repackaging old philosophy and bad touching donor brains. I tried to like him, I really did, but he reminded me of my mother. His audience is mostly young men and women who, if true believers, have separated from their families on his advice (that is not to make light of child abuse, I do believe separation is appropriate in certain circumstances). The same advice that got his actual therapist wife fined and threatened with suspension. He also creeps on her clients which I’m pretty sure by any standard is a violation of privacy. Molyneux bullies listeners in precarious financial situations to send him money. And when I say bully, I mean he berates broke college kids over $1 donations. Like all good authoritarian figures, he’s blatantly hypocritical in applying his own philosophy. He caused some ruckus lately when he filed a DMCA take down claim on a critic despite claiming to be virulently anti-IP for years. His older videos provide simple, easily accessible arguments for anarcho-capitalism but his recent ones are riddled with misogyny and cop apologia. And I’m not one to throw the term misogyny around irresponsibly, but he likes to call women “estrogen based parasites” which is ironic given that his wife is the one with a real job and his living is subsidized by young people in an unstable economy.

He also uses classic manipulation techniques to lure listeners in such as immediately asking about their childhoods. This approach builds a façade of false trust and closeness. It’s disturbing to say the least and I’m genuinely pissed he does it to people I care about. This is in between bizarre outbursts about black kids who dare to smoke blunts and other black kids that have miraculously figured out how to make “lean” from tea and skittles. Who knew Trayvon was an alchemist?! Even worse is his belief that he is singlehandedly saving the world (“I am the ring of fire protecting the fragile tree of virtue” is an exact quote). His followers appear to be much smarter than him and it’s unfortunate he’s such an arse because I can agree that peaceful parenting is a great thing.

Also, despite complaints of donation decreases and claims his website takes “tens of thousands of dollars” to operate, dude is sitting pretty on a stack of bitcoin. Weird that the documentary he was hyping a few years ago still hasn’t been made…and no doubt his Paypal donations greatly exceed his bitcoin ones. He’s gonna need them for the lawsuit filed by his critic for shutting down her Youtube channel, so if you feel moved please find it in your heart to send him a few bits. Or you’re a thief.

The second offender would probably be proud to be called that, say hello to Christopher Cantwell.

cantshootgunswell

Cantwell showing that piece of fabric who’s boss.

Cantwell can’t do much well other than bloviate on his blog and beg for donations while doing everything in his power to offend people, which would be hilarious if he were funny but his career is a bad joke. (hyuckhyuckhyuck!) He calls himself a comedian but I’m pretty sure living in your mother’s basement well into your thirties is only funny as a libertarian stereotype not a reality. I wish I was lying about that last part, but it’s entirely true. Since he moved out of his mom’s, he likes long walks in downtown Keene harassing meter maids and bragging about how cool it is to kill cops. He’d be infinitely more interesting if he followed through but he never will because he is a huge coward. I’m usually the first one to say attack the argument not the man, but he’s called better people worse things and I assume (often to my surprise) if people can dish it they can take it.

He also likes to talk about how any publicity is good publicity as a coping mechanism to his humiliating appearance on The Colbert Report and generally pathetic existence. Finally, libertarians get that juicy mainstream coverage, but *spoiler alert* it’s an ogre with atrocious gun safety practices. Oh yeah, he wields guns like a giant retarded baby. Other sources say he knows his shit IRL but he somehow managed to appear in at least two videos violating basic gun safety rules so I remain skeptical. He’s one of those sacrificial full time activists which I assume means being an internet tough guy. You mean to tell me an able bodied middle aged man with what I assume is years of job experience can’t go get a job like the productive libertarians? Ok. This 3edgy5me welfare queen also helped Adam Kokesh organize a failed armed march on Washington, D.C. because getting a bunch of your supporters massacred sounded like a good idea at the time. Cantwell is that bully in school that talks a lot of shit but acts on none of it. Honestly, I don’t even think he’s siphoned that much money off of libertarians, but he’s embarrassing enough to make the list with his bitching about how he “desperately” needs donations. Get a job, Cantwell, the market has spoken.

