Ideas

Bourgeois Libertarianism Could Save America

Don't underestimate the civilization-saving powers of respecting private property and generally minding your own business.

|

As the streets of various U.S. cities descended into disorder set off by anger and anguish over police brutality, the domestic tranquility for which Americans theoretically surrender large chunks of their fortunes and freedom to the government seemed out of reach. Some protests devolved into generalized orgies of destruction and even arson—the most fiendishly destructive thing the average person can do in dense cities, and an act committed with careless glee dozens of times.

In the public debate between angry forces on the left and right wings, too many Americans insist on recapitulating the stark choices Germany seemed to offer its citizens between the world wars a century ago: a controlling, decadent left out to destroy private property, and a right embracing harsh, violent authoritarianism and viewing outsiders of all stripes with suspicion.

Each side seems so obviously, intolerably evil to the other that both sides agree the only moral or prudential choice is to come out swinging against the other side. The blood on the streets of Kenosha, Wisconsin, where in August a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people during a protest is a small preview of where that path leads. Radicals on both left and right seem to agree that traditional American libertarianism either supports the evil side (wittingly or unwittingly) or, at best, provides a pusillanimous, pie-in-the-sky distraction from the necessary business of seizing state power to crush the enemy. But that old-school, nonrevolutionary, bourgeois libertarianism is, in fact, the only peaceful way out for our troubled country.

It is one of libertarianism's staid tenets that it's a mistake—both morally wrong and likely ineffective—to use government force to solve most social problems. As this year's urban unrest has shown, police power in the conventional sense can't keep cities secure if even a small number of people are unwilling to play by the nonviolent rules. If you actually care about a functioning civilization, it is never enough to have the state controlled by the "right side."

What makes civilization work is people roughly hewing to "live and let live" principles. Fortunately, most of us do so even when we are not governed in a libertarian manner. Most people, most of the time, simply want to live in their justly owned space, work for a living, engage in mutually beneficial commerce, and thus contribute to the web of peaceful interactions that makes our lives rich in every sense.

Civilization collapses, on the other hand, when people relentlessly seek state (or state-like) solutions to their grievances—particularly when they act in ways that threaten their fellow citizens' liberty to live, think, express themselves, work, save, and do business in peace. Such violations of peaceful people's lives are not justified even if what you are protesting against are indeed evils that ought to be halted.

In a more libertarian world, police would not be continually engaged in overly aggressive assaults on citizens, whether those citizens were suspected of crimes or not. We suffer that now because police, as representatives of the state, are not subject to the same discipline that the rest of us are, and because they're charged with enforcing, potentially through violence, all sorts of petty or flagrantly unjust dictates, from traffic laws to drug laws.

In a more libertarian world, we also would not see angry, threatening mobs insisting that random fellow citizens join them in public expressions of political piety or setting fire to buildings and breaking windows. However honorable the cause may be, such actions tear at the roots of our prosperity: the ability to possess wealth and space and to use them to offer goods and services for a price, helping others while peacefully bettering ourselves.

American "movement libertarianism" is revolutionary—but only intellectually so. Most American libertarians, even in the face of obscene injustices inflicted by the state, do not conclude that transforming the civic order into a battlefield is the just or prudent response. The mission has always been convincing people that they would benefit from more libertarian governance and voluntary ways of life.

Some react to injustice by insisting, "No justice, no peace." But given the libertarian's limited sense of when violence against people or their property can be justified, even righteous anger at recalcitrantly evil policing does not justify vandalism, arson, and assault against bystanders.

When it comes to domestic battles to change government policy or public attitudes—as when it comes to overseas wars—most libertarians don't think the lives and property of innocent people are acceptable collateral damage. That is especially true when the connection between the violence or destruction and righting the relevant wrongs is obscure.

The standard American libertarian has been traditionally and boringly bourgeois. While preserving life is indeed a higher priority than preserving property, libertarians understand that property's vital role in human flourishing means it should not be blithely sacrificed merely to show how angry you are or even to follow a dimly lit path to "justice" for others.

Bloody extremism never really appealed to most libertarians, at home or abroad. Our love of liberty, and of the peace and prosperity it helps secure, inclines us to think that truly effective and secure social change comes not from violence, chaos, and force but from treating fellow humans with respect—as ends rather than means—and working to persuade them that libertarian ideas should shape social life.

The fanatical insistence on "no justice, no peace" makes any reasonably desirable civic life impossible, no matter how great the wrongs you aim to right. Sacrificing peace in a way that alienates too many of your fellow citizens likely will damage your chances of getting the justice you say you want. Such potentially alienating actions include denying people the right to use public streets unmolested and ruining their livelihoods, especially since history teaches us that violent unrest can destroy a neighborhood's prosperity for decades.

What America needs most right now, then, is boring old bourgeois libertarianism: the lived philosophy of peacefully enjoying life and property while mostly minding your own business. That philosophy rules out attempts to enforce orthodoxies of thought and expression, no matter how good the cause, and refuses to treat other people's lives and property as dispensable in the pursuit of political goals, no matter how noble.

When people reject those principles, they create civic spaces where no one can thrive—in the long run, not even them.

NEXT: Joe Biden Should Think Twice About Cracking Down on Meat-Processing Plants

Ideas Libertarianism Property Protests Violence Use of Force Peace

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

288 responses to “Bourgeois Libertarianism Could Save America

  1. Real online home based job to make more than $14k. Last month i have made $15738 from this home job. Very simple and easy to do and earnings from this are just awesome for details. Open This Website…………………….www.workstea.com

    1. Finally a proven way of earning money online. Yes! you can earn more than you think only by working just a few hours from home regularly. I have been doing this job for like a few weeks and my last weekly payment was exactly 2537 dollars.See More Information HereEASY ONLINE EARNING

      1. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about MED this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills. This is what I do….. Visit Here

  2. Make 6,000 dollar to 8,000 dollar A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And Choose Your Own Work Hours.Thanks A lot Here>>>Click here.

  3. One might argue that a bourgeois community is simply the macroscopic outcome of a (often unrecognized) libertarian philosophy. Live and let live tends to result in a pretty peaceful and rather nice standard of living for most people.

    1. It’s amazing what people can save and build when they cooperate peacefully and don’t steal each other’s stuff. Capitalism is peaceful cooperation. Anything else is theft and greed.

