A Libertarian Utopia on the Danube?

The president of Liberland, the world's newest sovereign state, speaks with Reason TV.


The subject of a recent profile in The New York Times Magazine is also the world's newest sovereign state: The Free Republic of Liberland.

Reason TV interviewed Liberland's president at this summer's FreedomFest. Read the original writeup below. 

"We will have a chance to establish a country if it's mainly about love and freedom," says Vit Jedlicka, a 31-year-old Czech politician and the founding president of Liberland.

Nestled on a strip of unclaimed land between Croatia and Serbia, Liberland currently exists as a marshy, mosquito-plagued spit of land in the Danube River that has attracted the ire of its neighboring countries. Jedlicka seeks to create an autonomous nation capable of exisiting with the minimum amount of government authority possible

With a constitution modeled on that of the United States, Liberland has generated interest in more than 360,000 potential citizens and is, says Jedlicka, open to anyone with a "respect for private ownership" who is tolerant of other people and their beliefs regardless of race, ethnicity, orientation or religion. Criminals, communists, Nazis and "extremists" are discouraged from applying. 

About 2 minutes long.

Produced by Anthony L. Fisher. Camera by Paul Detrick and Zach Weissmueller. Interview by Matt Welch.

Related: "Liberland: Disappointing Reality or Encouraging Fantasy?," by Brian Doherty.

Music: "Call Now" by Podington Bear (

NEXT: Straight Outta Compton Reminds Us Even Scary Speech Is Protected

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 didn’t know homosexuality was an ethnicity…..-incident/

      1. You can [remove Greek joke] now

        /Greek joke recipient

      2. As his 10,000 hoplites froze in the mountains Xenophon was not amused.

    1. Sure why not – the perp is extra bad so they have to pile on whatever might stick.

    2. ” Michael D. Smith verbally accosted members and staff at CalFit 10, on Dublin-Granville Road, who he perceived to be gay

      Were they? or not?

      He did actually commit a crime by coming back to the gym and threatening staff for employing anyone he doesn’t like. However its unclear how he can have engaged in any ‘ethnic intimidation’ based entirely on his own misperceptions. Unless they were tittering and blowing kisses at him while oiling each other up.

      This is why you don’t use the showers at the David Barton gym.

      1. Your bolded emphasis begs the question: if the were NOT gay, was it possible to commit “ethnic intimidation?” Could I call a Caucasian a “dirty wetback” and be charged with ethnic intimidation?

        1. NOT BEGGING THE….

          but thank you for re-stating my point while needlessly insulting Mexicans.

          1. Not following you there. It would be hard to illustrate my point without using an insult AS AN ILLUSTRATION.

            1. Kids, that was a joke.

          2. needlessly insulting Mexicans

            It’s not very libertarian of you to suggest that people should only be free to do things that need to be done. People should be free to do things just because they want to do them, just for the fun of it. For example, you don’t need to call people who misuse the term “begging the question” names, but it’s fun to snicker at them, point and laugh and call them morons. Not that you or I would do that, of course, but some people of low moral character might.

            1. you to suggest that people should only be free to do things that need to be done

              He did no such thing, and I’m gonna call you a retard , “just for the fun of it”.

              1. Speaking of some people with low moral character……I’ve seen some of the people you associate with.

                1. Thank you

      2. I found this quote to be a real gem:

        “It was nice having that to fall back on,” Konves said. “It’s one of those things that we have, we can use, but we don’t use it very often, which is a good thing. It tells you how diverse our city is and how open and welcoming it is to people of all walks of life.”

        So, it’s good to let laws pile up on the books. Gives law enforcement something to ‘fall back on’ when they need to trump up charges.

        1. They don’t even bother trying to deny it anymore.

          The criminal justice system isn’t there to punish criminals or protect property. It’s set up such that the government can threaten you at any time for anything they wish.

          1. It was perverted to that use about five minutes after it was created, dude. That’s what it’s for.

            1. No it wasn’t and no it isn’t.

              1. Read about Henry II, the creator of the English judiciary. There were courts before that, but he created the permanent, impersonal judiciary that exists to this day. And yes, the purpose was to be able to arbitrarily punish people as a pretext for arbitrary taxation under the guide of fines.

          2. Don’t forget the robust civil court system. Those are lovely children and assets you have there, be a shame if anything happened to them.

    3. “It was nice having that to fall back on,” Konves said. “It’s one of those things that we have, we can use, but we don’t use it very often, which is a good thing. It tells you how diverse our city is and how open and welcoming it is to people of all walks of life.”

      Ya see, when we make everything illegal it makes it easier for us to force you to our will.
      /Officer Friendly

      1. It tells you how diverse our city is and how open and welcoming it is to people of all walks of life

        He really said that? Really? “We’re so tolerant of other people that we will lock you in a cage if you don’t appreciate how awesomely tolerant we are?” Did he also add “I’m without a doubt the most humble and peaceful man in the world, and I’ll punch you right in the mouth if you dare suggest anybody is more humble and peaceful than me”?

      2. You beat me to posting this. Should have read further.

    4. The cop said, “It was nice having that to fall back on.”

      Where “that” is a vague law against being loud and obnoxious, apparently.

      1. My friends and I got pulled over in high school for “being loud and boisterous”. Best. Charge. EVAR.

        We did not protest it – rather, we advertised it.