Last on the list is everyone’s favorite freedom fighter, Adam Kokesh.

kokesh

Nothing could possibly go wrong here.

If there’s one person libertarians should stop sending any money to immediately, it’s this guy. Please, I implore you; stop sending money to him. For your own sake, for the sake of future generations, please just STAHP. Sure, the butthurt among you will say, “look at all he has done!!!1!11!!!” but the butthurt among you don’t realize homeboy is a trust fund kid. Maybe back in 2010, Kokesh had some good ideas if you ignore that he stole them from other activists. I know some of them personally, but I won’t name names because I respect them and know they don’t wish to start any trouble within libertarianism. He also has a nasty habit of not paying people who work for him which is pretty messed up considering how good he is at raising money.

Kokesh is a man notorious for raising large sums of money that disappears without a trace if not squandered on useless activism. This guy riled up a bunch of mentally unstable people to march on Washington D.C. with weapons—quite possibly the dumbest stunt I’ve ever heard of—then cancelled it. He followed it up by an even more half-baked stunt: literally standing in front of the White House and Capitol racking a shotgun. Kokesh, with thousands of dollars in film and effects equipment, chose to do that instead of using a fucking green screen and then goaded libertarians into supporting his defense team after he was unsurprisingly raided. He then bailed on a legit mutual defense agency while his close team members slandered George Donnelly’s good name despite George’s meticulous records proving shenanigans. Then, and this is rich, he blamed his buddies for the missing funds! That’s 50 grand down the memory hole, mind you. Donors whined and he got his poor girlfriend to give some half-assed explanation. Everyone promptly forgot and no lawsuit was filed. Then, as if that wasn’t enough for libertarians to at least question his judgment, he goes on a book tour to spread the good word of liberty! I can understand needing to hustle when you get out of jail, but dude got another $30,000 from people for this tour. After he and/or his team disappeared over $50,000. Re-read that last sentence until it really sinks in.

So it seems libertarians and their money are easily departed, but what stings worse is that this asshole doesn’t need their money. His father is a venture capitalist who memholed $45 million and according to confidential sources his mother still helps him out. If you think he doesn’t have a trust fund, you are out of your goddamned mind. This is on top of a paycheck he gets from the government every month for disability as a result of his PTSD diagnosis, which like the other assistance wouldn’t be an issue if he wasn’t still begging for money. I give him props for being the best ancap on this list because that’s kind of impressive that he can squeeze so much money out of broke people over and over again.

**Dishonorable mention: Ron Paul. Paul was originally on the list and I removed him because he did make his money except when he was campaigning and being a congressman. All I will say is don’t be surprised when the millions people donate to a failed political campaign are wasted on bribes. And that he’ll be shilling on behalf of his son Rand soon, so just remember this time around you’re dealing with even more permissive principles. Did you really think politics was fair? Bless your heart.

Libertarian welfare queens are a drain on libertarianism and I think libertarians can do better. How can libertarian welfare queens ever hope to change the world if they can’t get past their entitled mindsets? How can libertarians ever inspire others to lead themselves if they’re still following these vermin?

Now there are still some scammers about that don’t quite make the list and activist methods I find are a waste of money even with the best of intentions, so here’s a litmus test if that money is burning a hole in your pocket. If any of the people on this list ask for money, don’t give it to them; if someone tells you there’s a Randian utopia waiting for you in Chile, don’t give them money (even if they have a team of cryptoanarchists ready to pounce); if someone says they are going to tour America spreading the good word of liberty, don’t give them money; if someone threatens to quit the “movement” because they’re not able to pay their bills as an activist, don’t give them money; if someone says they’re running for office, you know better than to give them money; if someone asks you to fund their anarcho-hippie commune, don’t give them money; if you’re a broke college kid, don’t give your money to anybody. If it sounds too good to be true it is and if it’s coming from a libertarian welfare queen it will probably be ham-fistedly executed.

Good ideas spread organically and now virally thanks to the internet, and despite a rough economy you can make money if you produce something valuable to others. There is no need to resort to older, more time consuming and expensive methods. Put your money where it matters and lead yourself. Or at the very least, do your due diligence on activists asking for money—there are some excellent projects out there by trustworthy people, but there are a lot of scammers too.