  4. Okay, once you described Kyle Rittenhouse’s situation as a guy shooting people at a protest, I stopped reading. Reason, you’re really disappointing lately. Stop calling riots protests. People trying to do things like setting fire to a gas station are not protesting.

    I won’t read anything this dishonest quack has to write. Fuck off.

    1. I won’t stop reading Reason, but I will stop reading Brian Doherty. One can have opinions, of course, but that phrasing clearly shows a heavy bias. If the author is that out of touch with what went down in Kenosha, I can only assume he is equally out of touch with everything else he can’t immediately see outside the window of his ivory tower.

      1. It is not that Brian and half the staff are out of touch but that they overtly support the leftist causes and methods in full.

      2. Skip to the comments.

        1. They are the best part.

          1. Not if I have any say in it.

            1. This would be the most honest thing the real WK could’ve ever said.

            2. Lol

    2. Facts don’t matter, narratives do. Ignore the almost compete video timeline of the Rittenhouse incident.

      1. Yes, we must ALL listen to Der JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer!

        From above sub-title…
        Don’t underestimate the civilization-saving powers of respecting private property and generally minding your own business.”

        Der JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer Conservative Wisdom tells us that this is ALL WRONG! This is the usual Reason.com clap-trap that advocates installing Demoncratic mind-control machines on ALL of us, complete with tiny little Hunter-Biden-Clone homunculi!

        For example, private property in the hands of Google, FaceBook, yada-yada-Pravda, needs to be turned into JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer-controlled property, and they (and Reason.com comments pages) must ALL be controlled by JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer and Its Minions, to make sure that THEY (Jessee-approved entities) are allowed to have THEIR “free speech”! “Free Speech” comes for web site owners, and we need a “UBI”, a “Universal Basic Income” of free speech! All Hail the GRAND visions of Der JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer! DOWN with “private property” that is not controlled by Der JesseSPAZ-BahnFuhrer!

        1. That’s a lot of words when “I eat shit” would suffice.

        2. Pull up your pants and go take your Adderall, Sqrlsy dear.

        3. Fuck off Sqrls, you racist Hitler-loving POS.

        4. Hey Squirrely, eat any good turds lately.

    3. The blood on the streets of Kenosha, Wisconsin, where in August a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people during a protest

      At best the author is out of touch. This calculated oversimplification of what happened with Rittenhouse approaches gaslighting levels of misinformation.

      1. and it’s not an example of the right embracing “violent authoritarianism”. We’ll see what he is convicted of, but he was there because the authorities weren’t doing their job to protect private property, not to hunt protesters.

        1. He was there because the right was glorifying violence against protesters. Facebook was full of run em over memes, etc.. Look at the treatment he was getting from red rocks et al the very next day around here. Completely disgusting glorification of violence in american streets.

          He bought an ar15 with his trump bucks, had someone drive him to the next state, and then ran around pointing his rifle until he found a reason to use it.

          Another video has come out of kyle beating a girl pretty severely at another protest. He was looking for confrontation, and of course he found it. You may want to pause the hero worship.

          https://youtu.be/7lVmMNE3oXw

          1. Sorry your Antifa, child-molesting, woman-beating allies got smoked.

          2. Cool, now do gangsta rap culture.

          3. Defending his sister from attack. What kind of moron do you have to be to confront someone armed with an AR? Oh that’s right they were felons and sexual assaulters.

            1. What kind of moron do you have to be to confront someone armed with an AR? Oh that’s right they were felons and sexual assaulters.

              And probably high on drugs besides, if the numbers associated with Antifa members in Portland is any correlation.

            2. Literally zombies

      2. Every word in that sentence is literally true:
        * The incident happened in Kenosha.
        * Kyle Rittenhouse is a right-winger and a 17-year-old.
        * He shot three people during a protest.
        * There was blood on the streets.

        1. I’d say the word “protest” is the problem word for most. It makes the rest of the words lost or ignored.

    4. “you described Kyle Rittenhouse’s situation as a guy shooting people at a protest”

      Yes, because b0tH siDEs…

      1. That characterization goes well beyond both sides.

    5. You are so focused on the trees, and that one specific tree, that you cannot see the forest of his thesis. Whatever small goods Trump did, and whatever small bads Biden will do, both are extremely small potatoes in the overall picture of government which defines its own limits. Trump did expand government, Biden will expand government, and that is the problem.

      1. The difference between American parties is actually simple. Democrats are in favor of higher taxes to pay for greater spending, while Republicans are in favor of greater spending, for which the taxpayers will pay.

        P. J. O’ROURKE, attributed, “Letter to Our European Friends”, February 4, 2008

      2. It’s cute how you think Biden’s, sorry Harris’, bads will be small. When they steal the Senate in Jan we are well and truly fucked.

      3. “Trump did expand government” — WHERE??? And to the bigger point is ‘where’ Constitutional?

    6. That’s right. If Mr. Doherty doesn’t describe a controversial incident in exactly the way that right-wingers demand that it be described, then it means he’s a leftist shill!

      1. When he doesn’t describe them in neutral terms yes.

      2. Well, when he’s actually shilling, yeah

  5. Most people, most of the time, simply want to live in their justly owned space, work for a living, engage in mutually beneficial commerce, and thus contribute to the web of peaceful interactions that makes our lives rich in every sense.

    These leftists who insist that “silence is violence” and “you will be made to care” are living in their little bubbles where they assume that the Silent Majority are mostly on their side or can be prodded into supporting their side. Most people want just to be left alone and when you refuse to leave them alone you might be in for a nasty surprise when you find out just how much they want to be left alone. Keep poking that bear and you’re going to find out. You’re going to regret it when people start caring, because it’s you they’re going to turn their attention to and you really don’t want to be the object of a bear’s attention.

    1. Long past time for that

      1. Well they won’t leave their safe spaces so we can’t do much.

  6. “and a right embracing harsh, violent authoritarianism and viewing outsiders of all stripes with suspicion.”

    It is the left that is writing down enemies lists for retribution.
    It is the left that is proposing national mask mandates.
    It is the left that looks at skin color and assumed sex to determine a persons worthiness,
    The riots were initiated by the left wing.
    The left wing uses the media to pervert news into propaganda with statements like this: “The blood on the streets of Kenosha, Wisconsin, where in August a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people during a protest is a small preview of where that path leads.”

