Category Archives: Humorous/Political

Libertarian Fundamentalism

I had a brief encounter with Christian fundamentalism in my married years (loooong story) that left my already skeptical self even more disillusioned with the religion. While I remain friends with many of the fine folks I encountered, the culture left a very bad taste in my mouth. The testimonies began to sound the same, the repressive views of modesty and women were off-putting to say the least, but it was the smug “us vs. them” attitude I found most repellent. You were either saved or lost and bless your heart if you weren’t a true believer. Overzealous fundamentalism is not limited to Christianity; indeed you can find this kind of extremism in any religion or in any philosophy.

In my strange foray into this Christian culture I noticed some parallels between it and another place where I spent a lot of time—libertarian activism. Libertarians are known for their anti-authoritarianism and some even actively oppose religion of any kind but as I hung around more I kept hearing the same mantras repeated and noticed a lot of overlap with religious fundamentalism. It seemed many replaced their former religious fervor with an unquestioning belief in the god of the free market and felt the need to convert others. I did my part through endless arguments and I own the fact that I was really, really obnoxious. It’s easy to alienate people with the rhetoric I used and I’ve since mellowed (some) but I have to point out the uncomfortable similarities between libertarian true believers and religious true believers. These parallels refer to specific tactics and are no means an indictment on all libertarians or the philosophy itself.

So here are the parallels I’ve noticed: Libertarian Fundamentalists have their patron saints/sacred cows/benevolent leaders who you’re not allowed to criticize, downplay abusive/fraudulent behavior by said leaders because they brought so many into the flock, use terms like “outbreeding the statists” (Quiverfulls anyone?), literally say we have to “convert” statists, call the uninitiated things like “sheeple” or imply they are not awake (saved/lost dichotomy), accuse those who have strayed from the philosophy as never having believed it in the first place, engage in constant purity tests over who is the holiest, calls for purges and witch hunts (“the left libertarians are destroying everything!!!1!11”), testimonies about how they saw the light of libertarianism and now need to spread the good word (a particular essay by He-Who-Shall-Not Say-My-Name describes this perfectly), the paralyzing fear of an invisible but influential specter marauding and causing all the bad things (the state) while downplaying other factors (lots of just plain shitty people out there), there are remnants and sell outs, apocalyptic thinking (“the dollar will crash!!!”), and mantras (“who will build the roads?” which to its credit I do like).

Now if you are a religious libertarian then much of that rhetoric makes sense to use. I get that. This is more directed to libertarians who aren’t religious but use the same verbiage.

I didn’t get into libertarianism and later anarchism because I wanted a worldview that fit everything neatly into boxes and made people into objects that needed to be molded. Libertarianism is not a religion that one needs to adhere to to escape damnation. There are strong, rational arguments to be made for free markets and against government intervention in our lives. There is thoughtful analysis that shows that a freer society brings prosperity to people in disadvantaged classes. It is insulting to dismiss the valid concerns of others by simply saying “the market will take care of it”. That’s the rhetorical equivalent of “just give it all to God”.

My beefs with Libertarian Fundamentalism are the same as with religious fundamentalism—it reduces people into conquests. It pits the holy against the sinful. It creates idols who repeatedly get away with fraud because they spread the good word a few times. It lacks nuance and empathy and is furthermore unnecessary to attaining a freer society.

There is no reason to use religious terminology for something that can be argued rationally and with compassion. My critique here is not to cast stones at my friends; it’s to say libertarians can do better. Charlatanism works, that can’t be argued, but if you resort to the same tactics as televangelists to sell your message it comes across as icky and pandering which are words many would use to describe the much derided political class. It’s hacky looking from outside the bubble. I’m also not saying libertarians shouldn’t have standards and principles—someone who believes we need to spend more money on war is really missing the point of limited government.

Every ideology has this problem so I’m not picking on libertarians here. I am aiming for a discussion of tactics and awareness of how language and actions can derail the stated goals of libertarians. I’m advocating for a little self-awareness and admitting I’ve been just as abrasive. Hell, I’ll always be a little abrasive but if your goal is to win hearts there are better ways to do it. By acting like fundamentalist jerks you can get a lot of notoriety and even followers but you’ll still be the blind leading the blind.