Advertisements

74 Comments

Filed under Humorous/Political

74 responses to “Libertarian Welfare Queens

  1. Chris James

    While I agree that libertarians (anarchists, voluntaryists, or any other group proposing freedom) should not require others to do their thinking for them, and I oppose celebrity worship across the board; what you fail to realise or acknowledge is that ‘asking’ (or ‘begging’ as you chose to call it) is the polar opposite of of having an armed collective forcibly steal it from you.

    Sure, I’m somewhat annoyed that apparently thousands feel the need to ‘tithe’ to Stefan Molyneux, but it’s their damn money, and I don’t endeavour to tell others what to do.

    As far as your ‘living in his mother’s basement well past his 30’s” strawman assumption…..really? That’s the best you could come up with? Try writing an article based on logic and facts, instead of assumptions, character assassinations, and your personal feelz.

    • It’s fine if people want to give money to whatever person or cause they want and have no power to stop them. Of course this post was just my personal opinions, but I gave good reasons why I believe them. Also, Cantwell living at his mother’s wasn’t an assumption or strawman; it actually was true until he moved.

    • reality

      He actually did live in the basement. Its a fact, ya big dummy. Don’t assume yourself. Just because it sounds like an insult, which it could very well be, that doesn’t automatically mean it isn’t actually true.

      • HRearden

        Well saying that someone lived in the Mother’s basement make them sound like a Phil Hendrie character who slept on a cot on his Mother’s back porch. Phil Hendrie did ( or does) a character who lives with his Mother and sleeps on a cot on his Mother’s back porch.

    • My Feels are I don’t care if someone lives with their mother. That is better than living alone and on welfare. Like mutigenerational households are very common in non anglo-saxton families.

  2. Rich Paul

    Activism is performance art. If you don’t like it, don’t support it, like any other kind of art. If you do like it, keep in mind that people are putting their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honors on the line to do activism, and that they cannot continue to be activists without support. I, personally, spent 3/4 of the last 2 years in jail. Do I accept donations? Your goddamned right I do! And I don’t feel the least bit bad about it.

  3. Excellent article. I’ve been trying to say this for a couple years now but in my own way. If I had to make such a list, I’d be most likely to scrap it and make a list of the rare few that aren’t exploiting people’s hopes and dreams for freedom by selling some type of Utopian snakeoil, or much worse engaging in antics that ultimately make “libertarianism” look bad.

    I think your list hit the top three on my list of celebritarians that I’d consider to be huge liabilities but I just have to squeeze in a couple of my own honorable mentions because of their prominence such as Larken Rose and Jeff Berwick. I could also add most if not all of the Free Keene group that I’ve seen.

    I’m also surprised you didn’t point out Cantwell’s little stunt where he shows up at someone’s house at night and harasses him from the PA in his car over some silly Fakebook drama. So much for NAP! We had a good laugh though when he showed up in a chat room that I run, just as we were talking about what a loser he is.

    • Others have mentioned those two also. I only alluded to Berwick at the end because I do think him continuing to push Galt’s Gulch after he knew there were serious issues is pretty unethical.

      Haha, yes I meant to add that scenario in. Very embarrassing and unecessary. I’ve also appreciated your input about Molyneux on the Feens. A positive list would be a good addition too because it’s not everybody in libertarianism scheming.

      • HRearden

        I should be on that list because I have done nothing embarrassing and unnecessary in an effort to promote liberty. Btw, the word scheme in the past did not have a negative meaning as it does today. In the 18th century good ideas were called schemes.

