But should we doubt his libertarian bona fides? I say no, but that's because I don't think much of libertarian bona fides in the first place. Attend Matt Welch of libertarian flagship Reason: Sure, he says, the holy-rolling is a little bit much, but --
Like his father, former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Rand has never hid his religion under a bushel basket when courting libertarian voters because he doesn't have to. Arguably alone among large swaths of the American electorate, even atheist libertarians tend to respect the ways in which religious organizations and communities fill vital roles in civil society. Indeed, even as outspoken an atheist and libertarian as Penn Jillette is quite open to the ways religious groups benefit society.He's got a point. As I've noticed before, libertarians who'll go to the mat and paint their faces blue for legal weed and raw milk suddenly get all big-tentish (or downright conservative) when the subject is abortion. (Or women's rights in general.) And we've been seeing libertarian-fundamentalist fusion lately over the sacred Constitutional right to refuse service to gay people looking for wedding cakes -- from William McGurn of the Wall Street Journal, for example, who does us the favor of explaining in his "Indiana’s Libertarian Moment" article why fundalibertarians feel as they do:
In 1964, when the Supreme Court upheld the Civil Rights Act’s requirement that hotels serve African-Americans, blacks, especially in the South, effectively had their ability to travel restricted by the possibility they couldn’t secure lodging. In contrast, no one today suggests gay couples can’t find a baker or photographer for their weddings.If they can get you to buy this, expect them to come back in, oh, a nano-second to ask, "Hey, why do black people need this so-called Civil Rights Act anymore either? They have hotels.com!"
Some of you may conclude from this that libertarians are max-freedom except when it comes to people they don't resemble. I'm sure that's true for a lot of them, but the thing to keep in mind is this: the apparent contradictions of libertarianism disappear when you consider the true goal of its advocates is not greater personal liberty at all, but to devolve all government power to for-profit companies -- to privatize prisons, highways, and even natural resources once thought to be the birthright of all people, so that everything becomes that highest end of human effort: a revenue stream for the rich. In other words, what conservatives try to disguise about themselves, libertarians proudly own. I leave it to you whether that's a point in their favor.
Libertarianism is a pretty funny joke played on the American public by whoever was paying the bills for Ayn Rand and Von Mises, but the true believers don't get it, and they are hell bent on taking us along with them on their carnival ride to dystopia,
ReplyDeleteSo if the service provided by a bigot isn't an essential service, it ain't discrimination??
ReplyDeleteto paraphrase the mighty boosh, libertarianism is for the science teachers and the mentally ill.
ReplyDeleteBlacks, especially in the South, effectively had their ability to travel restricted by the possibility they couldn’t secure lodging. In contrast, no one today suggests gay couples can’t find a baker or photographer for their weddings.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, the same people who would suggest that no one would suggest today, were suggesting that no one would suggest in 1964.
What does THAT suggest, asshole?
Don't forget realtors and Porsche salesmen.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between them is, conservatives use tradition to justify letting wealthy men rule the world, whereas libertarians arrive there via 'reason.'
ReplyDeleteIf it were remotely possible that Paul had a chance in hell at this thing, it would be easy enough to come up with some con to sucker the carnies on his campaign staff with, and blow the whole thing apart.
ReplyDeleteHell, just start encouraging libertarians to back him with Bitcoin exclusively.
...the thing to keep in mind is this: the apparent contradictions of libertarianism disappear when you consider the true goal of its advocates is to devolve all government power to for-profit companies...
ReplyDeleteWhich also goes a fair piece towards explaining their attitudes towards women's rights, IMO. The libertarian's study of history proves to him that male domination is the rightful order of things and would continue yet if not for those meddling feminists...lost in this analysis is the fact that male domination was only the result of unequal rights enshrined in law, rather than being a "natural order" in any sense of the word "natural." Libertarian hostility towards women comes down to a belief that women have in this day and age only accrued some limited power due to being coddled (that is, granted somewhat more equality under the law), and that if only this could be reversed, men would once again be free to practice the Galtian mastery only denied them through force of law. Strip that away and force the wimmins to once again be enslaved to their biology, and all those losers out there can take their rightful place.
c'mon, jenn, it's in the dungeon master's guide.
ReplyDelete"taking us along with them on their carnival ride to dystopia" and THEN the Nature Trail to Hell.
ReplyDeleteeven atheist libertarians tend to respect the ways in which religious
ReplyDeleteorganizations and communities fill vital roles in civil society.Yeah, until the private mercenary armies are fully up and running, you need something to justify stomping the faces of uppity darkies, sluts, homos, and liberal moochers.
Which one? First Edition, or Post-SJW?
ReplyDelete"Penn Jillette is quite open to the ways religious groups benefit society."
ReplyDeleteUm.
“Once you've condoned faith in general, you've condoned any crazy shit done because of faith.”
― Penn Jillette, God, No!: Signs You May Already Be an Atheist and Other Magical Tales
Is it like lawyers? are 90% of the RPG nerds giving the rest of us a bad name?
ReplyDeletegoing from a heavily libertarian son-of-Ron drone-fighter to a fuck-Islam Jesus freak.Well, in fairness: (1) Rand was never a drone fighter, but a drone posturer; (2) Ron is himself a Jesus freak, albeit one who hasn't gone all in on Foreign Military Adventurism for the Rapture's Sake; and (3) at the time, Rand opposed the "ground zero mosque" even as his daddy was (to his credit) defending it. His right-schmibertarianism has largely been smeared-on bullshit for the sake of Ron's base. So he's not having to flip-flop all that much.