  2. No “extremist” huh.

  3. No open borders?

    1. Yeah, now doesn’t seem like the right time to open a new country in southeastern Europe.

      1. If the country is founded on ‘love’ are open borders possible?

        What happens when people come in that don’t love? Doesn’t seem like a good plan, or any plan.

        1. And what about anchor babies?

          1. Those don’t work, that Syrian guy’s kids washed right up onto the beach.

            1. Oh I get it – you’re saying the kid didn’t work because he’s Syrian, right? You’re one of them ethnic intimidators, ain’t ya?

              1. We’re all in awe of his edginess.

            2. It’s a good thing the Danube flows in the direction of the Black Sea.

        2. What about people who come to get all the free love and don’t love their fair share back?

          1. I mean, that’s how San Fransisco ended up like it is today.

          2. Dancer: There was a lot of new energy in the room tonight, and some of it was just so Rainbow Rhythms, and some of it was just so not Rainbow Rhythms. Thanks.
            Mark Corrigan: Why don’t you just say who you’re talking about? You’re talking about me, aren’t you?
            Dancer: Well, yes, alright, I am.
            Mark Corrigan: Well, listen, I’m sorry if I didn’t do it right and I’m sorry if you assume that I eat red meat and don’t necessarily think money or Tony Blair are a bad thing, but if there isn’t room here for people who stand against everything you believe in, then what sort of a hippy free-for-all is this?

            1. if there isn’t room here for people who stand against everything you believe in

              Ha I like that.

  4. You know else saw the Danube as the “River of the Future?”

    1. Napoleon?

    2. Johann Strauss?

    3. Julius Caesar?

    4. The original Muslim invaders?

      1. It’s kind of amazing that all of Europe is not Muslim thanks to the Franks. Who would have guessed that?

        1. Franks:French::Edward I: Edward II

          1. So, it’s your fault then.

        2. It was nice while it lasted….

        3. My friend Bob honors Charles Martel for having done so, even though the Franks also repressed the pagans, of which Bob’s one, because Bob thought the Moslems would’ve been worse in the long run than the Xtians to pagans. Like the way beating the Nazis was necessary even though that helped the Commies.

        4. Vlad played no sma part in that as well. And the Spanish. I expect the vassals of the Danelaw also came to make a pretty significant buttress to it all. But now it’s all civilised and we got bigger bombs and what not, yet the fucking Turks are moving in like never before. The Sultan would be rolling around in his grave to see this if he were alive today. And laughing his dickens off.

  5. I can’t support such intolerance. No Nazis, no way.

  6. So suddenly libertarians aren’t extremists in Europe?

  7. Criminals, communists, Nazis and “extremists” are discouraged from applying.

    But not prohibited? Asking for a friend…

    1. Nothing about reptiles…so see ya suckers.

      1. Its . . . a bit *cold* there.

        1. But full of mosquitoes!

        2. Well at least it might be sqlr free

    1. Charming commenters there. *goes to take shower*

      1. Posted by: ghostsniper at September 1, 2015 5:41 PM

        I blame LBJ and the Great Society. It just took 50 years to get it really rolling.

        The horror

        1. Christ you are one mendacious cunt.

          1. Christ you are one mendacious cunt.

            the horror

            God forbid there is a non-racist argument against the welfare state and god forbid a demonstration that the comments appear to have been cleaned up.

            Anyway sorry to disrupt your endless hunt for racist trolls that you collect and display as demonstration of your moral superiority.

            1. …display as demonstration of your moral superiority.

              In contrast to you, of course.

              You could spreads the smug a little less thickly next time, they’re going to have to send an intern in here to mop it up.

        2. I was only pointing out that the site attracts obvious racists, and I feel poorer for having visited it. You chose to reprint one of the non-racist comments in order to make… whatever point you were trying to make, while ignoring any of the multiple racist comments that were present when I visited.

    2. Great, now that site is in my browser history. Thanks.

    3. “This economic alchemy has a purpose: to bring the Monkey People to the boiling point so they go off on everybody.”

      Oh, Goddammit. That’s some top flight racism.

      1. “to bring the Monkey People to the boiling point “

        Man, mixed metaphors make tasty soup.

        “go off on everybody”


        Am i to understand that “American Digest” isn’t a journal of refined intellectual discourse?

        1. Oddly enough I got that link sent to me from someone who’s a yuuuuge fan of a certain Presidential candidate and I suspect she got it from other yuuuuge fans. She highlighted the line in there that said this was all perfectly legal and wanted me to explain how the hell we got to this point that this sort of thing was actually encouraged by the government.

          1. I hadn’t actually read the link until just now.

            The original piece is actually a pretty accurate portrayal of how some people live.

            up until the last part, where they say that an unmarried couple with stay at home mom can get $75,000 in benefits. It may just be misleading, but it seemed like the entire thing was predicated on the “mother” being one of the person’s fake residency. i.e. not supporting a parent.

            but whatever. Yeah, there’s some morons in the comments.

            Re: what i find absurd is that Trump is suddenly attracting all of this “Smaller Government” appeal…. when he’s probably the least fiscally-conservative candidate in the GOP.

            1. The original piece is actually a pretty accurate portrayal of how some people live.


                1. Oh man, now I’m thinking of the episode where Rick says he’s going to kill himself because no one likes him and chugs a bottle of pills and Neil goes “Vyvyan, can you actually kill yourself with laxatives?” and Vyvyan says “I don’t know, but I’m going to stay and find out.”