  4. Very good points, thanks for refreshing my skepticism or better yet, resharpen my critical thinking. There are so many “false fronts” out there that it is hard to sort them out. Perhaps an organic directory created by legit core groups that validate legit efforts would be a great project? Sort of like a Better Business Bureau for real, legit and validated efforts. Seems any movement that gets bigger eventually gets harnessed and corrupted. How many Green Peace people now are corporate captains? Yesterday’s hippies are today’s corporate leaders. The vultures are everywhere from anti smart meter groups that actually work with hydro companies to spread dis info ( I have had first hand experience with that one) to honeypot chemtrail websites that create a false place to vent and probably get you placed on an heightened observation list. Any group/person that is very large and commands plenty of attention should be looked at closely and with a critical mind. We are by nature follower’s and this trait is easily harnessed by good/bad alike. Perhaps the big should actually be a grouping of many smaller efforts, so not one effort is outstanding or overwhelming but the unity of these groups can create and amplify a force for change. Yes, at least we have Internet until it gets funneled and choked but here is the good news – a new gov proof (decentralized) internet is around the corner check out https://www.ethereum.org/. Thanks M.K. for actually stimulating me into writing this.

  5. I agree wholeheartedly with your first pick on this list. I don’t know enough about Cantwell’s sources of income to make a well informed comment.

    Kokesh is a little different to me, and I am speaking as both a critic of him and a friend of his. He has a YouTube channel which gets ad revenue. The best thing about that, and I mean this sincerely, is that he’s providing value (eyes on brands’ ads) to someone outside the movement (brands via Google), which mean money flowing into the movement from outside. (Unlike Molyneux who refuses to use ads and thus is not helping YouTube earn back the cost of maintaining his copious rants).

    As a libertarian writer and occasional activist who *is* employed with a real job (I work for an international start up specifically placing branding on YouTube and dealing with creators), I have much more respect for Kokesh than Molyneux and have considered preparing a piece comparing the two of them and how one is a leech to the movement and one is not, strictly from a YouTube standpoint. (Also thinking of teaching “how you can be an effective YT activist too!” – the first is definitely to monetize your content.)

    All in all, I’m not opposed to people getting donations to increase their effectiveness as activists, but if they plan living on them 100% and provide no other economic value as they pull stunt after stunt, I’m pretty sure we’re just paying them to masturbate.

    • Thanks for the feedback, Avens! I have nothing against the principle of taking donations and have donated to a lot of activist causes that i think are doing real work. Thinking about doing a positive piece on some of those organizations (like Antiwar.com) who are busting ass putting in valuable efforts.

      I can see your point about Kokesh and Molyneux from the Youtube standpoint and agree. It’s most unfortunate questions haven’t been answered regarding thousands of dollars in donations to Kokesh missing, and I’m most disappointed libertarians haven’t been more persistent in finding out what happened. It’s hard for me to process that so many know and don’t seem to care–so much for peaceful disassociation.

      Excellent point about the nature and effectiveness of some of these stunts lol.

    • “All in all, I’m not opposed to people getting donations to increase their effectiveness as activists, but if they plan living on them 100% and provide no other economic value as they pull stunt after stunt, I’m pretty sure we’re just paying them to masturbate.”

      From an ethical standpoint I have no problem with beggars, but when people turn to this as a sole means of support then I start to become highly cyincal about anything they say or do. Furthermore I find activism to be antithetical to libertarianism. Getting in people’s faces and being an asshole is hypcritical to teaching leave-me-alone-ism. If people want to promote the ideals, then they need to first start by living them.

      I don’t 100% recommend this guy (or anyone else) but he has a few good videos on activists, SJW’s and other such busybodies. He doesn’t live off donations, instead just charging outright to answer people’s questions through his Asshole Consulting venture.

      http://dana.nutter.net/media/?id=6155

  6. >His older videos provide simple, easily accessible arguments for anarcho-capitalism but his recent ones are riddled with misogyny and cop apologia. And I’m not one to throw the term misogyny around irresponsibly, but he likes to call women “estrogen based parasites” which is ironic given that his wife is the one with a real job and his living is subsidized by young people in an unstable economy.

    I would say you are not making a strong case in this article that he is a misogyny.

    I didn’t know that Kokesh has a trust fund. I haven’t donated to any of these gents.

    The Atlas Shrugged movie was also a big waste of money…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDcJj6eFb2c Fringe Elements/Ryan Faulk also made a criticism of the use of money Mises Institute use, like not making big documentaries that would get a lot of appeal, buy the copyrights to certain books so the content is more easily available and build a stronger case against the state in certain areas where he would say it is lacking.

