Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Culture

Antisocial

The Social Network illuminates the dawn of our online-all-the-time world.

Kurt Loder | 9.30.2010 4:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

The Mark Zuckerberg we meet in the opening scene of David Fincher's The Social Network is a particular kind of jerk. It's the fall of 2003, and Zuckerberg, an overly wound-up Harvard brainiac, is sitting in a bar with his girlfriend, Erica. He's rattling on about his perfect SAT scores, his musical gift, the vital importance of pledging the right fraternity. His conversation is pure stream-of-consciousness, and Erica has about had it. "Dating you is like dating a StairMaster," she says. Then, unthinkingly—as always —Zuckerberg says something insulting, and she walks out. Zuckerberg is puzzled. He's not really a hostile guy; he doesn't mean to hurt anyone. It's just that his mind is always somewhere else. Several somewheres else, usually.

The movie tells the story of the creation of Facebook—the epochal social-networking website—from the dueling POVs of its principals. We see Zuckerberg (played with crackling intensity by Jesse Eisenberg) launching a primitive early site in his dorm room. When it draws 22,000 hits in its first four hours (crashing the Harvard computer system), Zuckerberg—who is himself a study in social disconnection—begins to contemplate the larger possibilities of online interconnection. Soon, with the help of three friends—key among them financial wizard Eduardo Saverin (the magnetic Andrew Garfield)—he creates a new site, the forerunner of Facebook. It's an instant hit, and it just keeps growing. Zuckerberg sees a new culture emerging: "You go to a party with a digital camera, and your friends re-live the party online." Welcome to our world.

As the Facebook community swells into the millions—and the site's valuation into the billions—Zuckerberg falls under the sway of Sean Parker (a beguiling Justin Timberlake). Parker is the playboy cofounder of Napster, the file-sharing site that was shut down by music-industry lawsuits in 2001. He's a digital hipster, and full of shrewd advice. First of all, he says, Zuckerberg should think bigger and relocate to California to be near Silicon Valley venture capital. Saverin, with his east coast financial connections, is opposed to this, but Zuckerberg makes the move anyway. After a sneaky stock-dilution, Saverin realizes he's being edged out, and regretfully decides to sue. Also going to court are two insufferably snotty Harvard twins, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss (a computer-assisted Armie Hammer), who claim they had the idea for a networking site first, and that Zuckerberg stole it. (Says Zuckerberg: "A guy who builds a nice chair doesn't owe money to everyone who ever built a chair.")

Much of the back-and-forth on these legal issues plays out in wonderfully prickly deposition hearings. The Winklevoss suit seems dubious (although Zuckerberg eventually settled with the twins for $65-million); but Saverin has clearly been wronged, and he's hurt. "I was your only friend," he tells Zuckerberg. "Your one friend." Amid the contending viewpoints, the movie is artful in never attempting to clarify who Zuckerberg really is: a scheming little snake, or simply a nerd-naïf caught by surprise on the cusp of his own revolution? At the end, the truth is still anyone's guess.

The movie's screenplay, by Aaron Sorkin, is a sleek weave of dense technical data and rich emotional interplay; and David Fincher—who managed to make information-overload so gripping in Zodiac—is the ideal director for it: He sweeps you up into this unexpectedly vibrant world. Sorkin's most pungent lines are rocket flares illuminating the online-all-the-time culture we now inhabit. After Zuckerberg writes a drunken blog rant about Erica (Rooney Mara), the woman who dumped him, she upbraids him in a restaurant. "You wrote your snide shit from a dark room," she says. "That's what the angry do these days."

Even more telling, in terms of the fundamental economic changes that digital media have wrought, is a passing confrontation between Saverin and Parker. Saverin, no fan of the older wiz-kid, pointedly notes that the big record companies were successful in their campaign to shut Napster down: "They won," he says. "In court," Parker replies, with the indulgent smirk of a new-breed mogul. "Do you wanna buy a Tower Records?" 

