Southern Poverty Law Center

Short of Actually Scary People, SPLC Targets Anarcho-Capitalists


Morris Dees

I have to assume that it's fundraising time at the Southern Poverty Law Center, because Morris Dees and company have gone looking for new people to label enemies of the republic. This time, they've found those long underappreciated serpents nesting in our midst, notorious fellow-travelers of the Patriot Movement knows as … anarcho-capitalists?

That even SPLC writer Leah Nelson, may think her organization is reaching a bit far with this one might be indicated by the oddly passive title of the piece, "'Anarcho-Capitalists' Seen as Cousins of the 'Patriot' Movement." They are? By whom? Oh. You mean the SPLC sees them as "cousins" yada yada and somehow potentially dangerous and hateful.

It's never a good sign for the credibility of a scare piece when it portrays as a sinister representative of a dangerous movement somebody who isn't known as a prominent member of that movement at all. In this case, Nelson picks on Porter Stansberry a doom-and-gloom, though respected, investment advisor. Stansberry is probably best known as a First Amendment martyr whose persecution by the SEC was opposed by such extremists as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. Nelson starts in on some opinions and kookiness voiced by Stansberry. 

According to a YouTube video distributed across a multitude of far-right websites and discussed with great seriousness by figures like antigovernment conspiracist Alex Jones, President Obama is planning to overthrown the Constitution, implement socialism, and seize a third term in office.

According to Stansberry, Obama won't even have to use force to do it. Instead, the president plans to buy his third term with untold profits gained from mining America's vast shale oil deposits, which will lead to an era of extraordinary prosperity unlike anything America has seen before.

David Friedman

Umm … OK. Bad anarcho-capitalists, even if that's conspiratorial and not anarchistic. Bad. Anyway, Stansberry was apparently invoked only as a gateway to Doug Casey. Casey is invoked because he— Oh, hell. Just read it for yourself.

Stansberry is not the only ultra-libertarian to promote such ideas. One of his most prominent fellow travelers is Doug Casey, an antigovernment "investment guru" who on Nov. 29 told subscribers to his newsletter that being a taxpayer in America today is analogous to "being a Jew in Germany in the mid-1930's."

On the surface, Casey (who often cross-promotes Stansberry's articles on his various websites and newsletters and who is described by Stansberry as a friend and mentor) seems a cheerful misanthrope, whose breezy manner and self-deprecating wit (he often says Uncle Scrooge McDuck is his hero) is a refreshing change from the pompous grandiosity of his close cousins in the far-right "Patriot" movement.

But scratch that surface and it's clear that this self-described "anarcho-capitalist," who in 2009 outlined a plan to privatize a small country and take it public on the New York Stock Exchange, is courting the same audience of government-fearing radicals. Though he puts a fresh face on tired conspiracies and a new spin on old animosities, Casey's message is the same: The government is your enemy, and if you don't prepare, it will destroy you.

If you stripped the Patriot movement of its pseudo-legal rhetoric, conspiracist malarkey and allusions to supposed Christian virtue, you'd end up with an ideology much like the one espoused by Stansberry, Casey and their compatriots. Often described as "anarcho-capitalists" or "voluntaryists," their belief in essence is that government — any government — is by its very nature tyrannical and unnatural.

So, Stansberry is friends with Casey, and Casey is an anarchist (he actually is, though you won't get any evidence from this screed), and if Patriots didn't believe what they believe, they'd believe stuff pretty similar to what Stansberry and Casey believe (if Stansberry and Casey actually agree on politics). You follow that logic, don't you? You do? Good. Then explain it to me, cuz I'm completely lost.

Of course, I'm not lost. The SPLC piece is intended to, yet again, tighten the sphincters of donors while loosening their grips on their checkbooks. That the SPLC jumped the shark so long ago that the poor fish has since died of old age is no secret. Reason writers have long pointed out that the group is increasingly preposterous and irresponsible in its search for monsters under the bed. These days, the group specializes in guilt by association. Often, really, really distant association resulting in highly unlikely and even laughable "threats."

Anarcho-capitalists? C'mon.

Note: Yes, that second photo is of David Friedman. Many apologies for any confusion.

NEXT: Berkeley City Officials Propose Creating "No Drone Zone"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I have to assume that it’s fundraising time at the Southern Poverty Law Center, because

    the sun came up this morning?