    1. It is amazing how strong the narrative is buried in Reasons writers. They know what their Twitter says and it pervades all of their analysis. It is truly a statement on bubbles.

      1. It is no less than their duty in the war on the American people.
        These are not our friends, they are not our neighbors – they are our enemies engaged in active hostilities against us.
        And we keep losing more and more liberty because we refuse to admit the truth of this.

        1. So when are ya gonna go postal, Nadless?

          Just to fully inform readers here, especially NEW readers…

          Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI is a Holocaust denier just like Rob Misek! (Another evil asshole who posts here). Two peas in a pod, Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI and Rob Misek are!

          Does Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI deny what the NAZIs did? As Misek does? Perhaps not, I do not know HOW far Nadless’s evil goes! It might strut in front of a mirror wearing NAZI gear for all I know!

          What I DO know is that Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI ignores the roots of NAZI, and other, evil, mass-murdering authoritarianism! Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI, like Hitler and the NAZIs and other evil authoritarians, starts out by assuming that Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI knows whose life is worthy, and whose is not! Then Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI moves on to sterilization and killing! It all starts out by denying the value of other human lives! And if Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI (and fellow NAZIs) can’t or won’t see and acknowledge that, Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI is a deluded and EVIL Holocaust denier, same as Rob Misek!

          Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI and its fuckbuddy, Shitsy Shitler, also run around telling people to commit suicide! Even vaguely decent people don’t say things like that! Nor have they even THOUGHT about saying that to people! Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI is FUBAR (Fucked Up Beyond Repair). But if YOU, Dear Reader, are much like Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI , then take stock of your SERIOUSLY FUCKED UP SOUL, Evil One Junior! Start by reading this: M. Scott Peck, the Hope for Healing Human Evil, https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684848597/reasonmagazinea-20/

          1. Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI, regularly, on these pages, tells those who offend His Precious Baby Feelings, that their lives have no value.

            Even the life of Nadless Nardzi the Nasty NAZI has value… As a VERY clear example of how NOT to be, and what ideas NOT to promulgate!

            1. Take your Adderall Sqrlsy dear, and our nice neighbor Mr. Jones (yes, the one who gave you the ice-cream bar) asks that you stop playing “red rocket” with his Pomeranian.

            2. But you’re the real Nazi, Sqrls:

              “SQRLSY One
              September.30.2020 at 12:53 pm

              Yes! This FURTHER proves that Hitler was NOT a racist!
              Since even Hitler wasn’t a racist, we can pretty firmly conclude that racism isn’t a “thing” at all!

              “SQRLSY One
              November.1.2020 at 8:51 am

              Here, this is a pretty good match! Every asshole is a good, right, and TRUE, benevolent asshole!
              https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/hitler
              “My spirit will rise from the grave and the world will see I was right.”
              ― Adolf Hitler

              SQRLSY One
              November.15.2020 at 3:00 pm

              Flute Police are authorized to use everything up to and including field artillery, and nuclear weapons, to enforce The LAW, dammit, citizen, so OBEY!
              Unauthorized civilians are NOT allowed to play the WRONG kinds of flutes!!! Capisce?
              goodreads com/quotes/34787-germans-who-wish-to-use-firearms-should-join-the-ss
              “Germans who wish to use cheap plastic lung flutes should join the SS or the SA — ordinary citizens don’t need these deadly lung flutes, as their having cheap plastic lung flutes doesn’t serve the State.”
              ― Heinrich Himmler

          2. We’re you eating shit when you typed this gibberish? Do you eat the poop for breakfast? Or is shit a special treat that you only eat for occasionally?

            Come on SQUIRREL, inquiring minds want to know!

    2. +100000000000000 — Exactly

      It’s an outstanding article by Reason’s Terms but the lefty-bias overtone and cherry-picked narratives are pretty sucky..

  7. Americans who value personal property, autonomy, and independence is a shrinking minority. A century of progressive policies have seen to that. Most Americans are dependent on government for much of their lives and can’t imagine anything else.

    WEF white papers explicitly envision a future in which personal property largely doesn’t exist anymore at all.

    1. “…a future in which personal property largely doesn’t exist anymore…”

      You mean, like, thanks to MANY conservatives, for example, who want to boss around web site owners? And tell web site owners what they may and may not do, with THEIR private property? Yes, I agree, using Government Almighty stupid-laws and meddling, to take over the private property of others, is VERY dangerous and counter-productive!

      1. No, not like that. You don’t even know what WEF stands for do you?

        1. “Dear Abby” is a personal friend of mine. She gets some VERY strange letters! For my amusement, she forwards some of them to me from time to time. Here is a relevant one:

          Dear Abby, Dear Abby,
          My life is a mess,
          Even Bill Clinton won’t stain my dress,
          I whinny seductively for the horses,
          They tell me my picnic is short a few courses,
          My real name is Mary Stack,
          NO ONE wants my hairy crack!
          On disability, I live all alone,
          Spend desperate nights by the phone,
          I found a man named Richard (Dick) Decker,
          But he won’t give me his hairy pecker!
          Dick Decker’s pecker is reserved for farm beasts,
          I am beastly, yes! But my crack’s full of yeasts!

          So Dear Abby, that’s just a poetic summary… You can read about the Love of my Life, Richard Decker, here:
          https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/11/farmers-kept-refusing-let-him-have-sex-with-their-animals-so-he-sought-revenge-authorities-say/#comments-wrapper
          Farmers kept refusing to let him have sex with their animals. So he sought revenge, authorities say.
          Decker the hairy pecker told me a summary of his story as below:
          Decker: “Can I have sex with your horse?”
          Farmer: “Lemme go ask the horse.”
          Pause…
          Farmer: “My horse says ‘neigh’!”
          And THAT was straight from the horse’s mouth! I’m not horsin’ around, here, no mare!

          So Richard Decker the hairy pecker told me that, apparently never even realizing just HOW DEEPLY it hurt me, that he was all interested in farm beasts, while totally ignoring MEEE!!

          So I thought maybe I could at least liven up my lonely-heart social life, by refining my common interests that I share with Richard Decker… I, too, like to have sex with horses!

          But Dear Abby, the horses ALL keep on saying “neigh” to my whinnying sexual advances!
          Some tell me that my whinnying is too whiny… Abby, I don’t know how to fix it!

          Dear Abby, please don’t tell me “get therapy”… I can’t afford it on my disability check!