Kurt Loder is a writer, among other things, embedded in New York.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Reason on the Tube: Michael C. Moynihan Talks Voting with John Stossel

Kurt Loder is a New York writer who also hosts the SiriusXM interview show True Stories.

CultureScience & TechnologyFacebookKurt Loder Movie ReviewsStaff ReviewsMoviesInternetSocial MediaTechnology
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (83)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Old Mexican   15 years ago

    Perfect movie to go to watch!

    Eh, once it becomes available in Netflix.

  2. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

    After I watched Zodiac, I felt like I could carry on and on about how I was affected by it, so I'm definitely looking forward to this.

    1. Old Bull Lee   15 years ago

      Every "based on a true story" movie should be done like Zodiac: no attempt at artificially creating drama, just a straight recreation of what happened from the characters' POV. I hate seeing "fact-based" movies where the real story is fucked with and hope this movie isn't one of them.

      If it pisses you off too, you might like this book: http://www.amazon.com/Based-Tr.....1556525591

      1. generic Brand   15 years ago

        I heard an interview on the Jim Rome show the other day with the author of The Accidental Billionaires, a book that influenced a lot of this screen play. He feels this team pulled off the movie really well.

        I saw so many previews for this movie and just thought, "oh geez, Zuckerberg's just trying to make more money." But now that I see Mark and his people denying most of this movie, I have to admit I am a lot more intrigued.

        1. Rhayader   15 years ago

          You can't mention Rome and not make a clone reference. Quad yeah, rubba donga, something. My personal favorite is the J-Stew "mother-daughter routine" bit.

  3. lol   15 years ago

    first Kurt Loder next thing you know John Norris will be contributing to reason

    1. Trespassers W   15 years ago

      Damn it, this was the ONE PLACE I could get away from Kurt Loder.

  4. Episiarch   15 years ago

    I don't trust Sorkin, but I do trust Fincher, so I will probably go see this.

    Fincher was going to do Rendezvous with Rama, but it fell through. I'd say that he is one of the few people who could pull it off.

    1. Old Bull Lee   15 years ago

      I'm with you on the Sorkin distrust, it seems like the guy is too in love with his own writing voice to tell a true story.

      I hope Fincher can make Sorkin's dialogue style less obnoxious too.

      1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

        Does Sorkin do any better when he's on the 'shrooms?

    2. Vermont Gun Owner   15 years ago

      Now that I could watch.

    3. mr simple   15 years ago

      I don't trust Sorkin

      That's just because you're weren't smart enough to get Sportsnight, the comedy so good it didn't have to be funny.

      1. Scott Baio   15 years ago

        That's what I've been telling people about Charles in Charge for years.

      2. Ted S.   15 years ago

        I got Sportsnight: it was a tedious, politically-correct diatribe.

    4. Barely Suppressed Rage   15 years ago

      I have hoped for years that someone would make a big-budget movie of Rendezvous with Rama. I loved that book and must have read it five times when I was a teenager. It would make a very cool movie, if done right.

      1. Rhayader   15 years ago

        I could finally see the damn cylinder instead of trying to translate Clarke's descriptions into a mental picture. Some of that shit was downright technical.

  5. Ebriosa   15 years ago

    OK, now I'm interested. I'm only on facebook to stay in touch with my husband's family, so I associate it with old french ladies posting pictures of their grandkids, but I do enjoy a real story about jerks.

  6. heller   15 years ago

    The trailer was basically three minutes of Jesse Eisenberg's annoying nasally voice. I don't think I could handle 90 minutes.

  7. Vermont Gun Owner   15 years ago

    I actually like him quite a bit. Zombieland and Adventureland were both fun. He's the only appealing part of the movie to me.

    1. generic Brand   15 years ago

      But this movie doesn't really follow the theme he's going for. It really should have been called Social NetworkLAND.