                2. Why the fuck am I Rick?!?!?

        2. By “monkey people” he’s probably referring to the Turks, who the Chinese used to describe as simian in appearance compared to upstanding Chinese Man.

  8. Da noobs!

  9. How many guns am I allowed to bring? All of them?

    1. Just the ones that love.

  10. “Nestled on a strip of unclaimed land between Croatia and Serbia…”

    An ideal location for people seeking to maintain a posture of strict neutrality. They will be loved by all.

    1. Or, another way of putting it =

      “Here we are free! Where a man can breathe easy…. WAIT!! You there!!!….move to the left …slowly…….. ahh…….. just a reminder to folks, we’ve only just started to remove the landmines, so i’d like to ask you to live freely strictly within the path marked by yellow-tape””

    2. Location, location, location!


    Official Libertarian theme song.

    I pump it into the diamond mines so my orphans have a soundtrack while they toil in the darkness.

      1. That’s a good point. It would have been way more accurate if he didn’t mention feeling guilty and just ran poor people over with his car or something.

    1. Meee-owwwww. Great White Hunter like

      1. Of course it’s a sexy lion. That’s why chicks like halloween.

        1. One of the best nights to go out.

    2. Yes, you could gain 40 pounds in a year. That doesn’t mean it’s Chipotle’s fault.

      1. Yes, could. I could eat there twice a day and not put on weight, but I won’t, because it’s gross. But chipotle claims to be healthful, and that’s just not true.

        I’d rather have the junk food.

        1. Do they claim to be healthful? The poster says they spend their time on “sustainability.” How does that translate to something like Subway’s campaign of, “eat us and you’ll lose weight”?

          Even the jump from “healthful” to “low calorie” is a non-sequitur. If you eat Chipotle every day, but otherwise stay in something like 2500 calories, will you be healthier than eating, say, Lean Cuisine or Subway or McDonalds every day?

          1. I know all of that. Your average consumer does not.

            And yes, I’m making the claim that McDonalds is more healthful than Chipotle.

            1. Depending on what you choose to eat. Some options at McDonald’s are more healthful than Chipotle, imo.

              For myself, I’d rather eat a bacon double cheese burger (no fries, no soda) than a Chipotle burrito. Fewer carbs, more protein and probably a similar number of calories.

              1. Ahem. Bacon Jalapeno double. I go off menu.

                1. You are fancy.

                  1. When I go to McD’s I usually order a double hamburger, substitute slivered onions. Those re-hydrated pellets they usually use are nasty.

                    1. What do you do, carry your own slivered onions to McD’s? Or do you mean take-out? Or do they keep whole onions in the back & slice them for people who ask? Like they’ll set you up for rum & Coke, BYO rum?

                    2. McD’s has two types of onions. Diced go on the regular (small) burgers and the Big Mac and slivered go on the Quarter Pounders.

                    3. They must be imitating White Castle w the small ones, then. Yeah, those reconstituted jobs have lost their volatiles, & lurk & plot in the digestive tract because the mouth & throat never noticed.

                2. I remember when they used to make their own biscuits from scratch before switching to frozen. One store I went to would make a sausage gravy for them. Oh, man. It was divine.

            2. And I’m cool with reminding people that they need to watch their calories, and not think they can just load up on “healthy food” without gaining weight. But as Frank says below, it’s all very disingenuous. I hate fighting stupidity with stupidity. It’s like whats-his-face eating 3 supersized meals a day and then complaining that he feels horrible and can barely eat it all.

              I also imagine that Chipotle’s salads are more healthful than anything from McD’s, but I admit to never having tried McDonald’s salads.

              1. McD’s salads are healthy enouth until you put their dressing on them. That’s where the calories are.

                1. Aha! Do they have onions for the salad, & that’s where you get them for your double hamburger?

              2. It comes down to what you think is healthy. The science is, to a certain extent, not settled on what is and is not healthy. I eat a lot of saturated fats in butter, meat, and dairy products. According to government agencies saturated fats are still unhealthy. I know they’re full of shit and don’t care about their dietary advice. Some people would be appalled if they know what I (a slim physically fit women) ate. Fuck them.

                1. Government diet guidelines are politically motivated. They’re basically intended to encourage people to buy stuff that is produced by cronies.

                  1. Government diet guidelines are politically motivated. They’re basically intended to encourage people to buy stuff that is produced by cronies.

                    A friend and I were having this discussion a while back. And we agreed that what is likely healthy for a human are the foods we evolved to eat that were in abundance. Meat, fruits, vegetables….

                    And the conversation turned to the 4th pillar of the government approved basic food groups. And he says, what did our ancestors do, run down lactating mammals, roll them over and suck on their tits?

                    Dairy made the big 4 because…politics.

                    Sounded like a reasonable hypothesis.

                    1. “what did our ancestors do, run down lactating mammals, roll them over and suck on their tits?’

                      Uh, if they were norse, they bred cattle for milk. and many northern Europeans, neolithic celts, etc. milked cows.

                      Dairy has a similar separate history in the near east as well. But its true, that the cultures (no pun) that consumed dairy were actually fairly rare, isolated, and spread the practices only slowly through the broader world, which is why so many are still lactose intolerant.

                      The idea that dairy is/was promoted by government is true. Milk consumption is generally associated with tall, strong people. Government likes big & strong. Its also a basic foodstuff that is most often used to raise kids, so subsidizing it is inadvertently subsidizing child-rearing.