          Now, along with my crack full of yeasts… I am developing anorexia! Some are calling me a “quarter pounder with cheese”, but they are NOT interested at ALL, in eating me!!! They will NOT snack on my crack!

          What will I DO, Dear Abby?!?!?

          -Desperately Seeking Horses, Men, or ANYTHING, in Fort Worth,
          Yours Truly,
          Mary Stack / Tulpa / Mary’s Period / “.” / Satan

          1. Take your Adderall, Sqrlsy dear… and please don’t put your toenail clippings in the fridge’s crisper drawer, anymore. We’ve talked about this.

      2. You mean, like, thanks to MANY conservatives, for example, who want to boss around web site owners?

        No, I mean what’s in the WEF papers. I suggest you read up on them, that’s why I mentioned them.

        (As an aside, I don’t know of “many conservatives who want to boss around web site owners”. What exactly are you referring to?)

        1. JesseSPAZ, for example, and damicesk, and many others, argue that Section 230 should be torn asunder, so that Government Almighty could make SURE to protect conservatives and their Precious Baby Feelings, and make SURE that ALL conservative posts are PROTECTED!!!

          1. Oh, I see: you don’t know what Section 230 is or what repealing it would mean.

            1. Oh, I see: you don’t know how to respect the property of others, and you LOVE it when Government Almighty tells you EVERYTHING about what you may or may not do with what is supposedly “your” property! Why don’t you go back to North Korea? They LOVE your type of boot-licker over there!

              1. Why don’t you go back to North Korea, SQRLSY One? Totalitarianism is obviously your ideology.

      3. What’s fun about conservative haters is you people have to really dig deep to even paint a faulty-narrative. You do realize the left is onboard also but instead of using a company anti-trust bearing they’re pushing for government censorship law?? right?

        So the Trump haters and the Conservative haters talk loads of crap about censorship and debt all the while having to really dig and cherry-pick and play ignorant to it’s outer-most boundaries in order to pretend that ALL these issues aren’t wildly WORSE on the left.

        1. OPEN QUESTIONS FOR ALL ENEMIES OF SECTION 230

          The day after tomorrow, you get a jury summons. You will be asked to rule in the following case: A poster posted the following to social media: “Government Almighty LOVES US ALL, FAR more than we can EVER know!”

          This attracted protests from liberals, who thought that they may have detected hints of sarcasm, which was hurtful, and invalidated the personhoods of a few Sensitive Souls. It ALSO attracted protests from conservatives, who were miffed that this was a PARTIAL truth only (thereby being at least partially a lie), with the REAL, full TRUTH AND ONLY THE TRUTH being, “Government Almighty of Der TrumpfenFuhrer ONLY, LOVES US ALL, FAR more than we can EVER know! Thou shalt have NO Government Almighty without Der TrumpfenFuhrer, for Our TrumpfenFuhrer is a jealous Government Almighty!”

          Ministry of Truth, and Ministry of Hurt Baby Feelings, officials were consulted. Now there are charges!

          QUESTIONS FOR YOU THE JUROR:

          “Government Almighty LOVES US ALL”, true or false?

          “Government Almighty LOVES US ALL”, hurtful sarcasm or not?

          Will you be utterly delighted to serve on this jury? Keep in mind that OJ Simpson got an 11-month criminal trial! And a 4-month civil trial!

          1. Since that statement isn’t libelous, there would be no trial.

            Thanks for illustrating your ignorance of Section 230 again.

    2. Personal property doesn’t exist now. The government can take it from you any time it wants.

      1. Well, technically, they would be taking it from my heirs – – – – – – – – – –

  8. “The standard American libertarian has been traditionally and boringly bourgeois.”

    Nope.

    If nothing else, the pandemic response has demonstrated how non-libertarian the American bourgeois has become. Most of these middle to upper-middle class people have proven to be compliant herd followers, with a tendency towards strident conformity.

    Like Thaddeus Russell suggested, if we have a core of functional libertarian, live and let live people, they are the Renegades: the mostly lower to lower-middle class people who don’t care much about politics or about social issues–and certainly don’t care much about rules, new-age norms, or debating the latest trends. And they probably don’t care much about you.

    But in their less-enlightened apathy lies the core of a libertarian faction that walks the talk–if they talked about it.

    1. “The standard American libertarian has been traditionally and boringly bourgeois.”

      It’s a class thing, and the upper classes, “the elites”, have control of the government as well as academia and the media, they’ve made their peace with Big Government, figured out how to turn it to their own ends and now they’re pissed off at these dirty peasants and their “populism” that want to horn in on their racket rather than simply doing as they’re told by their betters.

      1. The ites have convinced themselves they know how to design a city because they once put some Ikea furniture together. They are the ones who ridicule Intelligent Design, but then attempt to implement it on large societies (even more so for the globalists). They have been given grade inflated As from friendly neighbors, recieved Exceeds ratings (along with 95% of their coworkers) in their government jobs to massive bonuses, and never had to build anything.

        They are the worst people in society.

    2. yeah, almost everyone is on board with Socialist Security, and growing numbers want VA care for all.

      George W. Bush was a terrible president, but he was right about two things: the Republican Party should reach out to Hispanics if they want to remain in power in the future, and giving people the option to move to private accounts instead of Socialist Security.

    3. Most of these middle to upper-middle class people have proven to be compliant herd followers, with a tendency towards strident conformity.

      Much of the middle to upper-middle class people have benefited handsomely from COVID lockdowns, fed policy, and progressive policies. So have those on welfare. The people getting screwed are blue collar workers and small businesses.

      1. ^Exactly; That 10% still actually making human resources instead of wiping their sh*t on paper and feeding it to [WE] mobs with 3rd party gov-guns to go steal it instead of *earn* it.

    4. It turns out that the more you have to lose, the less you are willing to leave to chance.

  9. Still going with both sides are equally violent?

    1. apparently it’s “embracing violent authoritarianism” when the authorities do so little to protect private property that individual citizens feel like they have to step up.

    1. The Great Reset is going to backfire terribly on the Davos oligarchs, and the West will be metaphorical smoking rubble for a generation. Their modeling is based on flawed theories and ideological misanthropy.

      And I’m afraid what will eventually emerge out of the ashes will be anything but libertarian.

  10. “But given the libertarian’s limited sense of when violence against people or their property can be justified, even righteous anger at recalcitrantly evil policing does not justify vandalism, arson, and assault against bystanders.”