ReplyDeleteTo be (semi-)serious for a moment: At heart, contemporary libertarianism is a belief that not only is a true meritocracy possible, but is the natural state of things. The only thing stopping this is those filthy statists and their insistence that this "government" thing actually helps anyone. So, on the one hand, they oppose taxes and regulations because those hurt the people who should rightly be on top of society; and on the other, they oppose all that racial and "gonadal" politics stuff because it benefits a bunch of whiners who couldn't succeed on their own.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the middle-class-or-better straight white men who dominate the movement know that there's no inequity. After all, they've employed reason and conducted thought experiments, all untainted by that filthy life experience that renders their inferiors unable to acknowledge their own flaws.
Now, the wedding of libertarians and theocons may seem very odd, but they share that same belief in some Golden Age meritocracy that's waiting around the corner. They differ in how they imagine the plebs are going to be sorted out - with libertarians it's social Darwinism, whereas with theocons it's more about God kicking sinner ass. But even so, the fundamental belief - that everone gets only and exactly what they deserve - is the same.
"and that if only this could be reversed, men would once again be free to practice the Galtian mastery only denied them through force of law"
ReplyDeleteSome of them have told me that "just you wait" - in the coming apocalypse or civilizational collapse, all the women will be enslaved to the men. They like to envision scenarios where, not only do they somehow survive an apocalypse with their skills(?)//smarts(?), but they will have command of a harem of trembling women as a reward.
Those whiny females (and blahs and other littlebrains) think they're being oppressed, but they're letting their (*shudder*) lifetime of experiences get in the way. Everyone knows that pure reason can only come from the mind of a heterosexual white man, preferably one in his teens who's just discovered the news.
ReplyDeleteSo, like the other schmibertarian kool kidz, he's perfectly willing to use the religious right as political allies in dismantling the general welfare, while laughing up his sleeve about how his superior intellect allows him to do without bullshit fairy tales with no empirical basis. Now, where did he put that heavily-penciled copy of The Road to Serfdom?
ReplyDeleteYou've reviewed this year's Hugo Award nominees, I see.
ReplyDeletethey will have command of a harem of trembling women as a reward.
ReplyDeleteOnly until one of the women manages to get behind them and hit them in the head with a rock.
Their thick skulls render them immune to such female treachery.
ReplyDeletethe wedding of libertarians and theocons may seem very odd
ReplyDeleteSo odd it's downright queer, i.e., they shouldn't expect their fellow travelers to bake any cakes for the nuptials.
Yeah. I've often wondered if the vendors depriving gay couples of their services were gun dealers would it make glibertarian heads explode?
ReplyDeleteNow, where did he put that heavily-penciled copy of The Road to Serfdom?
ReplyDeleteWell, that's different!
See also the Gor novels.
ReplyDelete"Now, the wedding of libertarians and theocons may seem very odd,..."
ReplyDeleteMaybe not so odd...
"Arguably alone among large swaths of the American electorate, even atheist libertarians tend to respect the ways in which religious
organizations and communities fill vital roles in civil society. Indeed,
even as outspoken an atheist and libertarian as Penn Jillette is quite open to the ways religious groups benefit society."
Yeah, he's open to the ways religious groups can hoover up money from the gulls to do the thankless tasks of society; throwing a few bones to the poor, maybe providing a few bucks for vouchers for fundy homeschoolers, and do some faith based "social services" like day care and reproductive health that in no way includes contraception or abortion. Never mind that private charity has never been enough to meet the demand, in the coming libertarian utopia, only life's total failures will be sticking out their grubby hands. Meanwhile, society's TRUE heroic producers will be freed to realize their true potential and rightful dominance.
Just noticed that mds made largely the same points, but I hate to waste all this typing...
All's I know is that D&D 5th allows you to play transsexual characters (*ahem ahem* Girdle of Masculinity/Feminity, anyone?) and is therefore not only WOtC's capitulation to SJW pressure but is also a crime against humanity.
ReplyDeleteWhat's up with Bitcoin these days, anyway? Are gullible idiots still setting fire to their houses with server farms?
ReplyDeleteheavily-penciled
ReplyDeleteIs that what the kids are calling it these days?
This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Libertarians running for President on a libertarian platform under the auspices of the Libertarian Party regularly garner between 1 and 1-1/2% of the vote, if that. Now, a few months ago, glibertarians were making rather pathetic pleas for progressives to take them seriously, in the hopes of raising the prospects of young Rand, maybe even get a crossover vote started. Now, they're trying to gin up some support from the right wing of the right-wing party. It's all about trying to create enough press attention to parade around that attention as legitimacy, which is the Holy Grail of fundraising.
ReplyDeleteThe question that the mainstream press never asked at the time, of course: if you're so goddamned progressive, why are you fuckers running as Republicans?, whose reputation for batshittery, sadly, predictably, precedes them.
There will be many iterations of this pandering to the rabid factions until the money smoke clears, and I doubt that it matters much what Paul and his ideological ilk say in the meantime, because it's all about attracting money and promising to do the bidding of the billionaire(s) that now own the electoral process. Still, the progressives' view is sound--the glibertarians claiming independence are running as Republicans because they are Republicans. Fucking goofier Republicans, but Republicans nevertheless.
Funny, speaking of Rand Paul:
ReplyDeleteAt a splashy kickoff rally, Paul promised a government restrained by the Constitution and beholden no more to special interests.
"I have a message, a message that is loud and clear and does not
mince words," he told cheering supporters. "We have come to take our
country back."
Uh, yeah, the only question is how far back - 1830s maybe? And you have to love the picture of someone who's giving sloppy sleeve jobs to the Religious Right talking about "beholden to special interests".
Along the way, Paul is likely to challenge his fellow Republicans' views
on both foreign and domestic policy, as well as the nuts and bolts of
how campaigns are run. Tech savvy and youth-focused, Paul is expected to be an Internet juggernaut that his competitors will be forced to chase.
SNERK.