                  1. The pic you requested.

                    1. I can’t pleasure myself to that.

                    2. They suggest eating the plate? I thought they were about beets.

          2. Do they claim to be healthful?

            Not that I’ve ever seen.

        2. Fat carries more than twice as many calories as carbohydrates and proteins do per gram, which means just a little fat can turn a serving of food into a calorie bomb.


          People who want to lose weight and keep it off are almost always advised by those who run successful long-term weight-loss programs to transition to a diet high in lean protein, complex carbs such as whole grains and legumes, and the sort of fiber vegetables are loaded with. Because these ingredients provide us with the calories we need without the big, fast bursts of energy, they can be satiating without pushing the primitive reward buttons that nudge us to eat too much.

          WTF? Fat is actually more satiating because of the caloric density referred to in the first passage.

          You’ll pry my cooking lard from my cold, dead, thin fingers!

          1. Anyone who takes eating advice that isn’t their own body’s desires is pretty much assuredly going to be eating according to someone else’s body’s desires and that person’s obsessions and food animism.

            Because let’s face it. Most people are 100% retarded about food. They’re fucking insane. Many of them are convinced that if they just eat that perfect, “correct” way, they will live forever and feel fantastic and look amazing. It’s so simple! Just eat “right” and all that will be yours! If you just don’t eat the BAD THINGS (oh look, animism), you will never get sick or get heart disease or whatever.

            People are astounding animists about food. It’s unreal. And so the first thing you should realize about food is that it makes people fucking retarded. Eat what works for you. Don’t raise food to the level of superstitious totem. And that’s it.

            1. You’re right. It’s just hard not to respond when you’re basically being told that you’re doing something wrong and that even though you may enjoy the results you need to change to something else.

              I like your admonishment. “Eat what works for you.” Thank you.

            2. It’s wishful thinking. People want to eat more than is good for them, period. It’d be so much more pleasant to avoid eating just a few things than to avoid eating too much of everything.

              But as Dr. Dasler taught us, all reducing diets work, because they all restrict something caloric, and if you do that & don’t make it up with more of everything else, you’ll lose weight. But what are the odds you’ll do that?

              1. “People want to eat more than is good for them, period.”

                That doesn’t sell proposals for government programs, print or diet and exercise regimes.

          2. And there’s the fact that regular fats are pretty much entirely beneficial, healthwise, with no potential mal effects like is the case for most carbohydrates and proteins. And there’s that folks never like to consider the quantity of energy needed to extract the energy from a food when calculating its caloric content, instead treating fats, proteins, and carbohydrates equally when the proportion of usable energy in each is very different.

            As far as satiation, fuck yeah. A person can subsist quite comfortably living on fairly tiny titbits provided the fat content is sufficient to provoke satiation. Vinegar has a similar effect. I once tested this and found that I could eat less than once a day with no discomfort by simply taking some fish oil and a bit of vinegar whenever I felt hungry. Satiation tended to follow within minutes.

            The best diet I had for keeping off the pounds, however, was when I caught a form of pesticide toxicity induced c?liac disease. I could eat any quantity of food and never gain any weight. It’s like everything had zero calories, and, for that matter, zero nutrients, mostly. So I stayed very thin and stylish, with only some chronic malnutrition, insomnia, syncope, heightened neuroticism, and deconditioning of the digestive tract that took years to repair. Try it!

    3. I personally think the crusade to use a corporation’s weak claims against them is perfectly legit.

      Its similar to the blowback 7Up received when they tried to claim they were “All Natural” (which didn’t last long)

      Chiptole is trying to create the impression of “added value” by implying their food is somehow safer or healthier or more ethical. Testing the veracity of those claims is 100% in the consumer interest.

      1. Testing the veracity of those claims is 100% in the consumer interest.

        Yep, provided they are not attempting to use government to restrict their legitimate practices.

        However, if their beef is with the GMO-free and antibiotic-free claims attack them on said claims, not their calorie counts. Seems a little disingenuous to me.

        1. Look at you, interloper! Are you eating Chipotle right now?

          1. I WOULD! But I’d need to drive to Billings.

            1. Eh, you can make it at home.

              Take a dump in a pressure cooker, add pork shoulder, agave nectar, and mild chili powder. Cook until the stool is soft.

        2. “if their beef is with the GMO-free and antibiotic-free claims attack them on said claims, not their calorie counts. Seems a little disingenuous to me.’

          Well, the implication of Chipotle’s marketing (much like 7up’s “all natural” gimmick) is to insinuate “healthfulness”.

          They don’t make direct claims about their foods being low-fat or low-cal. But they use the GMO free and other kinds of claims to suggest they’re better than those other scumbags who let you eat Antibiotic-ridden corporate meat

          *(I’m reminded of “Food Babe’s” assertion from yesterday that Starbucks had pesticide in their coffee from having “Non-Organic” beans…)

          Pointing out basic facts about the caloric content of their food vis a vis competitors is 100% OK. In fact, “content comparison” is a protected form of marketing where you’re allowed to name the competition (although most prefer to say, “leading brands”…because why give competition airtime?)

          I have some familiarity with the “”Center for Consumer Freedom”” and its associated lobbbying groups. They’re hitmen for fast-food/soda/tobacco companies. They’ll take the even-lower-road in a second. That said, in this case they have a legit point, and theres nothing wrong with their campaign from what I’ve seen so far.

      2. 7 UP? The last time I remember them having a slogan – and I don’t think I’m making this up – is “make 7 Up yours.”