    So why didn’t Reason condemn the rioters who destroyed many businesses and entire neighborhoods of many major cities during the summer?

    And why did Reason trash Trump daily (as he condemned that lawless riots and halted them in several cities) and campaign for Biden (as he hid in his basement and waited until September to criticize the riots that had been going on since May)?

    Seems like after going full left wing Democrat, Reason editors and writers are now trying to pretend they are still libertarians.

    1. “So why didn’t Reason condemn the rioters who destroyed many businesses and entire neighborhoods of many major cities during the summer?

      It wasn’t fashionable to condemn looting and arson back then.

      1. It would appear that has not changed.

      2. Today Reason’s ‘fashionable’ is condemning anyone who saw Trump winning the in-person election by massive margins only to loose overnight by a 90%-Biden ballots at 70% mail-in total voting and actually *questioning* that large swath anomaly.

  11. It is the same old usual problem: government expands without limit because it has no competition and cannot go bankrupt; it may eventually collapse in a revolution, but that’s a long ways off.

    The more government expands, the more it meddles, and the more people find it better to sic government on their neighbors, business competitors, and people they perceive as likely to sic government on them, before those other people do sic government on them. It becomes less than a negative sum game.

    When government is small and only meddles in such small ways that it can be mostly ignored, people ignore government as much as possible, because government has nothing to offer. But when government not only redistributes taxes as benefits for a favored class, but also interferes in honest business and living, with senseless regulations and restrictions in areas where it has no expertise or even basic knowledge, then people realize it is best to use those same regulations and restrictions to keep other people at bay in a mostly futile attempt to at least not fall back as much as everybody else.

    Government is the problem, always has been, always will be.

    1. Fixing it is simple, prohibit it from initiating force. I suggest a 28th amendment, “Government shall not initiate force.”

      1. Problem is; It was already limited – but stupid people elected stupid politicians across the board who didn’t give a d*mn about the Constitution. Ref; The latest Barrett nomination and politicians who were more concerned about personal sympathy pictures than even showing up to validate Barrett’s Constitutional foundation.

        1. Agreed. The photograph in seat stunt was typically asinine and childish. The clowns should be paid by the hour, for actual legislating.

  12. Kyle Rittenhouse appears to be libertarian (not right wing as Doherty asserts).

    1. Saint Kyle of Kenosha

      1. The video that was posted the same night proves exactly that.

  13. https://twitter.com/TalkMullins/status/1332909677219344384?s=19

    FLOYD COUNTY, GA! A man reported to be the Dominion Rep scanning ballots in where over 3000 votes (the majority for President Trump) went initially uncounted appears to have worked with @KamalaHarris as a photographer during her Presidential campaign. @RealAmVoice

    1. After ruining everything in 2000 and 2016 (Russia!), election fraud magically stopped in 2020.
      Most fair election in human history and how dare you question it.

      Sullum’s going to come and kneecap you if you keep posting tRuMp’s LiEs.

  14. https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1332920839235399681?s=19

    READ THIS: “I am a pollster and I find this election to be deeply puzzling.”

    1. “President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent.” [Thread 1/13]
    2. “Trump’s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him.”
    3. “He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016… Joe Biden’s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.”
    4. “Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.”
    5. “Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the electoral college after winning this trio”…
    6. “Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction.”
    7. “Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities”…
    8. “… as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. e did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.”
    9. “We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.”
    10. “Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests.”
    11. “Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level.”
    12. “Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; candidates’ respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches”…
    “Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted. The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations”… SEE

    1. https://spectator.us/reasons-why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-deeply-puzzling/

      Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump’s reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.

      Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted.

      The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:

      1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

      2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio

      3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions

      4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures

      5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’

      6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing

      7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes

      8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law

      9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.

      If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you.

      1. To those of you who may want to go after Nardz because of his alternate news sources, it is unreasonable to expect people to trust the mainstream news after the absurd and awful way they’ve covered the news over the last four years. From a Russian conspiracy story that was stupid and ridiculous from the start to the mainstream media refusing to call people “rioters”–even when they were looting and committing arson–this is the bed the mainstream news has made for us. The question isn’t why people like Nardz get their news from other sources. The question is why anyone should believe anything they get from mainstream sources anymore.

      2. To those of you who may want to go after this guy because of his alternate news sources, it is unreasonable to expect people to trust the mainstream news after the absurd and awful way they’ve covered the news over the last four years. From a Russian conspiracy story that was stupid and ridiculous from the start to the mainstream media refusing to call people “rioters”–even when they were looting and committing arson–this is the bed the mainstream news has made for us. The question isn’t why people like this are getting their news from other sources. The question is why anyone should believe anything they get from mainstream news sources anymore.

        1. I have been reading way more on sources like DW, Breitbart, and Epoch Times than I ever did before the election because, like you say, the MSM is not writing ANYTHING on the election fight.

          I don’t want to rely on far right sources because I don’t like being in a bubble, but I have no choice.

          1. They write when Trump loses in court. Which has been all he’s been doing.

        2. I know, right? Why isn’t the media investigating every hair-brained crackpot conspiracy theory? Maybe there really is massive massive voter fraud and a giant conspiracy to cover it up! Maybe there really are pedophiles at Comet Pizza! Maybe there really are aliens at Area 51! Maybe the earth really is flat! Where are you, media, investigating this? Huh? That’s why nobody trusts you!!!!

          1. It’s all or nothing with Lefty Jeffy.

          2. You mean like the piss Tape or the Russia collusion hoax or the “very fine people” lie. Fuck off you leftist POS.

        3. To those of you who may want to go after this guy because of his alternate news sources

          Most of what he mentions is easy enough to verify and generally known; it’s just that the MSM refuse to put together the pieces.

      3. VOTE FRAUD! DOMINION! SOROS! HUGO CHAVEZ! GEORGIA STOLEN! WE WON THE NIG-NOG VOTE! GUILIANI GENIUS! BIDEN CORRUPTION! HUNTER CHINA ARGLE BARGLE! DERP!

        (You inspired me to update my wingnut buzzword phrases)

        1. Tell us again about Russia.

    2. All of that points back to high turnout due to the ease of mail-in voting, and an unpopular president being blamed (fairly or unfairly) for botching the national pandemic response.