Jenghazi Rubin is still going to hate him. She wants a reliable idiot who will bomb Iran.
ReplyDeleteSo Jeb or Walker. (She'd warm up to Cruz if she thought he could win.)
~
he's accepting donations in bitcoin.
ReplyDeletePerfect currency for a worthless candidate.
ReplyDeleteSeparate but equal...to coin a phrase.
ReplyDeleteBITcoin a phrase!
ReplyDelete"middle-class-or-better straight white men who dominate the movement"
ReplyDeleteMaybe it's small sample size or just my weird-ass family, but the most ardent libertarians I know IRL are all poor. While there are plenty of high achieving sociopath type libertarians out there, I think there's a strong correlation between people who don't fit into society generally and libertarianism.
At least with the guys I know, it seems like the same reasons why they're drawn to libertarianism - disdain for being told what to do in any way, prone to utopian magical thinking about the world, a desire to lecture anyone in earshot at the slightest excuse, and an overall inability to empathize with other people -- are the same reasons why they struggle with succeeding in a business/academic environments. It's precisely because they haven't had success in life that they find the "you're special and oppressed" message so compelling.
I think the Mens' Rights movement is very similar -- it's impossible for me to imagine an actual manly man giving two shits what some woman wrote on Tumblr. I can't imagine anything more "beta" than whining about a YouTube video about sexism in video games or whatever. Maybe they are posting all this crap in between boffing hot babes and rassling alligators, but I suspect it's exactly the opposite -- they feel their manhood is being taken away because they never had any. Plenty of libertarians are outraged about "government confiscation" precisely because they don't have anything to confiscate.
As far as I can tell they are grasping their shrinking hoards while exchange after exchange and darknet market after darknet market get rolled up by the feds or cleaned out by their proprietors. Or, as in the silk road case, both, shut down and robbed by the feds.
ReplyDeleteThe other Republicans are all various flavors of Koch but not Rand, Rand is different, Rand is Pepsi.
ReplyDeleteWell, there's two major kinds of each group, the prosperous, successful ones and the far more numerous broke losers upon whose gullibility the first group preys
ReplyDeleteRaise the empathy shields, Mr. Sulu! This will enable us to treat you like shit for being gay.--yes, empathy shield seems perfect.
ReplyDeleteAlso known as the Morlocks and the Eloi.
ReplyDelete"Libertarians" is just a big fake out. There's no such thing. If you read the comments at Reason you fast discover those guys are basically garden variety Republicans. Maybe they have their pet rocks (weed, hiring prostitutes, whatever) but it's different pet rocks. And 90% of them are pretty much indistinguishable from National Review commenters.
ReplyDelete"Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke pot" -- anarchist Bob Black
ReplyDeletePfft. Rand wishes he was the choice of a new generation. On his best day, he's barely Faygo.
ReplyDeleteHe's the disgusting metallic effervescent off-brand iced tea I bought once when I was living on Long Island and immediately threw out.
ReplyDeleteOh, man, how can you believe in a political philosophy that makes moral compromises to vote for an electable candidate, rather than standing firm?
ReplyDeleteI mean, what if progressives voted for a presidential candidate who worked to excuse NSA spying and CIA torture, or who expanded drone attacks and started illegal wars?
If that had happened, we'd surely be able to say that it looks like progressive ideals seem suddenly unimportant when it comes to, say, poor Yemenis.
Oh, wait...
Like, if I don't give Obama a pass for his shit I'm not going to give Paul a pass for his, either, but do you know how much shit I took from progressives and liberals when I told them I wouldn't vote for Obama because of the way he constantly betrays progressive and liberal attitudes?
Do you remember how much people would howl if you said that their voting for Obama proved they don't actually care about NSA spying?
You can't adopt a "lesser of two evils" approach and then go after libertarians for adopting the same moral calculus you do!
Yeah, but Libertarians are icky.
ReplyDeleteAgreed! The most diehard libertarian I know well leveled out in 2 or 3 different careers, imagined he was held back by people whose priorities were wrong (because not his), and was basically antisocial and very much "You can't tell ME what to do" in all aspects of life. All while harboring an idea of himself rooted in fantasy fiction -- i.e., if only the apocalypse would happen, THEN we'd see he's the hero of the story! Dude owned a truck and a computer and a gun and that was it. From him and from everything I've seen online, libertarianism is not a school of thought so much as it is a personality type -- and they don't understand that not everyone has this same personality type or that other types are equally valid.
ReplyDelete(I give him lotsa credit; he got older, outgrew this mode, and founded a successful business that operates within the law, and he does not bitch about the law. He is much happier now.)
Piracy works, it's true...but only for a little while. And once word gets around that you're a pirate, everyone will be comfortable with the idea of shooting you. Preferably in the back, from a distance. It just isn't a practical long-term approach--and by long-term, I mean anything more than about forty hours.
ReplyDeleteLibertarians and theocons want to see the same thing: the worthy rewarded and the sinners punished. Theocons believe the State should adopt the goals of whatever batshit Biblical interpretation they're fond of this week while the Randroids think the "free market" should step on the face of everyone without enough money. They get along so well because they dislike so many of the same people.
ReplyDeleteI wonder who he's getting to turn it back into dollars...and whether the Russian mob has its fingers deep into that exchange yet.
ReplyDeleteOh come, it isn't as though The Seven Samurai is an international classic, beloved for generations the world over, whose story and moral transcend international boundaries! Every true Galtian superman knows that he, and only he, will be The Chosen One with the sole power amongst the pathetic hordes of rabble...
ReplyDeleteWhatever one's politics, "as avowedly purist and proudly uncompromising as any internet libertarian" isn't exactly a badge of honor.
ReplyDeleteI think libertarians consider themselves to be Top Level Predators, and everyone and everything else is their Prey.