          1. I like the “up yours” version better. More honest.

          2. Isn’t everything that exists 100% natural?

            1. “Isn’t everything that exists 100% natural?’

              There’s semantics, then there’s the Nutritional Education and Labeling Act of 1990… which may not coincide with one’s personal semantic preferences.

              I mentioned the other day about food-marketing regulations…. and how “Natural” is given a lot of latitude, while “All natural” somewhat less so… but neither are strictly defined in detail.

              …and that ultimately there’s a loose degree of understanding about what is “commonly understood” in any given food category to mean “all natural” which they can’t possibly legislate every single aspect in perpetuity.

              In the case of 7Up (if I recall correctly) there were complaints from both consumers and competitors (who both argued that HFCS was not commonly understood as ‘natural’ the way ‘real sugar’ was) and the label was voluntarily rescinded

            2. Warty exists

              1. Subnatural?

            3. It means there’s no chemicals in it.

    4. So this “libertarian-leaning” outfit combats Chipotle’s misleading advertising with misleading advertising of its own?

      Sounds about right.

      1. The ends justify the mean.

        -Michael Scott

    5. Anyone who thinks eating shitloads of Chipotle is healthy deserves to get fat.

      Chipotle is not healthy. No shit. It’s your own fault if you don’t realize that just by looking at the food.

    6. When I used to go there I’d either get a salad and have leftovers or get tacos. How is it possible to even eat an entire burrito and not be fat already

      1. Metabolism, I guess. I consume 3000 calories a day, a lot of it garbage.

        I’m 6’0″ and I’ve weighed 185 for a decade.

        1. Weight and BMI aren’t the only measures of good health. How’s your morning glucose, triglycerides, blood pressure, and heart health?

          A good friend died of a massive heart attack while working out. He looked to be in awesome shape and was in his late 40’s.

          Don’t kid yourself; this shit matters.

          1. My blood pressure is so low that I’m encourage to eat more salt.

            I just had an echo cardiogram (I’ve take prescription amphetamines for the last 20 years) to see if there was any long term heart damage, and it came back fine. EKG normal too, resting pulse of 55.

            Cholesterol was 170 (with a shitty diet), but I don’t remember the breakdown of good and bad.

            If I don’t die in a gruesome accident, skin cancer will be what gets me.

            1. Glad to hear it.

            2. (I’ve take prescription amphetamines for the last 20 years)

              It’s not your metabolism then.

              1. Stimulants cause weight loss by suppressing your appetite. I don’t take a dose high enough to cause that.

                Did you miss the part where I consume 3000 calories a day?

                1. Stimulants cause weight loss by suppressing your appetite

                  And by stimulating your metabolism so you burn more calories.

                  1. Not in therapeutic doses, it doesn’t. I’ve done my research. It’s my body and my health, after all.

                    1. I’m just giving you shit. I maintained a healthy weight until I got a desk job with a long commute. Now, not so much.

            3. 55 RHR? Man, what are you? An Olympian?

              1. I used to surf and swim a lot. I have friends that are in the 40s.

              2. You say you eat a lot of garbage. Just reduce the amount of it you consume. No?

                1. Why? I’m not interested in losing weight.

                  1. Well, as you were then.

                    /throws slab of bacon at Playa’s feet.

                    1. How bout some beer? The Cal game is on at 2pm.

                    2. Sure. Why not?

                      I’m in a good mood.

                      For now.

                    3. Did you just ask a Canadian if he wants beer?

                    4. I want him to throw me a slab of beer.

                      I think of Rufus as more Frenchie than Canadian.

                    5. Yep, I mistook that as an offer.

                      Canadian Frogs? Are they drunk when they surrender?

                    6. I’M NOT FRENCH…you assholes.

                      /takes beer back.

            4. Ya got narcolepsy?

              1. Me? No. Impulse control issues stemming from a head injury years ago. You could call it “frat boy behavior”.

        2. Youth is wasted on the young.

            1. I said that before I knew you were using speed. That will keep anyone’s weight down.

          1. Good drugs are wasted on the young.

          2. Money and power are wasted on the yo?ng.

  12. I bet I could make the Liberland Olympic team in something.

    I could meet some of Pan Zagloba’s athletes in the flesh

    1. So what would the libertarian Olympics be like? I can just imagine some of the events:

      1. Drankin
      2. Orphan toss
      3. Drankin
      4. Orphan cannon shoot
      5. Drankin

      Did I leave anything out?

      1. I would hope that libertarians could compete in at least half a biathlon.

        1. I tried out for the biathlon team once, I kinda figured shooting regular downhill or cross-country wouldn’t be much fun, but the ski-jumping ones where you gotta hit ’em on the fly might be fun. Then I found out that ‘shooting skiers’ described the contestants and not the sport. I’m pretty sure the ski resort still has a warrant out on me.

      2. Marijuana-fueled Mexican ass-sex marathon.

        1. I call that Taco Tuesdays.

    2. I was thinking more of the Summer Olympics, but Liberland’s own olympics might be fun too

  13. Liberland has generated interest in more than 360,000 potential citizens

    well, I’m sure the surrounding countries are more than a little excited about that. The opportunity to murder 360k libertarians doesn’t come around often. the USA will be too envious.

  14. Liberland: Bring OFF!

    1. You can can get that at my Off, pot, booze, guns, explosives, orphans, monocle and battery store. Accepting bitcoins.

      1. WTF? No woodchippers? What the hell kind of libertarian store is that?

        1. At Hyperion’s Genuine Libertarian store, you’ll find all your libertarian needs. As well as offering all of the goods found at AlmightyJB’s store, in higher quality of course, I’ll also feature hookers and blow. Free drinks and orphan shoe shine while you’re shopping.