    1. Morrie needs a new pair-a shoes!

    2. And on the day that it doesn’t, they’ll whip out a six-degrees-of-kevin-bacon argument to blame it on somebody they don’t like.

  2. CAPTION (1st pic): We got rocks AND scissors, bitch. Hope you got more than PAPER…

    1. Rock beats scissors

      1. Spock smashes rock.

        1. Lizard poisons Spock!

          1. Psh, dynamite beats everything.

            1. I nuke y’all from orbit.

              1. It’s the only way to be sure.

                1. My penis beats nuke.

  3. The Bad Idea T shirts chick’s boobs are so big I can’t read what’s on the shirt.

    Not saying this is a problem. More an observation that’s making me really curious about what her t shirt says.

    1. …aaaaaaaaaand gone. Damn you, ad bot!

      1. [frantically refreshes page]

        1. Yeah, ad bot PWND me good. The little prick.

          *goes back to praying for the return of Chesty*

          1. Your gynecomastia doesn’t do it for you?


          “Admit It: You’d Go To Jail For This”

          Yes. Yes I would…

          1. …aaaaaaaaaand gone again. TEASE!

          2. Hair is not red enough to go to jail for.

      2. If you really want to look at T shirt ads with boobs from this company, there’s always google, which gave this marginally NSFW pic among many others:…..medium.jpg

      3. I’m getting an ad for some high-priced B&W speakers. At my age, that’s almost as hot as a chick in a tight tee shirt.

        1. I’ve reached the age where I now own all the full-sized speakers I will ever own (I’ll still buy replacement earbuds or whatnot).

    2. There’s something written on the shirt?

  4. Speaking of alt-text and Gangnam Style, the halftime show at the Seahawks/Bills game was…Gangnam Style. I only wish the Seahawks had crushed the Bills even harder for having that. Really, Buffalo? Really?

    1. I like Gangnam Style.


      1. (shakes head in disgust)

        1. HEEYYY, SEXY LADY.

          They’re going to be playing that a lot at Dodger Stadium next year because they signed that Korean pitcher.

          1. JINX!

            *starts dancing like when they’re in the garage doing the Gangnam Off*



          WHOOP! WHOOP! WHOOP!

          (mumble) GANGNAM STYR!

          *keeps dancing*

          1. I’ll dance with you, Almanian.

            1. Daughter #1 caught me and Daughter #2 dancing Gangnam Style and posted it on FB. And then I threw all her shit on the front lawn and kicked her out of the house.

              Naw – we just havin’ fun!

              HEEEEEEEY SEXY RADY!

      2. You were the guy in the 90s that knew both the Boot Scoot Boogie and the Macarena, weren’t you?


          Pffft – I don’t listen to COUNTRY! Line dancing is GAY!

            1. There’s a special hell for you Gen. Nekkid. A very special hell.

          1. Line dancing is GAY!

            Dated a girl back in the day in Houston who liked to go to the country bars and dance. But not line dancing. For her, dancing was like sex, fun done with a partner, boring and kinda creepy as a circle jerk. She was a mess and a handful, but spot on in that regard.

      3. I’ll admit, I’ve enjoyed watching the video more than once. But I am sure I would tire of it quickly if I were exposed to more media and had to hear it all the time.

        No matter how stupid the music, I always have a bit of respect for people who make fun of people who think they are awesome.

    2. It’s Canada’s fault this time.

    3. What, nobody is going to post my beloved Ari? I have to do everything around here.

    4. He’s also performing at the inauguration, isn’t he? Which is a bit odd since he was doing anti-American concerts in South Korea a few years ago.

      1. King Barack is in power so American imperialism is okay now.

    5. Game was in Toronto, right? No better way to build a new fanbase than giving up 50 points

      1. (Insert Leafs joke here)

  5. The SPLC’s antics remind me of an Onion article:

    Marilyn Manson Now Going Door-To-Door Trying To Shock People

    Last Friday at 4 p.m., Mark Wesley, 46, a resident of Overland Park’s exclusive Maple Bluff subdivision, heard the sound of “animal-like shrieking” coming from the vicinity of his front lawn. Upon opening his front door, he was greeted by the sight of a pale and shirtless Manson carving a pentagram into his chest with a razor blade.

    “Look at me, suburban dung,” Manson told Wesley. “Does this shock you?”