ReplyDeleteRepugs/religious fundies tend to have similar viewpoints, tho their rating methods are a little different -one group judging the prey by their "sinner-or saved" criteria, rather than faux Darwinian "Survival of Strongest" happy-crappy.
Liberal philosophy is closer to Commensalism and Mutualism, with a nice amount of fair (that is: regulated by gov't) competition mixed in.
The Liberal ways work quite well for everyone, but the predators want to be the rooster crowing on a dungheap, so long as it's their dungheap.
paint their faces blue for legal weed and raw milk
ReplyDeleteThat's not paint, that's colloidal silver. Medical freedom!!
Most "libertarians" don't care about police abuse of minorities because of reasons that are unclear.
ReplyDeleteScalzi's phrase "thin strips of Objectivist jerky" comes immediately to mind.
ReplyDeleteDusky people (and wimmins) are just unsuited for business success, for reasons that are also unknown.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it's like that weird disease that made slaves run away.
Damn, you beat me to it. I was going to predict:
ReplyDelete1) Anyone who tells the truth about Obama will be criticized for purity.
3) They'll be told their purity will depress voting and the only viable candidate will lose the primary.
4.)If the establishment candidate wins they'll be told any criticism of her will depress votes and lose the election.
5.)After she wins any criticism of her will lose any battles she must fight with Republicans, the midterms, and her reelection.
6.) Repeat.
Maybe presidents and politics don't improve our lives as much as mass public action. We've seen the right lose through fear of boycotts and public pressure; the president's viewpoint shifted with the wind. We need to harness the wind, not the president.
So the first step is not to tell everyone that Obama bailed out the banks and left (most of) the rest of us to slowly get poorer and angrier. They already know it and they ignore it. The first step is to break the bond of obedience to the leader.
In the meantime we have the great Edroso to keep us amused and occupied while we try to awaken the sleeping giant.
Arguably alone among large swaths of the American electorate, even atheist libertarians tend to respect the ways in which religious organizations and communities fill vital roles in civil society.
ReplyDeleteWhat the fuck is Welch trying to write here? Arguably ONLY atheist libertarians respect the role of religious organizations? I mean if he were trying to write that, he's a bigger fucking moron that I already think he is. First, there's a huge movement in North Carolina right now called "Moral Mondays", led by the Rev. William Barber and they are fighting...Oh, wait, he's black and liberal. Well, certainly the soup kitchens run by Catholic Workers...nah, they also fight redevelopment. Well, whatever it is this big time libertarian Big Thinker is onto here, I'm sure he meant something by it.
Maroon.
Yah, that guy would rule. Him, and anyone who figures out how to re-boot the internet. Solar-powered hot showers and HawtMilf.com archives? They'd carve his face into a mountainside...
ReplyDeleteEven the Liberal New Republic Atheist Penn Jillette agrees...
ReplyDeleteSo it turns out Tax Avoidance Fetishes trump religious beliefs/non-beliefs...Gee, whoodathunkit?
All of this would be slightly more bearable if these weren't the same people who go absolutely ape shit if they are even mildly inconvenienced let alone denied anything. If Rand Paul went in somewhere and could t get a sandwich because it offended someone's 'beliefs' he'd bitch until his dying day about how his FREEDUM was challenged.
ReplyDeleteHe's published budgets that call for year-over-year spending cuts and he hasn't put forward a terrible tax plan that blows open the budget again to give bigger child tax credits to all Americans regardless of income while also limiting the deduction for the poorest parents (that's Marco Rubio).
ReplyDeleteThere you have it. If you think that Marco Rubio is too sweet on poor people, Paul would appear to be your man. That this bold plutocratic thinking will endear him to those GOPies who most strongly consider themselves Christian tells you something about priorities.
Sometimes referred to as "the sex dungeon master's guide".
ReplyDelete"constantly betrays progressive and liberal attitudes"
ReplyDeleteA+ ad hominem counterfactual ragegasm, bro. Love it when people like you misuse the word "constantly" -- like Obama even takes a shit, sleeps, makes love to his wife, etc. in a way that "betrays progressive and liberal attitudes". Really proves you have the moral high ground and have something intelligent to say. Thanks for contributing.
With people who think life after apocalypse will be one big Gor novel with themselves as the barbarian heroes, I'd sort of wish them a good three months to survive it and see how far reality departs from their expectations.
ReplyDeleteI assume he has a flying car or owns his own road or something.
ReplyDeleteWell he wouldn't be much of a magician if he hadn't mastered the arts of levitation, would he? I'm sure he can fly a carpet or turn Teller into Pegasus or something.
So his next campaign stop will be at the Gathering of the Juggaloes?
ReplyDelete"...the apparent contradictions of libertarianism disappear when you
ReplyDeleteconsider the true goal of its advocates is not greater personal liberty
at all, but to devolve all government power to for-profit companies."
I'm buyin' it. So libertarians are the Jesuits of capitalism: purist, rigorous, "ideological," but all within the confines of the received system. It's not (as some of them might even think) that libertarians exist in spite of conservatism, but, rather, as the Jannisaries/ninjas OF conservatism.
"I want maximal personal freedom."
"As well you should! I, your libertarian friend, support that!"
"Then how about universal health care and a guaranteed income for life?" "Ooh, that's not going to work..."
"But even so, the fundamental belief - that everyone gets only and exactly what they deserve - is the same."
ReplyDeleteWhat they have in common is total faith in the legitimacy of the system. Of course, to one, the system is capitalism, while to the other, it's Christian dogma. But both define "merit" as "that which most fully and correctly adheres to the principles of the system."
Whereas a normal person looks around at age 13 and sees that the system--either one--is rife with hypocrisy, special deals, privilege, and pure bullshit.