  8. Paul   15 years ago

    I'm definitely not an early-to-the-party kind of guy, but I was just recently hipped to the fact that there are serious academic discussions going on right now that suggest that the mass exodus of MySpace to facebook represents a kind of digital "white flight".

    1. zoltan   15 years ago

      So the slums of MySpace and its shitty code represent some kind of inner-city wasteland while Facebook is the shining suburbs? Of course, there was niggaspace.com a while ago (it is now a more palatable ourspace.com).

      1. SugarFree   15 years ago

        There has also been a comparable professional flight from Facebook to Linked-In as well.

        1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

          Maybe Linked-in will be more merciful to Facebook than Facebook was to Myspace. God, that was brutal to watch.

          1. JW   15 years ago

            I have both FaceBook and LinkedIn pages. I hardly look at the LinkedIn page any longer.

      2. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

        Ourspace? Hahaha, niggers...

    2. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

      Well, Myspace did get kinda out of hand with all the pimpin' out of backgrounds and layouts.

      1. ?   15 years ago

        That's what happens when you give monkeys tools.

        1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

          Black people?

      2. zoltan   15 years ago

        True. That's what I hate most of all about Myspace. I like Facebook because every person I'm friends with on there is actually my friend. I do not need to see their personalities writ large (and horribly) on a website. I already know what they're like and I don't need the latest song by someone with a percentage sign in their name to represent who they are. MySpace also has a seedier atmosphere that seems to make it a better dumping ground for sexual relationships.

    3. Sy   15 years ago

      ".. the mass exodus of MySpace to facebook represents a kind of digital "white flight".

      Have you been on there the past 5 years? Shit, the only friend requests I got were from shitty local rappers.

      1. Paul   15 years ago

        So did you flee to the suburbs?

  9. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

    Will the movie delve into the earlier popularity of Myspace?

  10. Facebook User   15 years ago

    Hey everyone, look at me! Look at all my drunk pics!

    Wait, this isn't private?

    1. 2nd Facebook User   15 years ago

      Facebook changed the settings again! OMG!

      Join my Make Facebook Go Back to Original Privacy Settings group!

    2. Google   15 years ago

      Compared to what, exactly...?

  11. Almanian   15 years ago

    There's no buzz on Twitter - I'm staying away from the movie

  12. Data is an android   15 years ago

    Making a movie about Facebook makes about as much sense as making a movie about Myspace or Friendster.

    1. Anonymous Coward   15 years ago

      Next up: A movie about craigslist. 😀

      1. Red Rocks Rockin   15 years ago

        THAT one would actually be interesting.

        1. Ted S.   15 years ago

          Try Lured, a 1940s movie about the craigslist killer.

  13. Chad   15 years ago

    Actually, the one thing I wish libertarians would take from this move is that the difference between being one of the richest people on earth and a couple hundred grand in debt comes down to little more than a coin flip.

    Or is one if you seriously going to argue that Zuckerberg is a zillion times more talented and hard-working than his rivals?

    1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

      You're right.

      Chad, will you do the honors having holding the gun to Zuckerberg's head and forcing him to hand over 40% of his income to the government. I would, but I've had this lifelong queasiness about stealing money from the people who earned it.

      1. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

        Pussy, just steal it. There are people with NO talent that need to survive for no reason.

    2. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

      Actually, the one thing I wish libertarians would take from this movie is that the difference between being one of the richest people on earth and a couple hundred grand in debt comes down to little more than a coin flip.

      Yeah, we rich assholes MUST have achieved everything through random chance and good fortune, eh? We couldn't have possibly obtained those things through working overtime, wise investments, cautious spending, savings and careful budgeting, now could we? If so, then clearly every derelict on crack would have all the stuff that we do, right?

      What makes US so good?

      *Makes a sad face at poor people*

      1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

        And why does chance only benefit rich people? Don't middle/lowest class workers win the flip of the coin sometimes?

        1. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

          And why does chance only benefit rich people? Don't middle/lowest class workers win the flip of the coin sometimes?