    • “I didn’t know that Kokesh has a trust fund. I haven’t donated to any of these gents.”

      I didn’t know this either, but it would explain a lot about him behaving like a spoiled brat.

      “The Atlas Shrugged movie was also a big waste of money…”

      I’ve never bothered to see who produced the films. I have yet to see the last one but the first two were absolutely horrible from a cinematic and storytelling standpoints.

  7. The Mises Institute has done more to damage liberty by associating it, and Austrian economics, with pseudoscience (Praxeology), nonsense-philosophy(German and Jewish Rationalism), immorality (Block and Rothbard), and near schizophrenic levels of conspiracy theory (Rockwell) by using the internet just as the marxists used the magazine era, and postmodernists used the radio and television era: to overload with propaganda, rather than to advance knowledge and understanding.

    As a previous donor and activist, I am ashamed of supporting that institution.

    Do no harm. And they have done a lot of harm.

  8. I think this was an excellent article for the most part.

    Kokesh as well? That’s interesting. Never really felt comfortable with him and didn’t find his work compelling either. There did seem to be a lot of weirdness surrounding him, but can’t say I ever really knew that much about him.

    Anyway, one thing I do want to say, which is directed at libertarians who think that we shouldn’t be “infighting” or “attacking our own people” or whatever they want to call it. Solidarity or whatever.

    If we believe in the idea of free markets and that they can be used to flush out bad actors, then we need to demonstrate that first and foremost in our own little corner of the market. If we let these people just slide by without comment or even back them because “they’ve done a lot of good work”, then we have no business taking the message of liberty to the masses and claiming it works. We are hypocrites if we don’t point out the bad behaviour of people in our midst. And in that spirit I fully support this article. And I love the name of it.

  9. Oh and just wanted to mention that the harassment of the meter maids that I saw is real asshole behaviour and damn stupid. It’s stunts like that that almost make me ashamed to call myself libertarian. If that’s what they call activism, and if what Kokesh does is activism, then maybe we would be better off without the “activists”.

  10. You forgot to mention that Kokesh also owes 43 bitcoins to Derrick J who did some work for him back when that was worth about 400 bucks.Not only don’t give him money, don’t agree to take any unless you get it in writing.

    • You’re totally right. Thanks for the reminder, Jim Jesus! Libertarians Against Humanity is a much needed extension pack for libertarians too. Some of this stuff is too hilarious to not point out.

  11. colynbrown

    You would think libertarians like to present good arguments rather than ad-hom hissy fits. I guess not all of them.

  12. Ostracism is preached, but rarely ever practiced to any meaningful extent.

  13. Bob Robertson

    I recall reading about the “early libertarians”, to paraphrase from memory, “trying to make a living by selling newsletters to each other.”

    I only quibble with the term “welfare”. Donations are not welfare. You may disagree with them, object to their ways and means. What they do not do is rob anyone.

  14. Jolly

    The title of this article is a flagrant example of using a lightning-rod term to excoriate the author’s chosen targets. If it’s not an intentional mischaracterization, then it reflects badly on the author’s own vocabulary. Either way – not good. It undercuts the subsequent diatribe’s credibility.

    “Welfare” as it’s used in common English is money given to people FROM THE GOVERNMENT. Therefore, it’s stolen money. ONLY Adam Kokesh is [possibly] such a beast, and ONLY if he’s receiving checks for his alleged PTSD.

    Late in the argument, as an afterthought, you bash Ron Paul, while at the same time pulling him off the list. Make up your mind. That particular section looked like you’re prepping for some search-engine “juice.” Not exactly noble, eh?

    Pot – meet Kettle.

    • Bob Robertson

      Indeed, note the “Donate” button on the right side of the article.

      • Thane "Goldie" Eichenauer

        quote The title of this article is a flagrant example of using a lightning-rod term to excoriate the author’s chosen targets. unquote Having gone to government schools ever since I was a child I never quote managed to add excoriate to my working vocabulary. I completely agree with the quote up until that.