A guy who named his daughter Moxie Crimefighter is in no position to complain about anybody ELSE being crazy.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention realizing there is no Asphalt Fairy.
ReplyDelete1. His point (I think) is that libertarianism, unlike other political philosophies, is so noble that it can overcome the moral degeneration caused by atheism; so even atheist libertarians remain open to the possibility of grifting on extracting value from religion, as opposed to the disdainful ways of, say, atheist liberals. Welch may well be ath-curious himself, but panders gotta pander.
ReplyDelete2. I realise this is a lost cause, but in real English the word is "swathes".
but they're letting their (*shudder*) lifetime of experiences get in the way.
ReplyDeleteWell, that's the problem, ain't it? Everyone dismisses libertarianism simply because they have had experience with other people. Or have read history books. Or have actually thought about it for a few seconds.
Just ignore everything you've ever experienced, read, felt, heard, tasted, smelled, or thought and you'll see that libertarianism is the only perfect social order!
they shouldn't expect their fellow travelers to bake any cakes for the nuptials.
ReplyDeleteA-Ha! You're one of the oppressors!
Gonna need a bigger rock...
ReplyDeletePff, back in 1st, if you came at me with a girdle like that? I'da meteor swarmed you all the way to the Bone March.
ReplyDeletePS I am not a nerd.
I think I first saw "Houseplants of Gor" here -- maybe JennofArk posted it, a year-plus ago? I shall repost it at will:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rdrop.com/users/wyvern/data/houseplants.html
I find it infesting engineers and the conservative side of the software developer's universe as well.
ReplyDeleteOh, Gawd. Meteor, please hit me first, then those libertoonian assholes.
ReplyDeleteSo, libertarianism can be thought of the secular wing of Calvinism.
ReplyDeleteIt's a wonder that the libertarians haven't also come up with a secular version of dispensationalism. When the Rapture comes, you get to take your cash and your stuff with you and there's a duty-free shop at the Pearly Gates.
Ron and sprog-Rand are all about the grift, and any running for president pose is just more of the same - keeping those dollars rolling in. The scary one is Cruz: he believes what he says.
ReplyDeleteHmm, so recovery from the infection is possible...
ReplyDeleteWell, now, that was probably the nearest that print can come to a public knob job, I would guess.
ReplyDeleteIt is NewsMax, after all.
We'll have to revisit this prose when Tailgunner Ted ambushes the Paul campaign in the skies over Iowa, and Rand Paul augurs in, trailing flames.
Now that could get me to watch TV again.
ReplyDeleteMark Ames wrote an article a year or two ago, referencing the few documents in the record that libertarianism was pretty much created out of whole cloth by Milton Friedman in 1948, with the effort bankrolled by a group of businessmen who wanted Friedman to create a PR campaign to turn public opinion against the New Deal. It was Friedman's idea to create a new political philosophy. So, Friedman has committed two mortal sins in one--creating a theoretical framework for avarice that enabled brutal dictators to believe they were innovators, and then gave it an anodyne, cutesy name.
ReplyDeleteSo, it's not so much that it's no such thing, rather, it's a made-up thing done at the behest of a bunch of sour-grapes plutocrats.
As I recall, young "Dr" Paul was incensed at the prospect of anyone even inadvertently spying on him personally in his back yard via drone, but was totally okay with local police using one to "take out" any mope they caught sticking up a convenience store, because, um, freedom or something.
ReplyDeleteWake me up when "not voting for the actual candidate for office" because he's not as good as your rotisserie team vaults your fantasy hero into the job. What's that you say? You think globally and fail to act at all locally? Well, then, I'll just keep snoozing.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why so many people think this is just about wedding cakes and photography. Yes, those are the real-life examples that the law was built around, but it's worded so broadly that it provides protection for denial of essential services as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd tenured law professors at public universities.
ReplyDeleteThere's quite an overlap in the Venn diagram of libertarians and MRAs/PUAs. These jokers think women have all the power because pussy.
ReplyDeleteYou have to read Dave Futrelle's takedown of the guy at A Voice For Men who is teaching the MRAs how to cook as a means of revenge against feminists. Because what every woman fears is a man who can feed himself and doesn't need her. Or something.
ReplyDeleteThat's been my concern with people more or less minimising the bills by saying that the gay person in question can always go patronise another business. What happens if the provider of last resort in their area refuses them service?
ReplyDeleteThat's a damnable slander on Faygo. The blue is actually quite tolerable, especially when it's flat, and is delicious when mixed with peach schnapps.
ReplyDeleteG-d doesn't love us that much.
ReplyDeleteIf that were going to happen, I'd have to go to GOTJ, and stay sober for it. (I dunno about you, man, but I kind of have to admire an event that openly has a space in its topography called the "Drug Bridge.")
By the powers granted me, I award this comment the Medal of Succinctness.
ReplyDeleteElecting an endless string of Hilary Clintons is definitely going to lead us to a social democracy.
ReplyDelete"even atheist libertarians tend to respect the ways in which religious organizations and communities fill vital roles in civil society"
ReplyDeleteIs he referring to the massive tax-free real estate holdings, or the willingness to harness the coercive power of the state enforce their superstitions on people who don't share them?
Let's see now -- By analogy to the End-timers' loyal support for Likud Über Alles until the end comes and the Jews go to Hell, the theocons would be the Jews of libertarian fascism? Sounds right.
ReplyDeleteIf Ayn Rand is the founding mother, than libertarianism is the moral degeneration caused by atheism. Fortunately, most atheists are humanist enough to reject it.
ReplyDeleteObama has been a disappointing centrist Democrat, but that's not quite the same thing as America's Foremost Libertarian proving to be a standard-issue Tea Party Republican.
ReplyDeleteOr the oregano they bought from that guy at the playground.
ReplyDeleteIrn Bru, anyone?