          According to Upton Sinclear, Author of The Jungle, the more poor you are, the better. He refers to it as Hoboing It in the novel.

          Essentially this means riding around on freight trains; eating other people's trash; bumming money for alcohol; sleeping under the moon every night, etc, etc... means you are more free than the worker.

          The more middle class you become, the more bills and responsibilities you have.. and eventually you'll become bitter with your life because all you do is work, sleep, buy fancy clothes, and die.

          Car - 3 ton ball and chain
          Wife - Just a ball and chain

          Be a hobo, it's cool.

        2. Chad   15 years ago

          Caleb, the poor do win some flips, but almost certainly fewer than the norm, and few if any of the high-stakes flips.

          The biggest flip of all is "Who is your mommy and daddy?", and unfortunately, America falls short on this count. If you are born poor or rich here in the states, you are more likely to stay that way than in most other rich nations.

          1. Jen   15 years ago

            If you are born poor or rich here in the states, you are more likely to stay that way than in most other rich nations.

            You fail, yet again. Actually, the U.S. has more social mobility than any of the European systems you undoubtedly prefer. The University of Michigan did a survey on income a long time ago (well long enough for the information to be out there), and found that only 5% percent of those in the bottom quintile in 1975 were still there in 1991. So just because you're not smart or creative enough to improve your lot in life doesn't mean no one else is.

            1. Chad   15 years ago

              Jen, why don't you use data from, oh, this century?

              http://www.economicmobility.org/

              Economic mobility is now poor in the US, and has been worsening ever since the 80s.

      2. Chad   15 years ago

        Yeah, we rich assholes MUST have achieved everything through random chance and good fortune, eh?

        No, but it is highly likely that they contributed heavily...and in this particular case, all but certain.

        Btw, there was an article in the Economist a week or so ago that noted that studies have shown that 40% of your earnings are attributable to genetics alone. Last time I checked, you didn't "earn" your winnings in the gene lottery.

        1. NotSure   15 years ago

          So what ? If somebody has better genes for doing the 100m sprint, are you saying he does not deserve to win the sprint ? If someone has better genes at running a business than you, does that imply does not deserve to make millions more than you ?

          1. SugarFree   15 years ago

            I've said it before, but I guess I have to say it again:

            Chad read "Harrison Bergeron" and thought Diana Moon Glampers was the hero of the piece.

          2. Chad   15 years ago

            He deserves to win the race. He doesn't deserve to command a vastly disproportionate share of the world's resources and other peoples' time, however.

            1. NotSure   15 years ago

              Whose time is he taking up ? The wealth he commands comes from the very people who want to give it to him, are they not allowed to pay him whatever they feel he deserves ? Who gives you the right to determine what others attach value to ? If millions love Facebook and it adds meaning to their lives then Zuckerberg deserves infinitely more than your favourite sociology deserves to earn.

            2. db   15 years ago

              Chad, why don't just start compiling a list of all the people, individually, in the world, and what they "deserve," and once you're done, let us know so we can be enlightened by your brilliant social planning. Meanwhile, we'll be busy generating more wealth for you and the other looters to steal.

        2. Barely Suppressed Rage   15 years ago

          No, but it is highly likely that they contributed heavily...and in this particular case, all but certain.

          Btw, there was an article in the Economist a week or so ago that noted that studies have shown that 40% of your earnings are attributable to genetics alone. Last time I checked, you didn't "earn" your winnings in the gene lottery.

          Chad, let's say all of this is completely true.

          My answer would be a big, fat "so fucking what?" How would that fact, if true, equate to you or anyone else having some kind of claim on another person's wealth?

          I don't have the physical ability to fight Mike Tyson. Does that mean I should get some of the wealth he amassed as heavyweight boxing champ? I don't have the speed of Carl Lewis. Should he have to run slower so that I can win once in a while?

          I don't have Warren Buffet's market analysis skills. Maybe I should send him a letter demanding some percentage of his fortune.