          1. Who wants your skanky hookers when the love is free.

            1. Men don’t pay hookers for sex. You can get that from a bar bitch. Men pay hookers to leave.

              1. They’re not going very far in Liberland.

        2. “No Woodchippers”

          No longer do we need to dipose of the bodies of our enemies like common criminals. We display them at our gates.

    2. Liberland: Bring OFF!

      I’ll bet DDT is legal in Liberland.

      1. DDT? Hah! In Liberland one can shoot mosquitos w a .40 cal. Using real soft lead bullets.

  15. Racist? Sexist? Trumps new VP pick?

    Reasonable minds want to know.

    1. Was there a time you weren’t constantly trolling the same point over and over again?

      1. What do you want to talk about gilmore?

        Woodchipping stuff from orbit?

        Chicago style pan pizza?

        1. meh. whatever, i just dont see the need to pimp trump on the weekends. Its our free-time.

        2. There’s a subthread on Chipotle. Trolling welcome.

          1. Is that the one where you said your meth addiction keeps your tummy flat?

            *he says while smoking a cig and sipping cold brew coffee.

            1. My amphetamines are not methylated. What is this, North Korea?

            2. My morphines are not diacetylated! What is this, Nazi Germany?

      2. There was. It seems the GamerGate wars warped his mind. Either that or SJWs are paying him to ‘unsell’ the GamerGate movement.

        1. The recent gamergate happening is that Sarah Butts is paedophile and child pornographer.

          All the anti-gamergate idiots ran to her defence. Most of it was predictable denials but some of it is full throated support of paedophilia.

          1. Why did you spell that like a limey?

            1. I am a horrible speller….so i never spell anything right and everything is pretty much spell corrected…..

              And I switched my spell checker to UK spelling.


            2. You can’t very well say it “pay-doe” if you spell it fuckinass “pedo”. No more’n you can get ne “a-ternal apples” if you don’t spell it “?ternal…”. Iditos?

    2. I don’t understand what that video had to do with your comment?

        1. So Corgan’s a moron.

          1. Him and Robert Redford.

            More recently, actor Robert Redford said he was glad Trump was running because his candidacy “shakes things up, and I think that’s very needed.”

            Honestly I agree in almost all cases. Millionaire Musicians and Actors are generally idiots outside of music and acting. But the observation that support for Trump is an outgrowth of frustration with politicians and the media and years of them feeding the public bullshit is an apt one.

            Toeing the line of the Media narrative, like you are doing right now, actually feeds support for Trump.

            I do like Trump more then Hilary in the same way I “like” cleaning up vomit from a carpet more then I do cleaning human diarrhoea.

            Before I saw race-baiters at Reason chipping in I can honestly say it moved my Trump preference up from human shit to vomit.

            1. It seems like you’re pointing out that Liberals Love Trump, because he functions as a bug-zapper for scumbags in the body politics.

              They’re not “supporting trump”. They’re applauding the function that trump serves in highlighting the grossest elements in american politics.

              btw, Robert Redford is indeed a moron. After the midterm elections he was moaning about how “America is Lost” because how could anyone dare ever re-elect republicans to any position of power?

            2. So pointing out that supporting Trump is stupid = toeing the media narrative. Is there anything you can’t contort into some bullshit sin?

    1. Do they not have insurance that would handle the liability payouts?

    2. ” In China, drivers who have injured pedestrians will sometimes then try to kill them. And yet not only is it true, it’s fairly common; security cameras have regularly captured drivers driving back and forth on top of victims to make sure that they are dead. The Chinese language even has an adage for the phenomenon: “It is better to hit to kill than to hit and injure.”…

      … if you cripple a man, you pay for the injured person’s care for a lifetime. But if you kill the person, you “only have to pay once, like a burial fee.” “

      Its like the Apotheosis of Progressive-Liberal perverse-incentive schemes.

      I DO like their mention that at least one of these Hit-and-Hit-Again-and-Run-drivers was beaten to death by a pissed off mob.

      1. “With so many hit-to-kill drivers escaping serious punishment, the Chinese public has sometimes taken matters into its own hands. In 2013 a crowd in Zhengzhou in Henan province beat a wealthy driver who killed a 6-year-old after allegedly running him over twice. (A television report claims the crowd had acted on “false rumors.” However, at least five witnesses assert on camera that the man had run over the child a second time.)”

        That’s funny, why would the media automatically claim the eyewitnesses were wrong and the driver/lynchee was innocent?

        Maybe the driver was someone’s cousin or in-law?

        1. Im thinking it’s more like the comminist party told her what she could say if she wanted to keep her job and what she shouldn’t say if she wanted to keep her job.

          Communism hasn’t changed it’s goals.

      2. ‘I DO like their mention that at least one of these Hit-and-Hit-Again-and-Run-drivers was beaten to death by a pissed off mob.’

        The mob which then had to pay for the driver’s care and feeding the rest of his life.

    3. I think a lot of this happens to come from the fact that china has not really had a widespread “car culture” for nearly as long as it has existed in the US.

      Its also a class-distinction, perhaps. Which also would help explain why the law seems to be so stupidly biased in favor of drivers who kill, as well as assuming that drivers who maim can somehow afford the lifetime care of pedestrians they injure.