    When Wesley replied no, he said Manson became “petulant.” Recalled Wesley: “He started stamping his feet and shaking his fists, saying, ‘What do you mean no? Aren’t your uptight, puritanical sensibilities offended? Don’t you want to censor me so you don’t have to confront the ugly truth I represent?’ So I say, ‘Well, not particularly.’ Then, after a long pause, he says, ‘Well, screw you, jerk!’ and walks off sulking.”

    1. That is, like many things in the Onion, awesome.

    2. If Manson were really shocking, or even interesting, he’d be dead.

      See GG Allin (born Jesus Christ Allin).

      1. Nothing about GG Allin is remotely interesting.

        1. Not interesting like Mencken or Tesla.

          Perhaps I should have said, “authentic”. Say what you will about GG Allin, you have to admit that, unlike Manson or any other “shocking” rock star, Allin wasn’t bullshitting.

    3. The most interesting thing about Manson is that he’s a Republican.

      1. Capitalism has made it this way, old fashioned fascism will take it away…

  6. The SPLC denounced the Family Research Council, after which a gay-rights supporter went to FRC headquarters to try an shoot up the place and kill a bunch of people. Too bad for him that an alert security guard stopped him at the cost of an injured arm.

    Without that injured security guard, how far do you think the would-be assassin (who posed as and FRC intern) have been able to go in killing people belonging to this SPLC-targeted organization?

    1. Oooo – good reset – I’d forgotten about that. Well done, Eduard.

  7. SPLC (and CSPI. and MADD.) are way up there on my list of evil organizations/ideologues. You may donate to me via Paypal.

    1. There’s a headline on CNN’s front page by David Frumm suggesting that MADD has the right idea on how to promote gun control. I haven’t RTFA because I’m afraid my blood pressure would cause me problems.

      1. If it says anything other than “Pretend to lobby for ‘reasonable’ restrictions that no one could disagree with unless they hate children, flags, and apple pie, while you continually roll forward what’s ‘reasonable’ in an effort at full prohibition,” I will assume David Frumm knows as little about MADD as about anything else.

        1. I really wish MADD would get motivated and make DUI a felony. It would completely screw up that money making racket.

  8. Watch out! Libertarians want to take over and then leave you alone!

    1. You. Sick. FUCK!

    2. No, anarcho-capitalists! All 18 of us!

  9. I call myself an anarcho-capitalist even though I’m not really. I would take it over whatever this stupid thing is. Dumbocracy?

    1. Well, I *am* an anarcho-capitalist – and as one, fuck those people.

  10. Often described as “anarcho-capitalists” or “voluntaryists,” their belief in essence is that government ? any government ? is by its very nature tyrannical and unnatural.

    Is it just me, or does this make it sound bizarrely like they’ve never heard of anarchism before and are amazed by its existence?

    1. Your ways are new and frightening, and they are but simple Cave Man Lawyers.

    2. Anarchism is utterly foreign to many people. Because most people are, at heart, statist fucks who only can conceive of controlling others with force.

      1. But you hear of it in school or whatever, right? It’s not actually a new concept, and most people should have been exposed to it at some point.

        Really, this helps me understand better why people are so willing to call, e.g., protesters in Greece or various non-anarchist OWSers “anarchists.” Because that’s what they think “anarchists” are, and the actual, basic, dictionary definition is then surprising.

        1. To most people, there’s no distinction between anarchy and chaos.

          1. And they think “chaos” is a bad thing, despite the fact that our very existence as living organisms is based on exactly that.

            1. Biochemistry follows some pretty strict unbreakable laws….

              …and if you even attempt to bend em the punishment is cancer…or worse.

              1. Chaos made those laws.

        2. But you hear of it in school or whatever, right?

          Not in public schools. Three kids attended them, and not once has it ever been mentioned. It’s statism all the way down there.

          My daughter’s poly-sci professor at a private university has mentioned libertarianism and Nozick, so props to him.

        3. I remember when anarchy came up in middle and high school, it was suggested it was synonymous with lawlessness and images of people smashing windows and stealing things. My high school humanities teacher was shocked when I suggested it wasn’t equivalent to chaos.

          1. I’m not saying you hear about it in a positive or accurate light, just that you hear it exists. I know in my gov’t school days we at least heard about Sacco & Vanzetti, although we didn’t actually learn anything about them other than that they were “anarchists.” But there was a glossary definition of that in the back of the “social studies” textbook and shit.