ReplyDeleteWhile Libertarians profess to believe in a meritocracy, none of them has ever been in a room where a bunch of Meritocrats with radically different interests had to build consensus.
ReplyDeleteAsk a Libertarian how their ideal society would build a road from the mines in Randtown through the Get Off My Lawns Hills to the port in Commietown, and get ready to see a head explode.
A Huffington Post item, for what that's worth, says that he handles the bitcoin through a service that instantly converts the proceeds to real live US Dollars. You know, that stuff that Obama is working to ruin with inflation.
ReplyDeleteBTW, the Wall Street Journal, for what *that's* worth, says that many firms in the Finance Biz are looking to get involved in bitcoin. Draw your own conclusions.
Tech savvy
ReplyDeleteI.e. "Experienced with the Whackyweedia as a source of material for plagiarism".
He married a girl who was very good for him -- she was the antidote. (Also, 9/11 helped. After 9/11, his apocalypse fantasies subsided, I think because it gave him real evidence of how much horror a real apocalypse would involve, and he didn't have it in him to want that, once he saw it for real.)
ReplyDeleteThis does not augur well.
ReplyDeleteOops! Damned homophones.
ReplyDeleteOh my god. Why cant i unsee and unread that?
ReplyDeleteGet me a jackboot.
ReplyDeleteSo: he grew up?
ReplyDeleteYes! Upvoting for scalpel like precision wielded by the comment equivalent of a remorseless sociopathic surgeon.
ReplyDeleteI can assure everyone that the dysentery boogieman is quite real, though.
ReplyDeleteWhen do they start building their pyramids?
ReplyDeleteIf you think Galt's Gulch, hidden away from the sinners of the fallen world by a permanent cloud bank, where the worthy receive an eternal reward from mysterious figure who preaches a doctrine of redemption, sounds just a little familiar,...well, there's a reason that awful book is still so popular.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when it's the EMT who decides he doesn't want to touch that disease-ridden homo?
ReplyDeleteEvery larval authoritarian admires a fully grown authoritarian.
ReplyDeleteI...I really don't want to know what circumstances led to that desperate experiment in mixology.
ReplyDeleteyouth-focused
ReplyDeleteLet us marvel once again at a world in which an unconvincingly-toupeed old fart of 52 can present himself, without fear of contradiction, as Voice of the Yout.
Paul is expected to be an Internet juggernaut
The Wonkettariat are having fun with the incompetence of his stolen-from-German-photographer stock foteaux to represent Typical Americans, and his unfamiliarity with this thing called a DCMA, which resulted in his announcement speech disappearing from the Youtuber because he didn't think Warners would notice him using their musical property.
Here is an internet juggernaut. It does not look very fast-moving or maneuverable, so perhaps Newsmax were right after all.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-g2dijywqB4M/TlhTwWtEcoI/AAAAAAAAAhQ/xcYyQwCAqgs/s1600/Juggernath+car+in+Bengal+India.jpg
Fanta. Because 'Ersatz' tastes better in the original German.
ReplyDeleteWell, we ARE talking about the complete breakdown of economic and societal institutions here, which is the only environment in which libertarianism can survive.
ReplyDeleteWhy would you want to? It's genius!
ReplyDeleteIf the meteor hits the libertoonians first, you won't NEED to die.
ReplyDeleteHmm... here I thought that the lesson of 9/11 was that he who has the biggest military machine gets to RUN the apocalypse. (See: Iraq)
ReplyDelete"Hey, why do black people need this so-called Civil Rights Act anymore either? They have hotels.com!"
ReplyDeleteAirb(lack)nb(lack)
"I come not to destroy the Law of the Jungle, but to fulfill."
ReplyDeletethe Jannisaries/ninjas OF conservatism.
ReplyDeleteThey'll never overturn their cookpots Bitcoin servers to demand change, though.
Yep. Just wait till the Rapture starts, and Bibi tries to line up with the rest of The Elect. I can see him clutching at Ted Cruz's leg and wailing "But I DID everything you asked!!!"
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many of these doomsday preppers have a prescription for a chronic medical condition. Because if they're buying guns, and hoping the pharmacist down the street can mix up some insulin from scratch, that's just going to be one more of their multitude of rude awakenings.
ReplyDeleteand yet they needed a woman to point them that way - the irony is too much at 6:11 am :)
ReplyDeleteOne of the parts of Paul's announcement speech I loved was where he lit into the NSA for violating our privacy by intercepting our cell phone calls, and then in practically the next breath named "Islamic terrorism" as the number one threat to America, and vowed to do "whatever is necessary" to ensure our security. The NSA will continue to monitor everyone's phones in the name of national security, Sean Hannity will continue to blather on about Iran's aspirations for world domination, and Lindsey Graham will continue to wail about how ISIS is "coming to kill us all" until we, the great unwashed, call these people out for the hysterical fear mongering that seems to work so well for them.
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is planning to use " the Reagan approach to the Iran negotiations."
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of cake is he going to order for the mullahs?
LOL - oh the dreams of horny teenage boys
ReplyDeleteHe's going to shut down the Iranian nuclear program by giving them all the nukes they want.
ReplyDeleteDamn funny.
ReplyDeleteHe'll fire all the air controllers again, that always scares foreign powers into compliance.
ReplyDelete"who's just discovered the news."
ReplyDeleteAnd Atlas Shrugged
There you go, dragging logic into it again.
ReplyDeleteHey, that's just the Free Market at work.
ReplyDeleteWhat's 2)?
ReplyDeleteSeriously, We need to harness the wind, not the president. is great.
Please forgive my suspicious nature, but I just had to Google it to make sure you weren't making this "blue Faygo" stuff up.
ReplyDeleteNope, it's a thing alright. Kinda looks like Windex to me.