    4. I have never felt in greater mortal danger than when walking the streets of a Chinese city.

      1. Torrance, CA. It’s pretty much the same thing.

        1. Only if they blithely disobey any and all traffic measures. I haven’t seen anywhere in the US that bad.

          1. Only if they blithely disobey any and all traffic measures

            This is the official state pastime in MD.

            Somewhere it must be written down that to qualify oneself as a Murlander, you must disobey all traffic laws at all times and drive in a suicidal manner.

          2. I go to a certain market there to get pork belly and tuna collar. My head is on a swivel, and I’m on DEFCON 1, and I still get taken by surprise.

            I’ve witnessed 4 accidents in the parking lot this year alone. Nothing serious, but still. Keep your giant hunk of metal away from my giant hunk of metal.

            1. Yeah, we get it, you ain’t gay.

    1. I’m not familiar with the source.

      Something that does disturb me a great deal about how the media is covering the migrant issue relates to women and children, though.

      Most of the photos or videos taken by media show women and children, but when you click through and look at the range of photos you see very few women and children among the crowds of migrants. They typically appear to be young men 15-30 or so. Where are all the women? Left behind? I know many of the men are probably looking to avoid being used as modern cannon fodder, but what about the women left behind?

      1. I saw a video of Hungarian aid workers handing out food and water along a stopped train.

        men aged 15-30 were taking the stuff and throwing it on the tracks. No women were seen. Little girls did come out and grab some food packages. They did not seem to be stopped by the men but when an aid worker handed some stuff to a little girl through an open window of the train she quickly disappeared inside and a man replaced her and waved and yelled at the aid worker.

        These are Turks and Syrians right? Not bat shit insane Iranians or Saudis. It seemed really weird for this to occur organicly and makes me suspect it was an organized thing.

      2. Here is a video showing the BBC lying about that photo of a woman and her child on the train tracks:…..-immigrant

        1. Wow, that’s pretty blatant on the part of the BBC. “There was a push and shove with police” and the woman and baby “ended up on the tracks.”

          1. Does anyone have a tldr version? Asking for a lazy friend.

            1. Fast-forward to about 55 seconds into the video, and then watch the male push the woman and child onto the tracks at about 1:20. Clearly the police weren’t responsible for that.

    2. While I don’t doubt there’s considerable bullshit wrapped up in any of these stories….

      …the idea that the person ‘can’t be a legit refugee’ because their timeline doesn’t match up to something something “when ISIS happened to be in certain locations” is pretty stupid.

      “”‘ISIS was not in Damascus either three years ago when Kurdi claims he lived there. ISIS entered only a small rural part of northern Damascus last year and targeted a remote refugee camp with “Palestinians” earlier in 2015 and were pushed out. ISIS is present in a quarter of the country in Northern Syria, not in the South.'”

      The Syrian civil war has been going on since 2011, and was very much in Damascus in the early days of the war. The syrian army killed 1000s. There was open warfare in major cities in the early days.

      “”In January 2012, Assad began using large-scale artillery operations against the insurgency, which led to the destruction of many civilian homes due to indiscriminate shelling.[159][160]… January saw intensified clashes around the suburbs of Damascus, with the Syrian Army use of tanks and artillery becoming common. “

      It wasn’t until recently (2013-now) that “ISIS” was even a factor.

      The entire first 1/3 of that piece tries to discredit the person, claiming he “never lived in a war zone”. While its possible they’re right… the argument they make is facile, intending to appeal to people entirely ignorant of what has been going on for the last 5 years.

      1. The aim is to rationalize not letting Syrian refugees in, because dirty foreigner Muslims are scary and dirty.

        1. This is perhaps the most hilariously unself-aware thing you’ve ever posted here. You’re the “bomb ’em back to the stone age” guy when it comes to Muslims in their home countries, but when millions head for Europe to turn it into the same sort of cesspools they are fleeing from, well, it must be xenophobia for Europeans to not welcome them all in to their bankrupt welfare states. Because “all immigration is always and forever good,” right? Just look at the wonders it has brought to the suburbs of Paris, to Rotherham, and many more places! Just look at how the crime rate has dropped in Sweden! They have fewer rapes than ever, I hear!

          1. ” Just look at the wonders it has brought to the suburbs of Paris, to Rotherham, and many more places! Just look at how the crime rate has dropped in Sweden! They have fewer rapes than ever, I hear!”

            It has indeed been good for all of these places.

            “This is perhaps the most hilariously unself-aware thing you’ve ever posted here. You’re the “bomb ’em back to the stone age” guy when it comes to Muslims in their home countries”

            I know you think this makes you clever, but non-sequitors don’t do that.

      2. If the family had a free apartment in Turkey for three years, it’s at least a bit misleading to report the story as if they had just left Syria.

        1. Aren’t they the ones that said they were “fleeing to Canada”? That didn’t fit with the other refugees and I guess now we know why.

    3. Do you have any reliable, non-nutbar sources?

      1. Everything about how the child died being spun by MSM could be true.

        But don’t you feel a bit queasy how this image is being used to push a narrative? NPR yesterday was comparing it unironically to napalm girl and how powerful it was. Then later they had the kid’s uncle talking and the host interviewing him started crying on air.

        Note: I could give a crap about Europe and its immigrants.

        1. There’s a Napalm Girl? I’m glad we got Lobster Girl instead, & that she’s nothing like Lobster Boy, who either killed or was killed by Blockhead, I forgot which.