            1. We had a little bit on the assassination of one of the czars by Russian anarchists or something.

              1. Czar Alexander the second was assassinated by left-wing socialists, not anarchists.

            2. Right, I’m saying that they hear about it but just as an equivalent to the wasteland. They are shocked that anyone would actually think this is favorable. They are also shocked that people would actually believe that government was anything other than benevolent protector. People who believe this must be evil warlord wannabes.

            3. The definition of Anarchist in my history textbook:

              “A person who encourages a lack of civil order or peace”


              1. I really despise most of humanity. 99.9999999% of everyone who’s ever existed is a complete fucking idiot who doesn’t know what they don’t know.

        4. Well, a big part of the problem is that a lot of people who call themselves anarchists are just lazy bums who lie committee meetings and jerking off to diagrams of Molotov cocktails and think that they shouldn’t have to work because other people already have lots of stuff.

          Of all types of self described anarchists, I can’t see how anyone would decide that the capitalist variety are the ones to be worried about.

          I don’t always call myself an anarchist, but I do believe that government is inherently tyrannical and unjust and unnatural.

      2. I think most people have surrendered to being ruled without actually being aware that they have done so.

      3. [i]Because most people are, at heart, statist fucks who only can conceive of controlling others with force [/i]

        Well to be fair most anarchists are statist fucks. I mean technically speaking Communism is “anarchist” since the state will wither away. Not to mention Chomsky, Catalonia in the Spanish Civil War and all those “anarchists” out there demanding more taxes, spending and regulations.

        1. Yeah the stupid proportion of humanity is vast, anarchists included. Most poeple who call themselves that support coercive wealth redistribution and political institutions to steer the ship. Complete fucking idiots, the lot of them.

          1. I say this as an anarcho-capitalist myself.

    3. Is it just me, or does this make it sound bizarrely like they’ve never heard of anarchism before and are amazed by its existence?

      The really weird part is that they think this is a strange and evil POV detached from objective reality.

    4. They probably think of “anarchists” as the left wing WTO and G20 protesters, along with the more radical Occupiers… and tbh most of the population has this perception also.

      Which is unfortunate, since anarchism by definition really is anarcho-capitalism, not whatever Marxist crap the more common “anarchists” spew.

      Disclaimer: I do not like anarcho-capitalism and have been known to taunt and rhetorically eviscerate its proponents in the past.

      1. Yes, I agree. I had assumed they were calling OWSers this because they took a word they knew the meaning of and misapplied it to a group they didn’t understand, but it seems many are going in the other direction.

        1. OK, the link was overkill. You expect me to read the comments before replying?

          1. If I expected you to read them, I wouldn’t be helpful enough to link to them! Man, Tulpa, sometimes it’s like you don’t want to get along.

      2. rhetorically eviscerate


        I’m going to start calling you Butter Knife for that stupid shit. Get use to it, Butter Knife.

        1. A machete by any other name would still be as sharp.

          1. Keep up the good work, butter knife.

        2. Exquisite, Killaz. PWND.

            1. Not to be confused with Butt Nice. That’s generally a NSFW link.

      3. Disclaimer: I do not like anarcho-capitalism and have been known to taunt and rhetorically eviscerate its proponents in the past.

        I have doubts that your rhetoric satisfies anything but your own confirmation bias. Let alone address other people’s arguments.

        DISCLAIMER: Tulpa is full of shit, be advised.

  11. If that dude in the second photo dyed his hair bright orangey red, he’d pretty much be Bozo the Clown.

    *mic drop*

  12. An-Caps! I hate those guys.

    1. I hate Illinois an-caps.


  13. Who the hell is Porter Stansberry? I’ve never even heard of the guy.

    1. Jersey Patriot| 12.17.12 @ 2:56PM |#

      Who the hell is Porter Stansberry? I’ve never even heard of the guy.

      Thats just how *insidious* these people are! They *lurk* in the shadows! Be afraid! be very afraid…

  14. Shouldn’t they be scared, or would you sit back peacefully as they implemented their goals?

    I am a pacifist and a peaceful person, and nothing makes me feel safer in my rights than that the fucks who would deprive me of them are afraid of what I might do. “I” meaning people like us.

  15. You have a picture of David Friedman, but no mention of him in the article that I saw.

    1. It’s to go with the alt text.

  16. Southern Poverty Law…

    Is that the one requiring a goat to be chained to a cinder block in yer front yard, and only have 3 corners of the screen door actually attached to the frame?