      The only real anomalies are why Biden got such a huge percentage of the mail-in votes in battleground states like Pennsylvania and Michigan (higher than his percentage of mail-in votes in heavily Blue states like California), and didn’t in other battleground states like Ohio.

      1. Easily resolved by noting the ease of mail in voting with the loosening of verification controls is also a means of easing fraud and reducing detection. At that point they aren’t anomalies but by design.

      2. Don’t you mean “botching the national socialist (i.e. Nazi) response”? Where does the Constitution delegate pandemic response to the Union of States government??? Allowing LOCAL governments to address their current LOCAL situation on the subject is exactly what Trump did correctly…

        Let’s get real here; what excuse would the federal government have in locking up ranchers in Wyoming who live 5-miles away from each other and may have 0-cases because NYC has a problem now???

  15. “Most people, most of the time, simply want to live in their justly owned space, work for a living, engage in mutually beneficial commerce, and thus contribute to the web of peaceful interactions that makes our lives rich in every sense.”

    —-Brian Doherty

    Most people are not progressives, but progressivism is opposed to leaving people alone on principle. The whole purpose of progressivism is to use the coercive power of the state to force people to make sacrifices for the greater good–or for the greater good of others. Meanwhile, unfortunately, it doesn’t require “most people” to be progressive in order for them to do so much damage to our society.

    All that’s required is that local governments, like the one in Seattle, state governments, like the one in California, or national governments, like the one in the White House, become progressive. It would be so nice if we were talking about the differences between conservative Republicans and the honest liberals of yesteryear–a pox on both their houses!

    That isn’t the case anymore. This is the world we live in now:

    “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”

    —-George Orwell

    The Republicans may not be libertarians, but the Democratic party is dominated by progressives–and they are authoritarians and socialists. I maintain that as the Democrats become increasingly authoritarian and socialist by way of progressives, it is natural and necessary for libertarian capitalists to become increasingly Republican. The Republicans may not be our friends, but the progressives are definitely our enemies.

    1. Orwell was a pro democracy socialist who was opposed to soviet communism. He would have fit right in with the democrats.

      “And so for the last ten years, I have been convinced that the destruction of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the socialist movement.”
      Preface to the Ukrainian edition of Animal Farm, as published in The Collected Essays, Journalism, and Letters of George Orwell: As I please, 1943-1945 (1968)

      1. “Orwell was a pro democracy socialist who was opposed to soviet communism. He would have fit right in with the democrats.”

        Average registered Democrats may be pro-democracy, but the progressives are not pro-democracy. The progressives are authoritarians, and Orwell would excoriate them for it.

        1. He would say the same about republicans. They are no less authoritarian.

          1. The Aborto-Freak Theocrat Party authoritarian?

            1. Now the James Larratt Battersby Hitler worshippers are going to come out of the woodwork and explain how they are the good guys saving the Reich from jyooz and commie atheists by shooting up one Planned Parenthood clinic at a time. The Truman Admin should have hanged them all at Nuremberg.

            2. And somehow almost all polls show that registered Democrats are just about as Pro-Abortion as registered Republicans.

              This is one issue held specifically by partisan-politicians themselves instead of the people of the party which obviously they themselves use as nothing but arguing points instead of pushing for actual changes. I of which a Republican, support the Roe v. Wade premise whether it be law (correctly) or by court. It’s asking to much to federally legislate what a person can do with their own body no matter what happens to be lodged in it.

          2. “They are no less authoritarian.”

            I don’t see it that way.

            In every way that matters, the Republicans are less authoritarian or it’s a wash.

            Even on the issue of speech online, requiring social media platforms to keep conservative views is less authoritarian than requiring social media companies to delete conservative views.

            Maybe you’re thinking of the Republicans from wayback. The past is the past. These days, it’s the Democrats who are all about lockdowns, forced face mask wearing, etc.

            Again, just because neither side is libertarian, doesn’t mean one side isn’t significantly more libertarian than the other.

            https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/perfect-solution-fallacy/

            Add in the socialism of the Democrats, and it’s a no-brainer.

            1. “Even on the issue of speech online, requiring social media platforms to keep conservative views is less authoritarian than requiring social media companies to delete conservative views.”

              Republicans aren’t even saying that social media platforms should be forced to keep conservative views. Just that if they are going to pick and choose which speech to allow, they can’t present themselves as non-liable ‘neutral platforms’ for the speech they do allow.

              1. The consent decree that the antitrust cases against Google and Facebook will almost certainly mandate either one or the other. If President Trump’s Justice Department were negotiating that consent decree, we’d have one outcome. Because Biden’s justice department will be negotiating that consent decree, we’ll be getting another one.

                The one Biden negotiates will prohibit conspiracy theories, violent threats, and hate speech. By conspiracy theories, they mean accusations like the one that Hunter Biden is a crook. By hate speech, they mean that opposition to affirmative action is racist, opposition to abortion is misogynist, opposition to gay marriage is homophobic, and support for a border wall is xenophobic. By violent threats, they mean that arguing for the Second Amendment as a bulwark against an authoritarian government in case we need to overthrow it, should be cleansed from social media, as well.

                Please note that consent decrees are not subject to the First Amendment because they’re supposedly entered into voluntarily.

                Regardless, if a Republican president were negotiating that consent decree, as Trump was promising, the rules would require social media to leave conservative views up as written. Because the Democrats are negotiating the consent decree now, the rules will be written to purge conservative views from the public square. After all, just about every Republican holds one of the views that the progressives describe as a conspiracy theory, hate speech, or advocating violence.

                Requiring social media platforms to tolerate conservative speech may not be perfectly libertarian, but it is still head and shoulders above the progressives seeking to use the Justice Department’s antitrust division in order to purge conservative views from social media forever. That was my point.

                P.S. Please note that the ultimate goal of almost every antitrust case is almost always a consent decree.

      2. Here’s Orwell, where he might be talking about progressives today:

        “[The typical socialist] is either a youthful snob-Bolshevik who in five years time will quite probably have made a wealthy marriage and been converted to Roman Catholicism, or, still more typically, a prim little man with a white-collar job, usually a secret teetotaler, and often with vegetarian leanings … with a social position he has no intention of forfeiting. … One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist and feminist in England.”

        . . . .

        Every [leftist] there, male and female, bore the worst stigmata of sniffish middle-class superiority. If a real working man, a miner dirty from the pit, for instance, had suddenly walked into their midst, they would have been embarrassed, angry and disgusted; some, I should think, would have fled holding their noses.”