Or "Obama wants to be able to drone little old ladies sipping tea in cafes when he should be droning black guys walking out of liquor stores."
ReplyDeleteNo, that's Scott Walker's plan.
ReplyDeleteHeh. That's the step where the unicorn pony poops glitter.
ReplyDeleteWould you sell a cake to a homophone?
ReplyDeletehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38297000/jpg/_38297733_blue_300_ap.jpg
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/57zFkL9GSZA
It has led us to this:
ReplyDeleteComparing rank-defined and demographically defined versions of the middle class. Figures 1 and 2 show the median incomes and wealth of the three demographically defined groups over time—thrivers, the middle class and stragglers. The median incomes of thrivers and stragglers were slightly higher in 2013 than in 1989—about 2 and 8 percent, respectively. The median income of the demographically defined middle class, on the other hand, was 16 percent lower in 2013 than in 1989. The median wealth of thrivers was 22 percent higher in 2013 than in 1989, while the typical family in each of the two other groups experienced large declines, of 27 percent among the middle class and 54 percent among stragglers.
How did the typical family fare in each of our demographically defined groups relative to the population as a whole? Figure 3 shows that the median middle-class family as we define it suffered a steady erosion of income relative to the family at the exact middle of the overall population of families in each year's ranking (termed P50, for the 50th percentile). In terms of cumulative growth, the median demographically defined middle-class family's income grew 21 percent less than the overall median income between 1989 and 2013. Whereas the median family we define as middle class in 1989 based on age, education and race or ethnicity ranked at about the 55th percentile of the overall distribution (not shown in figure), by 2013 the median middle-class family had dropped to about the 45th percentile in the overall distribution.
Figure 4 shows that the middle-class decline was slightly worse in terms of wealth. The cumulative growth shortfall for the median demographically defined middle-class family was about 24 percent compared to overall median wealth. The median demographically defined middle-class family had wealth at the 53rd percentile in the 1989 distribution (not shown in figure). By 2013, the median middle-class family ranked at the 47th percentile. The median straggler family also fell far behind its benchmark, which we take as the 25th percentile of the overall wealth distribution. The median straggler family ranked at the 30th percentile of wealth in 1989, falling to the 26th percentile in 2013.
If you make over $90,000 a year voting for the Democratic candidate that your party gives you makes perfect sense. You are getting richer. If you don't make as much money you are steadily getting poorer and it doesn't make quite as much sense to vote for that candidate.
Social issues might be more of a bottom-up thing than a top-down thing. That would explain why gay rights are advancing while abortion rights are declining. It's not fair to say Obama doesn't care about supporting women's rights for an abortion and that is why they are evaporating. When women start withholding donations and applying pressure on corporations (see: Komen) then we will see change, I am guessing.
You've seen this, right? http://braveandbold.wikia.com/wiki/Birds_of_Prey_(Song)
ReplyDeleteYeah, he's often used his show Bullshit! to spread it.
ReplyDelete"Whatever is Necessary" covers a lot of contingencies, none of which should be "taken off the table"
ReplyDeleteOn the way to finding that article, I found this one. Nuke them from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/aCbfMkh940Q
He’s always right there for the save, I’d like to see his secret cave...
ReplyDelete*fans self with a TPB from Gail Simone's run*
You could do some serious cooking on a Bitcoin farmer, though.
ReplyDeleteYeah, "everything" has to be kept on the table, after all.
ReplyDeleteThen you end up at a table like this:
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT29Sach4gGmP2_XAY_bIkEtal8AyWXm5zV0XObhoLpa76y_zn9
Which leads to a table like this:
http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/php/photos/DefendantsHLSL.jpg
"Caveat emptor, suckah!" *runs*
ReplyDeleteIn the coming libertarian utopia, if you're lying in the street with a broken bone sticking out after being hit by a car, don't just climb into the first ambulance that comes along, NEGOTIATE! Call several EMT corporations, check the prices, verify their religious affiliations, and be savvy. YOU'RE the consumer, YOU'RE in charge, don't just settle for any old private company! And it's a good idea, when you do find a suitable ambulance company, to repeat your research regarding destination hospitals. Don't let anyone dull your negotiating skills with pain meds until you settle these essentials.
ReplyDeleteYou've been rummaging around in my nightmares again.
ReplyDeleteThat's the stuff we used to refer to as "blue flavored".
ReplyDelete"What's it taste like?"
"Blue."
Does that mean I've been hiding those chunks of blacktop under my pillow for all these years for nothing?
ReplyDeleteHow ironic.
ReplyDeleteLuckily it will be women's work, tending fields, heating water for washing, preparing meals, gathering rocks. They'll be off hunting mammoths, and we will be preparing our arsenal. Well, anyway, that's how my post-apocalypse, "harem" version, works.
ReplyDeleteI still feel so much relieved that I didn't read that thing until I knew better.
ReplyDeleteIf I had got ahold of it at 14 or 15... *SHUDDER*
"WHAT, I have to cook it? In the MICROWAVE? *HUFF* Can't I just eat it frozen? I bet it still tastes the same."
ReplyDeleteWHAT? He's tainting his hands with filthy fiat money?
ReplyDelete*shakes head*
You can get a badge in how to make a toupee out of a dead squirrel. Rand will show you how!
ReplyDeleteMy husband read it 30 years ago, when he was stuck on drilling rigs and libraries were his only lifeline. He was absolutely shocked when I told him there are people, nay, even elected officials and Fed chairmen who use that thing as the guiding light for their morality and worldview. He thought I was yanking his chain, until few internet searches brought the horror home.
ReplyDeleteMy BIL lives on a private dirt road that he and his neighbors have to maintain themselves. It is a perfect libertarian experiment, and every winter it devolves into endless backbiting (and worse) over that other guy not plowing properly, and they all take turns as that other guy. My BIL plans on selling an getting the hell out of there ASAP; last winter got a little too real.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt the same group of plutocrats who had plans for coup during FDR's presidency.