People aren’t incapable of being swayed from their irrational positions and there’s no reason to assume that because a person has a few hang ups about state intervention on some topics that they are somehow beyond redemption. It’s problematic to think people need one specific worldview for that redemption but even more so that they need to be saved in the first place.

9 Comments

Filed under Humorous/Political

The TRUTH About Female Clothing

I came across this weird video where libertarian welfare queen™ Stefan Molyneux works out his mommy issues on his viewers calmly and rationally explains why women are evil for wearing make up. So, naturally I thought it’d be fun to do a little parody. Below is the transcript and video.*

Recently internet philosopher Stefan Molyneux made a video titled The Truth About Make Up in which he made the point that women who wear make up are deceiving men into believing they are more fertile than they really are so they can extract resources from the men. Interesting point.

But I don’t think it goes far enough.

You see, women also use clothing (or lack thereof) to signal the sturdiness of their eggs. We use our skin, shoulders, necks, thighs, and yes—even ankles—to seduce men into the false comfort of fertility.

Not only should make up be forbidden for women to wear, but so should certain types of clothing. Did you know that Neanderthals invented clothing as a way to hide so they could more easily stalk their prey? Similarly, the modern female shamelessly uses the same techniques. You have to ask yourself, why would women use such primitive techniques? And even more so, who are their prey?

Truth be told, it’s you—the resource rich and protective male. These succubae entrap you with the provocative movement of their hips accentuated by wearing flowing dresses or so called skin tight skinny jeans. Cute. Except for the fact that these hosebeasts are likely trying to appear much younger in order to steal your life force with their rotten hoo-hoos before they are too washed up to even be passable as human beings. It’s disgusting that they use spanx to hide their own self loathing and deceit.

And don’t get me started on shorts and tank tops that push up the breasts and ass like some rap guys girlfriend or something. Good god, show some self respect! Might as well be advertising with that kind of clothing. Men, do you really want someone like that to be the future mother of your children?

But I have a solution. In order to cover up the transgressions of these wiles, women could instead take the virtuous route. There’s no shame in being wholesome, ladies. Put those stripper heels and make up and sexy little blouses away—you don’t need them if you are truly honorable.

From now on, women should wear ankle and wrist length, formless burlap sacks. The no make up goes without saying but just a reminder that you wouldn’t want to appear completely dishonest now would you? And forget about sprucing up your burlap sacks with any colors, we all know colors like red signal overt promiscuity. The color red was actually invented by ladies of the night—also known as hookers—as a way to tell prospective clients that they were sexually available. Now ladies, you wouldn’t want to be mistaken for a hooker would you?

Brown is an admirable and rational color. It says “I am able to work with equal effort alongside my fellow comrades and make for a suitable egg producer.” Men need to be careful of the treasonous tools women have in their arsenal to manipulate and leech off of hard working men. From make up to clothing, these Neanderthalic predators will stop at nothing to extract resources as their own condition is one of weakness, emotional and intellectual inferiority. They even use something as insidious as shampoo and even shaving to mask the true nature of their follicles. Real women have no such need of products as their knotted hair signifies someone who is down to earth and their fuzzy legs say, “I’m not a woman who’s vanity transcends logical expressions of my own humanity.”

So women, if you could just fight against your savage nature to accumulate material possessions for a false feeling of comfort and security, maybe you too could one day ascend to a masculine form of self-actualization. So ladies, remember, wear a burlap sack with no make up and knotted hair…or you’re just another estrogen based parasite.

End transcript

*Just wanted to point out the irony of Stefan Molyneux saying women are using deceptive practices to swindle men out of their money but…that’s none of my business.

1 Comment

Filed under Humorous/Political

Anarchism without Hyphens by Karl Hess (narrated by M.K. Lords)

Karl Hess explains the nature of anarchism without hyphens. I’ve been a panarchist for years now and Hess’ text is one of my favorite reads. I’ll be making more recordings of essays and posting them here and on my Youtube channel. Images used were ones I found browsing and some were borrowed from Bitcoin Not Bombs comrade Davi Barker. I’ve been all over the anarchy spectrum but find Hess’ analysis closest to my position now. Enjoy the recording.