    The only law my poor southern grandaddy had was to never let the .22 send ricochets near his car… which would result in a switch getting stripped from the nearest tree, and a proper ass-hiding.

    Ahh, corporal punishment. The good ‘ol days.

  17. The good news is that we’re constantly 10 minutes away from an an-cap hating the label an-cap and coming up with a new one to describe virtually the same thing to anyone not an an-cap.

    If the SPLC really wants to tug at this thread, I have a feeling they’ll have no leftover manpower to much of anything else.

    1. Shh, we already covered that last week.

      1. How did you all know I was going to say this last week? Don’t get me wrong, I’m flattered, but still confused.

  18. In a just world, Morris Dees and the Westboro Baptist Church would be locked in a room together for all eternity.

  19. Gasp! Asshole’s mom might have been a Doomsday Prepper!

    Watch as Jezebel whistles past the graveyard of Hurricane Sandy and other natural disasters that being prepared for might have saved a lot of lives.

    Let’s put the Preppers on a list! Any list, dammit! SPLC to the rescue!

    1. If we deem them as doomsday preppers, it becomes a little easier to separate their reality from our own, to make us feel that we know what the danger signs are and to help to help comfort ourselves into thinking that knowing all this could protect our children and ourselves from a similarly horrible event in the future.

      My only response: HAHAHA

    2. Fortunately, it’s no problem that The State can’t solve.

      but the fact is that stigmatizing and alienating the homes that it could happen in does not help as much as, say, better access to mental healthcare, better support for the families of the mentally ill and, yes, better gun control undoubtedly could.

      1. Back off, Warty. Deep down, even the most ardent libertarian knows that a family of two living on a paltry $280,000 a year in alimony cheques can’t afford psychiatric services without federal aid.

    3. Just another angle to be exploited from their point of view. It would be unconscionable not to demonize when there are those who don’t go along with the proglodyte agenda.

    4. THEdarcyhirsch and 11 more Reply
      I don’t understand. Why five guns? Five guns goes above and beyond the idea of personal security. If there is a home invasion, why do you need five firearms? Are you planning for a war to break out?

      I don’t know whether she was a doomsday prepper or not, but this just seems so incomprehensible to me.


      My dad and I lost count the last time we tried to do a joint mental inventory.

      1. It’s the lack of self-awareness that’s the killer. How many pairs of shoes do you think the poster has?

        1. But each one of those shoes serves a special purpose, nicole! There’s the black slut shoes, the red slut shoes, the sparkly slut shoes, the black slut boots, the black stiletto slut boots, the white slut boots, etc.! It has nothing in common with an arsenal of assault weapons. Do I have to mansplain everything to you?

          1. All I’ll say is, they better have a brown pair too.

          2. The harsh looking New Vegas barmaid look she is going for these days actually kind of does it for me even though she needs to admit she is 2 sizes larger than what she wears. Boots are a little


            In the side view of the boots, you get a better idea of what’s going on there. They are wee bit combat, and wee bit street walker. I’d totally be in them if I were a chick.

          3. There’s the black slut shoes, the red slut shoes, the sparkly slut shoes, the black slut boots, the black stiletto slut boots, the white slut boots, etc.!

            Oh fuck, there’s a Warty in my closet. Good thing it is big enough to fit all those shoes and plenty of guns.

            1. But that means Warty has the guns.

              1. I’m confident that trying on all the shoes will keep him busy until I can find some livestock to throw in there with him (…for him to…eat. Yes, that’s it). This is going to be the Best Christmas Ever!

                1. Maybe he will be distracted by the sparkles.

      2. I don’t understand either. Why not 6 guns? Or 14? How can you be sure you really have enough guns?

    5. You know what this means, right?

      Doomsday preppers, aka survivalists, are the next group of “mentally ill” people who should be monitored by the government and not be permitted to own firearms.

      1. Soviet psychiatry! This person suffers from anti-social personality disorder, why else would he own guns? It’s clear evidence of a mistrust of government and society, which are of course one and the same. To the cuckoo’s nest with him!

    6. Yeah, I posted this last night. I’ve never heard a prepper refer to himself or herself as a “doomsday prepper”. That term originated from critics/mockers of prepping and the Natl Geo Channel show about preppers.

      1. That’s great. I have to believe that the further off the deep end these idiots go the more people they’ll lose along the way. At some point this young people that they hook with all their do called fairness and equality tripe (which is nothing of the sort) are going to figure out that these people are batshit insane.