ReplyDeleteTheir problem is that any one of them always feels themselves THE "most meritorious", which, combined with a total disdain for compromise and negotiation...
ReplyDeleteFunny how their "entry literature" never mentions all this when they're babbling on about the agora and mutual benefit and enlightened self-interest.
And nothing angers a feminist like the idea of a man who is capable of cooking dinner for her. Right.
ReplyDeleteI always wonder why individual libertoonians think they'll be the local regent in their utopian future, when none of them can afford the standing army that will be necessary to enforce their position and of course, enforce contract law, without which they won't be able to claim the harems they are currently so wrongly denied.
ReplyDeleteHis point (I think) is that libertarianism, unlike other political
ReplyDeletephilosophies, is so noble that it can overcome the moral degeneration
caused by atheism;
Mikhail Bakunin wept.
I am not a happy camper.
ReplyDeleteI was so excited a the prospect of going to the nearby truck stop, just off the Thruway, to get us a shower. Turns out that truck stop doesn't have them, and the closest one that does is almost 20 miles away.
Which might not be an issue, but Mom and I are supposed to meet my sister and a friend of hers for dinner tonight, and, the last time I saw her, she felt that I stunk to high heaven and was too embarrassed to mention it to me but blabbed it to my father who sent me an amazingly patronizing email about personal hygiene. I'm tempted to ask her "what the hell do you think we've been doing for the last week-and-a-half?"
They'll simply subscribe to the local private security service they think has the best deal. You know, just like small businessmen on the Lower East Side used to do.
ReplyDeleteWhy, they won't need "force" because their view are right!
ReplyDeleteYeah, I always had problems reaching a high target word count.
ReplyDeleteI want to let myself feel optimistic about this - maybe some of those MRAs will take a genuine liking to cooking, and spend less time on the Internet. Maybe they'll learn recipes, take a cooking class, put up new curtains around the kitchen window… adopt a pet, throw a Tupperware party… Have a little less rage.
ReplyDeleteAnd even then, the local private security service was only able to operate because of the structure provided by the overarching community organizational unit, also known as government.
ReplyDeleteWonder what she'll change that to when she's old enough.
ReplyDeleteI am ever so grateful that I became enthralled with Stranger in a Strange Land as a 14-year old. It made me a weird(er) kid, but at least it didn't turn me into a glibertarian asshole.
ReplyDeleteWow, bless her heart. Personally, I can't even date libertarians, let alone marry them.
ReplyDeleteMight cough up a lung with all the laughing at them.
Chronicles of Gor, Chronicles of GOP; same difference.
ReplyDeleteWell, in the era I'm thinking of, it was also known as organized crime.
ReplyDeleteNiven and Pournelle touch on the difficulties of being an insulin-dependent diabetic in a post-apocalyptic wasteland in Lucifer's Hammer. Without refrigeration or access to lab equipment to harvest insulin from sheep kidneys or somesuch, your average diabetic survivalist won't be surviving long.
ReplyDeleteCan I just say, I'm in the midst of preparing for a trip to India at the end of the month, and my appointment with the travel medicine specialist was one hell of a cold bucket of water on my first-world self. I had to get immunized for typhoid! And get polio and MMR boosters!
ReplyDeleteReally kind of brings home just how fragile our civilization really is, and how much things will go to hell after the apocalypse. Hell, even in our first world system, a bunch of entitled woo-believers are enough to bust our herd immunity (and you better believe the travel nurse had Opinions about them).
They also seem to be under the delusion that the meritocracy will value what they themselves bring to the table. Which is highly amusing when the libertarians at issue are a bunch of white-collar workers who wouldn't know enough not to shit where they eat, or would spend all their time sniffing that they're too good to dig a sanitation trench.
ReplyDeleteOne of the first things you learn in Property class in law school is the concept of the Tragedy of the Commons. Your BIL seems to have encountered that.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
This stuff was less "Ersatz" than "SchiessGift".
ReplyDeleteIced tea is NOT SUPPOSED to go "phhhhhstttt" when you unscrew the cap.
resulted in his announcement speech disappearing from the Youtuber
ReplyDeletebecause he didn't think Warners would notice him using their musical
property
Oh, the irony.
Yes, that's what I was thinking as well. Organized crime may have shaken down all the local small business owners, but without government to do things like provide for defense, services, police, etc., the organized crime model doesn't work!
ReplyDeleteOr the one where we find out what to do with all those underpants.
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of a sister doesn't invite you over to shower? Tell her you will punt on the damned dinner but you and Mom are coming over to shower at her place.
ReplyDeleteSee, e.g. The Mafia of a Sicilian Village a study of violent entrepreneurs.http://www.amazon.com/Mafia-Sicilian-Village-1860-1960-Entrepreneurs/dp/0881333255
ReplyDeleteBaby authoritarian.http://www.thinkstockphotos.co.uk/image/stock-illustration-cute-caterpillar-cartoon/460405387
ReplyDeleteWell, I actually blogged this a bit. Withholding donations won't do anything since women don't have the economic or corporate clout to make their issues top priority. When a female version of Tim Cook decides on behalf of her enormously large tracts of land company that she will withdraw her company from Indiana until Patel is released we will see some action.
ReplyDeleteBut it would also help if the god damned younger white women would get out and vote at all.
I quite like the cut of your jib.
ReplyDeleteSis has been brainwashed by my father, who's an ultra-controlling conservative who literally won't help me financially
lest it benefit my mother as well. Oh, and as far as dinner goes - presumably we were paying for our own, because god knows my sister couldn't be risking supporting us in any way, either.