Leave a comment

Filed under Humorous/Political, Srs bsns

Liberty’s Lady of Stalingrad

I’m a nobody in the general sense of the word. Got a regular job, work as an editor and vlogger for tips, fire dance in my spare time, and write for free on this little blog. I have no illusions that any of it will have any profound, lasting change–I do these things for fun because I find them personally fulfilling. In fact, I’m certain that my bitching doesn’t change very many minds at all.

That being said, there have been a couple more prominent folks in the libertarian milieu that have punched down at me in futile attempts at snark. I don’t abide fools well and when this happens I call them out, naturally. It results in more attention from their detractors and this is the opposite effect they likely want. Punching down is an act of futility.

Most recently, my biggest fan Chris Cantwell tried to bully the hosts of popular libertarian radio show Free Talk Live into not saying my name when I called in to challenge his most recent article of filth. Chris makes his living writing half researched articles with barely baked premises and harassing meter maids for liberty. He’s so successful he recently added pr0n ads to his site and sits by his computer refreshing his Google Analytics page obsessively, but don’t take my word for it, listen to him admit it in this dandy little recording. Skip to 1:25:00 for the juicy parts and the confession follows shortly after I jump off air.

King-Baby

h/t Stan Ancapi and anonymous anarchist troll for their combined efforts

I openly admit it is a petty thing to do to feud with another unknown anarchist, but I don’t like being lied about and I like it even less when bullies exploit tragic situations for clicks under the guise of a “philosophical” discussion. And I’m doing specifically because Cantwell is someone who loves to write clickbait, pick fights, and push buttons. If I write a clickbait headline it is meant to be taken ironically and is used to mock his own love of clickbait headlines.

No one can argue I’m a leftist feminist if they are familiar with my work, which is something this manchild has lied about in other articles. But it takes a special kind of douchenozzle to kick someone when they’re down which is what Cantwell did in his article titled “The Worst Thing Brad Spangler Put in His Daughter Was Bad Philosophy” “I’m a Bad Person and Should Feel Bad”. It was a reference to a recent controversy surrounding a prominent libertarian who insensitively outed his daughter as a victim of sexual assault by his own hand. Cantevenwell goes on to say that leftist philosophy will scar everyone it touches immeasurably and the only cure is to fight it when and wherever it rears its ugly head, even if it is a 20 year old kid who wants to be left alone. Or something like that.

The whole situation and response is awful and disgusting and I called in to simply ask what the point of attacking the survivor was. The discussion (or lack thereof) followed one about tactics for spreading ideas of liberty so what I had to say was very relevant considering Cantwell was giving tactical tips out.

Ostracizing is one way to peacefully resolve problems in a hypothetical anarchist community and it appears I have been ostracized by King Menses. He’s been known to hate on the womenfolk quite a bit so I thought he would revel in taking down one of them. Guess he’s still afraid of a girl. If ostracizing someone for wanting to have an on air philosophical conversation is okay but not at least questioning their attack on a young survivor of sexual assault from a tactical perspective isn’t, Libertopia has a fucked list of priorities.

The outcome of his attempt at ostracizing is an interesting case study for libertarians. Most would agree black markets thrive when the state tries to prohibit something and the same applies when bloggers try to silence dissent. By screaming, “DON’T SAY HER NAME!!1!11!!1” it prompted others to ask, “Who is this woman that big, bad brutalist is so afraid of facing?” It also resulted in mockery and gems like this silly video a friend of mine made:

Cantdoanythingwell pulled tried to pull the ole Stalin, but we all know what happened to him. You can’t suppress information, drugs, content, or names without generating more interest. By punching down, you elevate who you are trying to silence. I’d say this is true especially of people with differing ideologies. It’s typically a bad idea to try to censor people see: the Streisand Effect. Oh and our old friend Josef Stalin.*

stalinwell2

*There was a disclaimer here but if you don’t get it, you don’t get it.

Update: It was brought to my attention that this easily triggered grown man has been angry with me since Porcfest Idol 2013; he recently admitted it 30 minutes into his Some Garbage Podcast. So for people trying to say I started this, it actually started when he refused to shake my hand after losing to this spoken word piece. I found this admission particularly hilarious.
 