  15. Seasons Greetings M.K.,
    Are you the same person that just called into a so called Randian udopia in the New Hempshire? You know, the one who’s headline news reporter is currently soliciting donations for a self-serving mission to spread the ideas of liberty across our great country! Hate to agree with that capitalist, so called libertarian activists, pig…you sounded like a cop out…because???

    • I don’t see how I copped out. I honestly never expected the article to rustle so many jimmies, but stand by all of it.

      • was it tongue in cheek or do you stand by it? seems slightly contradictory ….. whooo… never thought i would agree with witt again

      • The terminology was tongue in cheek but I stand by my opinions. I also think people are taking this way too seriously lol

      • Amazing…. now M.K. gets live (welfare queen) radio interviews on LRN, what next? Oprah?or CNN? Gosh, express an opinion and the entire planet gets their ass in a knot. It was only an opinion, not a rewrite of the US constitution. M.K. was only “following the money” that’s how you solve a lot of BS in this world.

      • Hahahaha yes! Some people get very butthurt about others having opinions. Like the queens here have never used spicy language to rile up their fans!

    • “M.K. was only ‘following the money’ that’s how you solve a lot of BS in this world.”

      As a lifelong practicing cynic, EXACTLY!

  16. As a matter of fact, I have shared your articles sentiments for sometime M.K. and I can’t top this line of satire? So many so called libertarian activists/criminals are nothing but an embarrassing bane to society and are hugely destructive to the Liberty Movement. I only found you by chance on Friday, courtesy of a fascinating Facebook page I first heard of in April on Peace News Now: STOP FREE KEENE!!! Unfortunately, your appearance on so called Free Talk Live spoiled much of this articles salient points. It I is ironic I was on just before you, and C.C. tailed your call with his typical shameless air polluting exhaust. In my opinion, you watered down your own important hit piece by calling in not to really discuss, or defend, your “extremely in between…” satire, but to seek communion with the so called minister/FTL host[s] …WTF does being anti-war have to do with your article? I have no desire to attack you M.K., but I am not polite to phony ministers, or people who call themselves libertarian activist that share round tables, or even living spaces, with C.C. queen defenders and advocates of murder. Regards, Jimmies the Infamous Witt

  17. I’m reminded of a quote from Elenor Roosevelt…”Great Minds Discuss Ideas; Average Minds Discuss Events; Small Minds Discuss People.” I tend to believe we all find ourselves drifting on occasion into the later category when we should stick with the former. Just a reminder.

    I know one personally, met one in person and don’t know the other one of your infamous three and I can say I’ve questioned and wondered about some of their actions but I tend to give them credit for doing what they do… and if people want to support them, I just don’t see how you can consider that welfare.

    I know activism and business tend not to mix well… either people believe in their mission and do it as efficiently as possible or they treat it as a business and lose their message somewhere in the process of collecting the money… you don’t need a new truck, a nice place, and the finer things to deliver a message… and when one sees those sorts of things… I tend to believe most start to question the motives.

  18. I personally didn’t take the “welfare queens” label literally. What was meant, I think, is that their behaviour is very much similar to behaviour exhibited by entitled welfare queens. And in that, I completely agree. Moly , in particular, behaves like everyone owes him vast amounts of money, monthly donations. And for what exactly? What has he achieved in almost a decade that warrants all this money that he guilts people into sending?

    He gives his stuff out for free? Then why is he always putting a guilt trip on people who watch or listen to it for free? Why does he say you should pay for listening to his videos or podcasts? And why can’t he just monetize his channel?

    • I didn’t take “welfare queens” too seriously either. I knew it was just a play on words but yes these people are living a parasitical existence by conning others into supporting them as part of some noble cause when in fact it’s just to fuel their own egos while supporting them so they don’t have to get a real job like the rest of us.

      And yes, I’d say Stalineux falls into a category unto himself. Fortunately he’s practically been shunned out of the Libertarian media already. I’m actually very surprised he hasn’t been into some deep legal troubles for what he does which is essentially practicing therapy without a license. I just wonder how long before former members hurt by taking his quack advice get together for a class action suit against him. That is, if there’s much left after he’s done with the Tru Shibes suit given that he seems to be resisting all the way, only running up the legal tab he’ll eventually get stuck with.