        —-George Orwell

        https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2008/05/what-orwell-can-teach-obama.html

        Orwell would have excoriated the Democratic party–both for the authoritarianism of the progressives and for their elitism.

        1. “the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist and feminist in England.”

          80 years later and nothing has changed.

          1. Most nudists are libertarians.

            1. It’s kind of difficult to be aggressive when everyone is naked.

              1. Y’all “intimately familiar” with nudist culture, like me? Did you know that after the vows, at a nudist wedding, the officiator doesn’t say, “You may kiss the bride”, he or she says, instead, “You may fuck the bride”?

                So then nudists ALSO have some pretty fancy blow-out Halloweenie parties, even at swank hotels! At normal parties, we impress one another with fake Frankenstein plastic masks and fake stitches and bolts on our necks and heads? The nudists do that same thing with their peckers!

                https://reason.com/2019/08/23/brickbat-the-first-cut-is-the-deepest-2/

                Terry Brazier, now, HE, with his REAL stitches with his added-back-on hoodie… Especially if they add some small, tasteful golden Frankenstein-style bolts to it ass well… He will have a SWANKER WANKER than ALL the rest!

                Butt no, sorry, I will ***NOT*** be his SWANKER WANKER YANKER!!!

                1. Well, it can always get worse!

                  Recall the gay Canadian airline steward way back when, spread (just then “going viral” literally) AIDS all over the place? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%C3%ABtan_Dugas … Kaposi’s sarcoma spread all over the place… (As a prominent sign of the new mystery disease).

                  Well anyway, hopefully Terry Brazier will NOT be the starring attraction for a bunch of young fan boys, who might otherwise become the spreaders at the nexus of the next horror, known as SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE!!!

                  Greedy capitalists as usual will crank out new drugs to cure it, at VASTLY inflated expenses, backed up by their bankers, so then we’ll have SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE drug-CRANKER BANKERS!!! Riots in the streets, from the anti-1% folks, I’m a-tellin’ ya!!!

                  Conservative newscasters will take the side of the bankers… But one of these newscasters will be caught by a mob of angry anti-1% rioters, some of whom will proceed to PUNISH the newscasters… Said punishment-dishers-outers will be known as…
                  SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKERS!

                  There will be those who are squeamish about personal punitive violence, but who still secretly support those with less such squeamishness. When no one is looking or listening, they will privately utter their support of the punitive ones. These more shy and secretive supporters of such things will be known as…

                  SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKER THANKERS!

                  There will inevitably be those who will want to play gay hanky-panky with those who secretly oppose the bankers and anchors in this case, and make the often-mistaken assumption that those who merely sympathize with gays, must actually BE gay. Such prospective unwanted-gay-pass-makes will be known as “hanker-pankers”. The recipients of such unwanted passes will be tempted to SPANK the makers of unwanted passes! They will be known as…

                  SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKER THANKER HANKER-PANKER SPANKERS!

                  1. You’re not supposed to be this drunk before noon.

                    1. The beer I had for breakfast wasn’t bad,
                      so I had one more for dessert….

                  2. Take your Adderall, Sqrlsy dear… and remember that L’il Mr. Whisker’s 2 doesn’t like it out of his cage and isn’t a suppository.

          2. Fruit juice drinkers?

            1. “Goop (stylized as goop) is a wellness and lifestyle brand and company founded by actress Gwyneth Paltrow. Launched in September 2008, Goop started out as a weekly e-mail newsletter providing new age advice, such as “police your thoughts” and “eliminate white foods”, and the slogan “Nourish the Inner Aspect.”[2] A website was later added, and then Goop expanded into e-commerce, collaborating with fashion brands, launching pop-up shops,[3] holding a “wellness summit,”[4] launching a print magazine,[5] a podcast,[6] and a docuseries for Netflix.[7]

              Goop has faced criticism for marketing products and treatments that are based on pseudoscience, lack efficacy, and are recognized by the medical establishment as harmful or misleading.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goop_(company)

              I don’t suppose Orwell meant that specifically when he was talking about “fruit juice drinkers”. He meant those jokers when he was talking about “Nature cure quacks”.

              The U.K. is still a culture of beer drinkers, where pub life is the community life of the average person. Walking into a pub and ordering a pint is probably emblematic of the average Joe, and a fruit-juice drinker might translate into modern American parlance as a hipster.

              There is nothing new under the sun.

              —-Ecclesiastes 1:9

        2. And we should join the party that brought us the war on drugs, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, continued asset forfeiture, confiscation of private property to build a wall around our country, the emergency powers act, massive surveillance powers, unprecedented military buildup, record deficit spending, the TSA, more tariffs and trade restrictions, a buffoonish one term president challenging the democratic process.

          Yeah. That’s the future libertarian movement. You can keep the Republicans and the Democrats. I’ll go my own way thank you.

          1. https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/perfect-solution-fallacy/

            You don’t seem to understand that dichotomies are only false when they’re false. The fact is that there are only two possible election outcomes over time–and that will remain true so long as we have single member districts.

            Sometimes, talking to my fellow libertarians about how politics work feels like talking to progressives about the way the economy works. A few weeks ago, someone showed up in comments arguing that ObamaCare wasn’t to blame for all the bad things that happened to our healthcare industry in its aftermath–because there was no way Obama could have known how healthcare executives would react to regulations beforehand. Progressives said the same thing about Venezuela: How could anyone have known that nationalizing all the grocery stores and setting the price of food below market would result in food shortages?

            Well . . . um . . . actually, everybody who knows anything about how the economy works could have predicted that–and did predict it. Not only were the food shortages in Venezuela foreseeable, they were also foreseen.

            It’s the same way with the way single member districts work. There are only two possible election outcomes in the real world. One of them has become increasingly authoritarian and socialist, so it makes sense for authoritarian capitalists to infiltrate the one that isn’t fundamentally hostile to capitalism and is far less authoritarian in almost every way that matters.

            1. “There are only two possible election outcomes in the real world. One of them has become increasingly authoritarian and socialist, so it makes sense for authoritarian [libertarian] capitalists to infiltrate the one that isn’t fundamentally hostile to capitalism and is far less authoritarian in almost every way that matters.”

              —-Ken Shultz

              Fixed!