          I guess maybe for some people - such as yourself - it just sucks being you.

    3. cynical   15 years ago

      "Actually, the one thing I wish libertarians would take from this move is that the difference between being one of the richest people on earth and a couple hundred grand in debt comes down to little more than a coin flip."

      I think the libertarian personality accepts the role of luck in people's lives as an amoral factor and is resistant to intervening on that account (although they're usually slightly more receptive to helping the unlucky than hurting the lucky).

      Generally speaking, "luck" is very difficult to distinguish from "merit" and "cheating", if only because there's a lot of self-deception and self-interest involved in categorizing it. There are evolutionary forces pushing in both directions, since both false positives and false negatives are harmful when it comes to catching cheaters in your society.

      Libertarian societies would tend to be more meritocratic (and while they wouldn't be devoid of charity, they would view those who claim to be victims of circumstance much more skeptically), but they would also likely be susceptible to cheaters who are skilled at disguising their malfeasance as luck.

      Socialistic societies, inversely, would tend to detect and punish successful cheaters if it results in them winning too much, too often (ie, the undeserving rich), but because in so many cases you make your own luck, they would also tend to punish honest success as well, and in their zeal to protect "the unfortunate", they would subsidize a lot of moochers. Plus, they only detect cheating on the basis of income, so one can still cheat by cutting the amount of labor traded to earn that statistically unremarkable income. Hence, unions.

      1. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

        America demonizes wealth. It's pathetic.

        Start reading Crimethinc ya fuckin' hippie losers. Glamorous poor lifestyle with beer fountains and hens laying free vegan eggs for everybody!

        And nobody has to work to get it done....

        1. Ted S.   15 years ago

          I thought eggs were by definition not vegan.

    4. Mr. Chartreuse   15 years ago

      No, but at some point he learned (10,000 hours of practice makes you a star according to Malcom Gladwell) how to do the things that would get him to point where a coin flip would earn him millions of dollars. I'm sure my perusing of HTML for Dummies isn't going to earn me that much money (well, maybe in late the 90s ;)) no matter how much good luck I have.

    5. Sy   15 years ago

      He was the first one to capitalize in the new industry..

      1. Sy   15 years ago

        Gah. When compared to 'Tom'.

        1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

          Poor Tom.

    6. Paul   15 years ago

      wasn't the "life's lottery" trope laughed out of the room back in the 90s?

    7. Barely Suppressed Rage   15 years ago

      I find the harder I work, the luckier I get.

    8. Barely Suppressed Rage   15 years ago

      By the way, "Chad," often it's not entirely about talent and hard work, although those absolutely are important - mostly the hard work part.

      Often it's also about having a good idea and pursuing it. And yes, sometimes, being fortunate in having others think it's a good idea as well.

      You are not seriously arguing that Zuckerburg just totally lucked into his creation, are you? He had nothing else to do with it other than pure chance?

      He had a very clever idea and devoted his time and intellect to it, and others liked what he produced. Might there have been some degree of good fortune, or "luck" that helped him? Maybe. If so, so what?

      Where is it written that those who do not have similar good fortune have any kind of claim on the fruits of another person's efforts?

      You also seem to imply that if there is someone who "wins," ala Zuckerburg, there must also be someone on the other side of the "coin flip" who loses. More standard liberal trope - it is not the case that there is some kind of finite pool of "wealth" in this country that "the rich" control and therefore we need some giant arbiter who gets to say how it gets distributed.

      Don't have enough wealth of your own? Go out and create more. There is hardly a place on this planet better than the U.S. (although maybe not so much anymore) to create new wealth. Unfortunately, Obama and the Dems and progressives want to change that - instead of encouraging people to come up with new ways to CREATE new wealth, they want to simply redistribute other people's existing wealth and "spread it around a little." Obama said it himself on camera with Joe the Plumber.

      1. Chad   15 years ago

        He had a very clever idea

        Which was?