      Moly has never had any consistency in how he tries to “sell” FDR for funding. He runs it like a charity at times, then in others he tries to say it’s a “business”, then calls people “thieves” for “consuming” content on one hand while preaching that IP isn’t valid property on the other; and finally commiting acts of aggression against any critic that gets too much attention (Tru Shibes, Paulie Doyle’s Buzzfeed article, Liberating Minds, The Guardidan, etc..) After following FDR for roughly a year or two, only to be banned for having a mind of my own and not succumbing to the dark side of his agenda, I can say he’s the most dangerous of the bunch and there is plenty of shadenfreude waiting upon his downfall.

      • Lots of people don’t understand hyperbole it seems. I’ve noticed even when the people listed in this article use it, many libertarians take it literally.

        Yeah and I have nothing against inconsistency as we are all imperfect, contradictory creatures, but Moly’s extreme hypocrisy must be pointed out since *he* is the one arguing for absolute consistency in virtue. Too bad about the lawsuit, but when you pick up the gun in the room you aren’t immune to the consequences.

  19. Jim Ro

    I’m a bit surprised that you had only one dishonorable mention. Great article though.

  20. … why not support and sustain Libertarians of all flavors via the dollar and internal commerce. Leverage your buying power, that is a hell of a lot more powerful than leveraging the (bullshit) vote. Forget the political panhandlers, they come in all stripes and have been around forever. Really look at it and even Obama and ilk are welfare queens.

    Why not create a network of Libertarian or near Libertarian entrepreneurs (labels suck) and do business in-house? A sort of trade alliance or an economic support group? hmmm, adds a new slant to the expression “working for change” 🙂 Crypto currency could be a huge part of this, simply opting out of the dollar would be a huge move….

    as for M.K. your statement “standing by it all” this is for you………..

    I’ve discovered that rejections are not altogether a bad thing. They teach a writer to rely on his own judgment and to say in his heart of hearts, “To hell with you.”
    SAUL BELLOW, attributed, Putting Your Passion Into Print

    and here is one for the rest of you

    “Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him, better take a closer look at the American Indian.”- Henry Ford

    cheers all

    • The theory of free trade indicates that one benefits by trading with people regardless of their views. I have a business and I have traded with other libertarian booksellers, but there are too few libertarian entrepreneurs for us to limit ourselves. At the same time, there is a tendency in fringe movements for people who don’t have a cost effective product or service to appeal to your philosophical agreement with them to get you to buy something that is not worth what they sell it for.

      • very good point, I did not take the time to think this all the way through. A matter of scale. BRIC (Brazil/Russia/India/China) would work but trying to source things or sell things from such a small band of the population could be a challenge. I just today discovered the term Agorism. very neat. So now I am reading The Agorist Primer and perhaps learn something. Even going the Holy Grail crypto coin route seems able to be sabotaged… Ecuador banned all crypto currency, just google Ecuador bans Bitcoin. Gosh, what next? Perhaps at the end of the day, Barter will be the best route for all. thanks for the feedback.

  21. I offered my thoughts here. Sadly, I think you got more wrong than you did right and these are important topics:

    http://MoreLibertyNow.com/cantwell-kokesh-molyneux/

  22. Pingback: This Bitch Wrote a Blog Post Criticizing Libertarians and You’ll Never Guess What Happened Next | Extremely in between...

  23. Pedro O'reily

    “And that he’ll be shilling on behalf of his son Rand soon…” Not so far, and I have seen no evidence in that direction. The word I’m getting about Ron, actually, is that he sees Rand (rightly) as a HUGE embarrassment. That’s about my only criticism.

  24. Pingback: Chris Cantwell: Liar, Strawman and Sockpuppeteer | FREEDOM FEENS talk radio show

  25. Of the four I am only familiar with Cantwell and Molyneux. I get the points about the money and the questionable aspects of their personalities and I appreciate having this to consider.