22 Comments

Filed under Humorous/Political

Crypto Convos Episode 13 with Brian Sovryn of Sovryn Tech

I had the pleasure of sitting down with my friend Brian Sovryn of the awesome podcast Sovryn Tech for episode 13 of Crypto Convos. We talked bitcoin, broader tech, the future of tech, and alternative nets that could compete with the internet we’re used to. Brian always has an interesting perspective and check out sovryntech.com to listen. Sex and Science Hour with Brian Sovryn and Stephanie Murphy is another great show.

Leave a comment

Filed under Humorous/Political

This Bitch Wrote a Blog Post Criticizing Libertarians and You’ll Never Guess What Happened Next

Sometimes you write articles that you’re really proud of and you took great care in polishing–careful that every point was crystal clear. My last one was not one of those articles but it got more views than all of my other ones combined. I’m usually pretty laid back and mostly write about boring bitcoin stuff now. This reaction was unanticipated as it was just meant to be a silly rant, but it also had to be said.

I apologize for nothing.

But I do want to clear up some points because they seemed to have been missed. The article was meant to be a bit outrageous to be sure, but the subjects (except Ron Paul) involved have produced much more intentionally offensive content. I’m not a fan of outrage culture, but I thought I’d vent out some amusing frustration. Turns out, a lot of people felt the same way but had experienced censorship or silence when their concerns were brought up because even libertarians have their sacred cows immune from criticism. Others have weighed in on what I got wrong and I went on Free Talk Live to give my side of the story.

First off, I have no problem with donations as I said. The language was hyperbolic to make a point but that point was not that you should donate to nobody (unless you’re broke) but that your donations would be better spent on activists with better track records. Some people asked me for solutions but another point was to do your own research. There are very few groups I donate to: Antiwar, Bitcoin Not Bombs, Ross Ulbricht’s Legal Defense Fund, Sean’s Outpost Homeless Outreach, and individuals who are in need or whose work I value. But unless you have vetted someone, don’t waste your money.

I’ve been accused of trying to divide the movement. Your movement isn’t worth shit if it can’t handle a little low brow criticism. It produces enough content of the same every time one of the people I criticized writes (or has someone ghostwrite that they later don’t pay) or makes attention seeking videos.

Some people wanted to argue semantics (shock!) but if you’re too dense to realize the way I am using the term welfare, especially after I defined the term “libertarian welfare queen”, then I can’t help you. If you are living off of the donations of others to fund your lifestyle, you are using some form of welfare and no welfare does not have to be coercive it can be voluntary. Words have multiple meanings. I learned some libertarians should get better at reading comprehension.

I don’t think you have to have a job to be a productive libertarian. Many people balance day jobs and activism; I do and am privileged to be able to have a job that allows flexibility. But there are full time, successful activists out there that don’t work a “slave job” too. I wasn’t demonizing activism in the least, just unproductive activism.

I was also amazed (well kind of) at how uncritically thinking my critics were. Calling me a communist, bootlicker, butter faced cunt, or SJW is the best you got? I got called worse and more creative names in middle school. The three people I focused on are the biggest name callers in libertarianism and even revel in being known for it. And please learn the correct definition of ad hominem. Saying Chris Cantwell is a big, fat crybaby =/= Chris Cantwell’s points are invalid because he is a big, fat crybaby. Now yeah it was name calling and even a little bit of shit talking, but that’s the nature of rants. These are grown men who can take it and who really shouldn’t be worried that some insignificant blogger is going to interrupt their cash flow.

But maybe some of them are afraid of a little lady? One of them, Chris Cantwell, wrote a lie filled blog post as a response and then blocked me from commenting–which is fine because it’s his property. But if you give money to someone, shouldn’t you be a little curious about why they are trying to silence their critics?

I don’t make jack shit from my writings but do take donations and allow all non-spam comments. Even the mean ones. Even the ones that might prove me wrong.

But I’m not going to stop criticizing any movement when I think the people it puts in leadership positions are swindlers or ineffective. I want to thank the people who have contacted me offering their support. If you want something to succeed, you should be willing to examine when someone casts a harsh light on the people with more followers and influence in your movement, even if the critique was meant to be saucy or humorous.

 

 

20 Comments

Filed under Humorous/Political

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.

74 Comments

Filed under Humorous/Political