        Social networks? Like the many that pre-dated Facebook?

        The social network "market" is has a strong tendency to a natural monopoly, at least within any particular linguistic sphere. Zuckerberg just happened to capture ours, for reasons no one can really be certain of. Whatever they were, it wasn't brains or hard work. His competitors were just as smart and just as hard working. It was more a combination of random fad, earlier corporate backing, and anti-competitive practices.

        There is hardly a place on this planet better than the U.S. (although maybe not so much anymore) to create new wealth

        Why can't libertarians realize that this ain't the '60s anymore? Your "Rah Rah America Number One!" chants are pathetic....and in contradiction to the facts. Of course, our decline could not possibly be related to the fact that our government has tilted much further to the right than that of our major competitors...

        1. Red Rocks Rockin   15 years ago

          "Why can't libertarians realize that this ain't the '60s anymore?"

          Probably for the same reasons progressives can't realize that this ain't 1910 anymore.

  14. Mike Laursen   15 years ago

    Is there a montage of a coding marathon? I don't want to watch it if there isn't a coding montage.

    1. Caleb Turberville   15 years ago

      Set to Kenny Loggins' "Danger Zone."

  15. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

    Psychologists are claiming that people ages 18-25 who do not have a facebook account are anti-social... and by them not having a facebook account, should make authorities anxious towards them as a serious threat to humanity.

    No FaceBook Profile....

    1. Computer Repair Santa Clarita   15 years ago

      I could understand where they're coming from with this since facebook is how todays young generation communicates and stays in touch. Regardless I know a couple people who refuse to have a facebook yet are no where near anti social.

  16. IceTrey   15 years ago

    Using a social network to keep in touch with a small group of far flung family and friends is one thing. Having 10,000 people you don't know as "friends" on Facebook is just masturbation.

  17. My Irony is key is borken   15 years ago

    Ahh yes but fun masterbation no?

  18. Drunk Punk   15 years ago

    I don't own a facebook account, and I'm only partially disillusioned by life, and only question reality for a few weeks after a bad trip... psilocybin and alcohol binge by myself. Gives me time to think.

    1. George V   15 years ago

      NO wonder I don;t question reality. I never had a bad trip!

  19. Jim   15 years ago

    It's an ok movie with flaws in plot and accuracy. If the screenplay were written by anyone but Aaron Sorkin, I think I would have liked it more. But his writing style tends toward the hackneyed and unnatural (much like mine, but I don't get paid to write screenplays). I always feel like I'm being hit in the head with his machine-gun style of writing.

    I ain't no high-falutin' Hollywood, Harvard or Silicon Valley type, so take my opinion for what it's worth.

  20. John Chow   15 years ago

    I'm on facebook and think it's a quite important part of modern life. People made always find simplier and more laizy ways to live and that is just a point on the way to new instant communcations without any physical move.

    However I'm still up for active live and trying keep my real socializing abilities...

    I think this comedy has right vision on what we see around us these days:
    Mostly Unfabulous Social Life movie.

  21. Patrick Peterson   15 years ago

    This review missed several important things:
    1. Zuckerberg is portrayed as very morose and NEVER smiling -= very different than his public profile.
    2. The movie's theme is definitely anti-capitalist in that it portrays "success" as needing to lie, cheat, steal, and backstab.
    3. No hero in the movie. Only 4 people at teh 9:30pm showing I saw last night & those folks did not even get the techy humor that I was LOL about.

  22. nike shoes UK   14 years ago

    is good

  23. ???? ??????   14 years ago

    thank u

  24. ????? ??? ??????   13 years ago

    thank u man

    http://www.zain1.com/vb
    http://www.iraq-7b.com/

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Celebrate Independence Day by Insulting a Politician

J.D. Tuccille | 7.4.2025 7:00 AM

Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Billy Binion | 7.4.2025 6:30 AM

Brickbat: Friends in High Places

Charles Oliver | 7.4.2025 4:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!