  20. Yes. SAYING the Obama is a socialist who plans to overthrow the constituion makes you a dangerous militia type, because dangerous militia types agree with you.

    Similarly, SAYING that Bush is a disaster and that the Iraq war is a failure, makes you a dangerous islamist terrorist, because dangerous islamist terrorist agree with you.

    Let’s all never say anything that any enemy of the US government could ever agree with.

    1. Bush was the best thing that could have happened to the Islamist Terrorist movement.

      1. Terrorist! What are you trying to do? Help the terrorists by instigating opposition to the US government?

    2. No, when there is a Republican in office, dissent is patriotic.

  21. Salon’s entry in the pearl clutchoff.

    Profiling is bad! Unless we’re doing it to white men!

    1. I dunno, sounds like that suggestion was not serious and used to make a point about racial profiling (maybe).

      After all, broad demographic profiling is not only grotesquely bigoted in how it unduly stereotypes whole groups, it also doesn’t actually work as a security measure and runs the risk of becoming yet another Big Brother-ish monster (this is especially true when a lawmaker is forwarding the idea of deploying a quasi-military apparatus like the Secret Service).

    2. Any honest observer should be able to admit that if the gunmen in these mass shootings mostly had, say, Muslim names or were mostly, say, African-American men, the country right now wouldn’t be confused about the causes of the violence, and wouldn’t be asking broad questions. There would probably be few queries or calls for reflection, and mostly definitive declarations blaming the bloodshed squarely on Islamic fundamentalism or black nationalism, respectively.

      As they were in the Ft. Hood slayings, and Beltway sniper attacks?

      Additionally, we would almost certainly hear demands that the government intensify the extant profiling systems already aimed at those groups.

      Does he mean like the profiling systems aimed at Middle-eastern and southern/central Asians at the nation’s airports? The one where little white girls get sexually molested to prove how non-profiley we are?

      I get the sense that the US in which this Salon contributor lives is not in the same universe as the one in which I live.

  22. I’m essentially an anarcho-capitalist. And I did shoot a .22 at YMCA summer camp when I was 12. Which was obviously combat preparation for the coming war against the government after they hand over our vital essences to Google and precipitate the rise of the machines.

    My vision of the government-caused apocalypse is Matrix meets Terminator meets Social Network.

    1. As long we we can fight it using our contollers and sitting in on the couch in front of the tv eating cheetos.

  23. It’s not even “guilt by association”. It’s guilt by saying something that a guilty person might agree with.
    You don’t actually have to actually even *associate* with them in any literal way. You just have to be someone whose articles they might like to read.

    1. Good point. It’s a slightly more clever ad hominiem.

  24. What good has the far right ever done any society?

    1. Well they haven’t been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people like the Far Left has. So there is that.

      1. Which far leftists? Totalitarian dictators who may have been nominally communist but who in practice were the opposite of egalitarians (what with being totalitarians)?

        In some ways the far left and far right tend to blur into each other, but if you’re going to make distinctions then the far right certainly gets Hitler (that would be the guy many extant far right movements still worship).

        1. What the fuck are you talking about?

        2. And by your logic the far left gets Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

          Plus, the people being profiled as far right in this instance are libertarians and anarcho-capitalists, neither of which are anything like Hitler. So what the hell’s your point?

        3. Right, so in Tonyland, national socialism really has nothing whatsoever to do with socialism, and the Holocaust had nothing to do with class warfare. The promise of redistributing the wealth of the predominantly Jewish upper class down to the working class Aryans who had been “robbed” by the wealthy, greedy Jews had nothing to do with how the Holocaust was able to gain widespread support/complicity.

          1. Well, Neo-Nazis are labeled as being on the “far right,” so they must be, despite their socialist leanings. It’s Tonys all the way down.

          2. Woah are you out to lunch.

            1. Don’t bother refuting the point, Tony. You might strain your teeny tiny brain if you ever actually tried to prove a point.

        4. In some ways the far left and far right tend to blur into each other

          They also had a tendency to support state sponsored eugenics programs.

          Just like you did when you said “birth control should be mandatory”.

        5. who in practice were the opposite of egalitarians (what with being totalitarians)?

          Sounds like a run of the mill progressive. I guess that makes you right wing, so you can answer the question. What have right-wingers like you ever done for society?