    I totally disagree about having a job and being a full-time activist and I disagree about us leading ourselves better. The number one reason for both of these is that the ideas of leadership have to be reason. This requires time to reason correctly and maintain correct reasoning, in addition to making content of high quality (in this case choice of words, etc..), marketing content, maintaining character (which is essential to maintaining correct reasoning), and living the rest of life. Maintaining character appears to be difficult for Molyneux so it likely takes up a good amount of his time. Also, the admins of some anarchist pages as well as some of the presenters of libertarian content are far more careful and much less flawed with their reasoning than most commenters. Having better reasoning in spotlight positions is very useful to sharing ideas more productively, which is the essence of libertarian progress at this time.

    I also disagree about the characterization of their popularity as blind-following. I judge what is spoken based on reason and I recognize better reasoning. To characterize the considering of words and learning as following a person is incorrect. This article makes this assumption to such an extant as to call the supposed following religious. Molyneux certainly has ego issues that are apparent, but I don’t think his view of himself is shared by his audience, not by the numbers that define him as popular, though maybe by a vast minority that donate significantly (donations is much of what the writer was getting at, I recognize that). The reasonable things Molyneux articulates clearly are just as reasonable despite his flaws and I appreciate those articulations.

    This article seems to be written from the perspective of blind-following in the sense that the writer seems to see blind-following as a motivation for valuing content, but libertarianism isn’t motivated in that way. This gives me the impression that the writer approaches ideas with a follow-or-not perspective rather than a learning one; which is a perspective unfitting and uncommon among libertarians. I see no reason to think that blind-following accounts for the popularity of Cantwell and Molyneux. Those who gain their popularity from blind followers are usually less reasonable and more likable.

    • “Maintaining character appears to be difficult for Molyneux so it likely takes up a good amount of his time. ”

      It’s all a sham. I think that’s the basic point of this article, to show these people have no character. Holy Moly is doing nothing but trying to maintain and grow a cult. And yes his following are basically blind sheep who seem to remain wilfully ignorant of the hard facts out there that show him for the liar and hypocrite that he truly is. Likewise there are examples of the others mentioned being blatently hypocritical, if not just embarassing as self appointed representatives of “libertarianism”.

  26. “Bless your heart” I love this part LOL
    -Theo

  27. sam

    Great blog, love this sort of thing. Hate hero worship, I used to like molyneux after a couple of his vids, then dmca takedown bs happened. Still can’t convince some ppl that he’s an egomaniac fraudster. I wasn’t aware of kokesh’s thievery. Although I wrote him off as he’s standing for president. But I thought it was naivete. I’m also getting so bored of echo chambers. Used to like Larkin rose, but he supported moly over dmca takedown.

    Great stuff, will continue reading your blog 🙂

    Sam

  28. Thanks for swimming against the current.

    I have taken heat for daring to out hypocritcal behavior in the “liberty movement”.

    Funny thing is I wanted to be free long before anyone “sold” me on the idea. In fact longer than many of the current batch of zealots have been alive.

  29. Pingback: ‘Just Another Celebritarian Blog’ – AdemoFreeman.com | AdemoFreeman.com

  30. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

    Where can I donate? 🙂

    But seriously, this has needed to be said for so long now. It’s worse than libertarians simply wasting money. It has contributed to the consumerization of the movement, where being a good libertarian is something you can cheerfully buy. This strain of media-driven libertarianism is more about supporting certain media-friendly darlings to be a libertarian on your behalf rather than changing your life to accommodate and live out your principles.

    Let’s say it: the single-minded devotion to market principles has convinced many that ONLY through the exchange of money validates a libertarian. And these libertarian confidence men seem to have fully adopted the mindset that, if they get money from people, they must also morally _deserve_ it. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t–who am I to challenge the flawless operation of our all-powerful diety, the market?

    The FreedomWorks co-optation of the tea party was in many ways playing directly into the weaknesses of a market-worshipping group of narcissists who think genuine liberty is something that can be bought. It’s downright disgusting. We deserve more than a fan club, vicariously living freely through our obnoxious kept libertarian performing clowns.

  31. Pingback: Liberty’s Lady of Stalingrad | Extremely in between...

  32. Pingback: Libertarian Fundamentalism | Extremely in between...

  33. Alex

    These people have operated openly. Have you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s