      2. So this is unconfirmed, but I have to tell you, it wouldn’t surprise me at all. The liberal media is nothing more than leftist propaganda these days. Arab Spring, lol.

    1. Dude, your sources are suspect.

      1. Shhhh, don’t disturb him when he’s shitting his pants.

        1. So says the guy who regularly shits his pants about the police.

          1. Exactly, I’m as much of a pants-shitter as you. Completely. So could you recommend an adult diaper brand for me? I mean, you being the expert in pants-shitting and all. The D-Pants are a little moist, if you know what I mean, and I’d like to stay as dry and comfortable as you do when I shit my pants daily.

            1. I have no recommendations because my pants are always quite dry.

            2. You never achieve nothing if you aren’t willing to get your pants wet now and again.

        2. What the hell is wrong with you?

          1. Joss Whedon fan.

      2. I don’t post this things because I believe they are Unimpeachable Sources With The Final Word. Some I think are probably pretty accurate, but some are just viewpoints worthy of consideration.

        1. This things I believe.

    2. Your love of spreading bullshit supported by the scampiest of evidence and most suspect sources is as constant as it is revolting.

      1. Your constant use of the ad hominem fallacy, against commenters and sources, is a joke around here. Lighten up, Francis.

        1. I don’t think you know what Ad Hom is.

  16. OT = Pillow Fight Turns Bloody In Military Academy Ritual

    “He said upperclassmen supervising the freshmen had required the cadets to wear helmets, but many put the helmets in their pillow cases instead, the Times reported.

    The pillow fights date back to at least 1897, the Times reported, citing a 1901 congressional inquiry on hazing.”


    soon to be intervening all over the world, by drone. I suppose they will have their exams on Xbox later.

    1. I pity the poor guy who Googles “college pillow fights” and finds this story.

    2. Is there a some rule that the individuals who make up the greatest military in the world aren’t allowed to have fun?

      1. why don’t they just dress up as ladies and do the mikado? or how about a car-wash fundraiser? maybe they could race soapbox cars down a hill in the nude.

        1. “maybe they could race soapbox cars down a hill in the nude.”

          That’s a thing?

          1. I think GILMORE’s point was to compare it to something else potentially physically injurious and slightly homo-erotic.

            1. Someone finally understands me

        2. I don’t have any problem with any of that.

          Ask their opponents what they think.

          1. The Navy? See below. They’re already a lost cause.

        3. why don’t they just dress up as ladies and do the mikado?

          Uh… Have you never Crossed The Line?

          1. Yes I have…. and I puked my guts out and had to throw away everything I was wearing when I transformed from a pollywog to a shellback.

            1. That’s incredibly silly.

    3. “Look at this, Muffy, we’ve been doing it all wrong – we’re supposed to be putting stuff in our pillows so the fights can be more fatal and stuff!”

      “But, Misty, if I put a large rock in my pillow I won’t be able to sleep!”

      “Heather, you silly, take out the rock *before* going to bed.”

      1. “Yeah, but I’ll still be sleeping on a rock.”

        “No, Heather, take out the rock and sleep on the *pillow.*”

        “[whispers] I think Heather’s been to one West Point pillow fight too many.”

    4. I ran into a gaggle of cadets this week, and based upon that experience this story is not surprising.

      1. Well, *someone* needs to post the relevant Monty Python video.

          1. That is some honestly good military drill choreography for a throw away skit.

            Are Monty Python ex-military?

            1. Not ex military, but a lot of them attended public schools (what the Brits call their private schools) that required the students do military drill.

              Michael Palin boasted in one interview that he could disassemble a Bren gun blindfolded, and after someone stirred the parts around a bit reassemble it in under a couple of minutes.

    5. Fuck, man. If they can’t handle a fucking pillow fight, how these motherfuckinass soldiers supposed to take on an enemy armed with actual bullets and throwing knifes?

  17. If only we could have a thread about nothing.

    1. But, Grasshopper, *every* thread is about nothing. What we call “thread topics” are mere illusions.

      And since our so-called “reality” is indeed an illusion, every aspect of reality is truly nothing.

      It is only when we acknowledge this that we are *truly* talking about something.

    2. I do think they should do an open thread/no topic post now and then, maybe as the last post of the day, or for a Saturday or Sunday.

    3. Yada yada yada.

  18. Of the stories that appear here, only some are highly perishable, so you’d think they could save more fresh ones for the weekend. I also like commenting to go on for a long time, and a reduction in the rush of posts would help w that too.

    1. Yeah, they’ll do the 20 post in an hour slam so nobody reads them, so then they have to repost them.

  19. And I wish they’d leave the old comments up when they re-post, so we can just continue on as if nothing’d happened. Because usu. nothing has.

      1. Because you’re embarrassed of what you wrote. You should be.

        1. Because I get sick of watching you attempt to carry on conversations with people from 4 days ago.

          1. I blame the growing corrupting use of the Reasonable chrome app

          2. But convers’ns went on for mos. on Libernet-d.

          3. “conversations”? What the fuck is this, Red China?

    1. They have done that many times. It’s only when we actually WANT them to, that they don’t.

      1. They tend to do it on much older posts that had a news hook, & then we don’t read the date, & the comments link to other old news.

        4 days is a fine interval to bump a thread by.

  20. I bet I could make the Liberland Olympic team in something.

    I could meet some of Pan Zagloba’s athletes in the flesh

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.