        6. Hitler was a socialist. I’m sure this is only the fifteen-billionth time you’ve ignored that fact.

    2. Shut the fuck up, idiot.

    3. What good has the far right ever done any society?

      Who gives a shit? It’s not the “far right” who uses force against peaceful people everyday. It’s the leviathan state enabled by morons like you.

    4. What exactly IS the “far right”, Tony?

      Anyone who says something that you find sufficiently crazy sounding?

      1. I really don’t get why you people talk to it.

      2. It’s a fairly well defined term. The KKK is an example of a far right group.

        1. And what about the BNP or Neo-Nazis who are heavily in favor of socialism? Where do they fit on your little continuum?

          What about the fact that Hitler used wealth envy as part of his anti-Jewish rhetoric? You going to keep deflecting, Tony?

        2. The KKK is an example of a far right group.

          A far right group that was the military wing of the Democratic party in the South.

        3. So, does that include anarcho-capitalists, or not?

          Are anarcho-capitalists like Stansberry comparable to the KKK?

      3. What exactly IS the “far right”

        Anything that liberals don’t approve of?

    5. Would the Founders count as “far right,” at least for their day?

    6. What good has the far right ever done any society?

      Depends how you define “the right”. You saying that “birth control should be mandatory” would fit pretty nicely in more then a few of the more nasty definitions of “the right”

      But if you are talking about anarcho-capitalists they invented liberalism, freed the slaves, and unleashed the prosperity that the modern world enjoys from free trade and property rights.

    7. Well, they like to kill people on the far left, so there’s that.

  25. President Obama is planning to overthrown the Constitution, implement socialism, and seize a third term in office.

    Well he pretty much ignores the constitution on everything that every president before him ignored and added a few more ignores to the list on his own.

    He is a socialist and has implemented socialism. Some people don’t define socialism as i do. To bad i get to use the word like a want to.

    Yeah the only third term for Obama is to try and get Biden into the seat after he vacates it.

  26. President Obama is planning to overthrown the Constitution,

    He’s certainly got a good start on it, what with the way he has eviscerated Congress’s traditional responsibilities with “recess” appointments when there is no recess, no budget for three years, and now his demand to have the authority to raise the debt limit by Executive Order.

    implement socialism,

    Gosh, why would anyone think that the man who acquired ownership in and control over two of the three big domestic car makers and vastly expanded state control of the health care sector might be trying to implement socialism?

    and seize a third term in office.

    Alright, that one’s a little premature.

  27. Well to the SPLC right-wing website could be the NY Times. I’m pretty sure they consider home schoolers terrorist so this is no shocker.

  28. The progressives stole “liberal” and if you really think about it stole “progressive”. (Sweep of history would suggest strong central government over the individual is as old as dirt.)

    And yet anarcho-capitalists actually choose to be called anarcho-capitilists.

    No wonder we are losing…

    1. The progressives stole “liberal” and if you really think about it stole “progressive”

      The German liberals that opposed Bismarck were known as “left-liberals” and they formed the Progress Party. This made them Progressives. Alas they did end up supporting Bismarck in the kulturkampf (a term coined by a left-liberal natch).

    2. The left has always been far more interested in appearances than in truths.

  29. These days, the group specializes in guilt by association.

    However tenuous and preposterous.

  30. Re: Tony,

    Which far leftists? Totalitarian dictators who may have been nominally communist but who in practice were the opposite of egalitarians (what with being totalitarians)?

    In the first place, you cannot realize the egalitarian ideal without totalitarianism for the very simple reason that people are NOT born equal NOR do they like the idea of being equal to others by force.

    Second, you seem to miss something important: The result of leftist ideals IS mass murder, as you cannot easily reprogram people to eschew their upbringing, culture and knowledge. In that regard, Pol pot was quite the egalitarian – he managed to make 2 million Cambodians equally dead, the rest equally miserable. He REACHED the ideal you so profoundly wish for.

    but if you’re going to make distinctions then the far right certainly gets Hitler

    Hitler was a socialist. His was the National Socialist Worker’s Party. The fact that he emphazised egalitarianism through the purity of race does not mean he was not less an egalitarian than, oh I don’t know – YOU.

  31. What would Morris Dees think of me?

  32. David Friedman’s hair is more anarcho-capitalist than any of the clowns they cite.

  33. I guess it’s a good thing that are not familiar with Assasination Politics by Jim Bell.

  34. World Map of Anarcho-Capitalist hate monger deviant communazis /derp

    But seriously a cool site.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.