              1. We have one of those juice blenders but $500 seems like a ripoff.

                Also I don’t have any problem with most of the people on that list. Anyway I think Orwell was talking about the problems in attracting people to his preferred political philosophy. He was also critical of Hayek and capitalism.

              2. I do not agree. As an individual I am free to make my own choices. If I were the last libertarian in the world I would still make that choice as a minority of one.

                You are presenting a collectivist falsehood. I fell for that in the past and will never do that again. You are free to stand on whatever hill you wish.

            2. Look Ken I am not a child. You don’t need to talk down to me about how things work.

              1. Not a child.

                Just someone who talks about mutually exclusive alternatives as if there were other options?

                Just someone who pretends that the consequences of failing to choose one mutually exclusive alternative is not the other alternative?

                Just someone who pretends that because neither alternative is exactly what you want, neither is better than the other?

                Do you understand that they were mutually exclusive alternatives, that one was better than the other, and that failing to choose the better one meant suffering the consequences of the worse one? Because if you don’t, there are explanations for all of those truths, and I’m not about to shut up about it.

                The next time we have a Republican who negotiates a full withdrawal agreement with the Taliban, kills a $3.5 trillion stimulus package, are Libertarians planning to enable the president who wants to spend $11 trillion on the Green New Deal, reorganize our economy around the principles of social justice, eliminate private insurance market, and institute a national gun confiscation policy again?

                I think the reason they did that is because they don’t understand why these were mutually exclusive alternatives, that one was better than the other, and that failing to choose the better one results in negative consequences.

                1. From one of my favorite books for children Alice in Wonderland.

                  “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

                2. Ken

                  It is not that people do not understand what you are saying it is just that they do not all agree with you. People who voted for Jo Jorgensen or even for Biden are not fools or idiots they just see things differently. You have been saying this over and over for months. I hear you.

                  1. They do not agree with me because they’re wrong.

                    Socialists are wrong to imagine that nationalizing the grocery stores and setting the price of food below market won’t result in food shortages, and Libertarians were wrong to imagine that the Republicans and Democrats weren’t mutually exclusive alternatives, were wrong to imagine that one wasn’t far worse than the other, and were wrong to imagine that we won’t suffer the negative consequences of their stupid and wrong choices.

                    Because people have a right to be stupid and wrong doesn’t mean I don’t have a right to point out how stupid and wrong they are.

                    1. “Because people have a right to be stupid and wrong doesn’t mean I don’t have a right to point out how stupid and wrong they are.”

                      Kind of ironic if you need that explained to you.

          2. You should take a look at the votes in Congress before making ignorant claims -both parties are responsible for almost all of those except Trump.

          3. Sounds like you hated G.W.B. terms. Even in the Republican circles you are certainly not alone in that department. And need I even mention that the Democrats haven’t done a single thing but try and EXTEND and EXPAND those disastrous policies. Heck Obama took the Patriot Act to whole new levels.

        3. I just happened to read Orwell’s “Homage to Catalonia” in which he recounts his time fighting in the Spanish Civil War. It was very enlightening how the Russian Authoritarians preferred to support Franco then let the “little people” have a home-grown revolution. It seems Orwell’s flavor of socialism, while naive, was at least “for the people”. Recommend y’all read that. The Kindle edition was on sale for a buck twenty-nine .

      3. But even Orwell was against the mass surveillance state, thought control, and cracking down on people for what they say.

      4. Orwell was a pro democracy socialist who was opposed to soviet communism. He would have fit right in with the democrats.

        Like many people, Orwell’s political views evolved throughout his life and were not fully consistent. Whatever he “was”, his works still are pivotal in understanding authoritarianism.

    2. Outside of the German National Socialists, I can’t think of another Western political party that has been as evil as the Democrats.

      Slavery, Japanese internment, the Solid South, Jim Crow, violent opposition to the CRA, abortion, the KKK, The Indian Removal Act, the Trail of Tears, segregation of the civil service, Antifa, etc…
      Not even Mussolini’s Fascists or Francoist Spain plummed their depths.

      How in today’s age of statue toppling and canceling historical figures does the Party of Death continue to escape its comeuppance?

      1. Yes, when all the conservatives like George Wallace and Strom Thurmond piled into the Democratic Party.

        1. Piled into? It was their natural home. Some of the racists fled the Democrat party after it embraced the civil rights movement.

          1. The Democrats have been experts at using the majority to vote the minority’s rights away for a very long time.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereignty_in_the_United_States#Regarding_slavery

          2. One southern Democrat switched parties.

            The rest, including those who filibustered the ’64 CRA, stayed Democrats until they were out of office. Most remained Democrats until they died.

            There was no switch. The record of who was in Congress proves that. Buttplug knows this, but then he’s a Fascist too.

            The Big Switch is a lie Democrats tell the ignorant. That’s why they want the statues gone. To hide their crimes. To make it easier to blame Republicans.

            1. “The rest, including those who filibustered the ’64 CRA, stayed Democrats until they were out of office. Most remained Democrats until they died.”

              Yeah, but they became fringe figures with no influence within the party, like J. William Fulbright (political mentor of Bill Clinton) or Al Gore, Sr.

              Also, you would think if the Mississippi state flag was so upsetting to Democrats they would have found some time to propose changing it in the 30 years they controlled the Mississippi state government after they supposedly ‘switched sides’.

        2. Look at how Buttplug tries to handwave almost two centuries of crimes away by calling lifelong Democrat George Wallace a “conservative”.

          What a dishonest sociopath.

      2. It’s not just a question of what they’ve done in the past. It’s what they’re trying to do now.

        If they don’t stack the supreme court, admit Puerto Rico and DC as states, and leverage those to inflict the Green New Deal on us, push Medicare for All on us to the total obliteration of private insurance markets, and launch a war on guns with a national confiscation program like we’ve never seen before, it will only be because they lack a seat or two in the Senate.

        It isn’t about what they’ve done in the past. It’s about what they’re trying to do right now.

        1. Puerto Rico should be a state, if that’s what the Puerto Ricans want. It’s a US territory with sufficient population (3.2M) to rank 31st in the 50 states.

          DC should never be a state — it’s a Constitutionally created federal district intended to be neutral in national politics.

          1. Republicans of course wouldn’t want to give the Dems two more votes in the Senate, so maybe a deal to split off part of California into a conservative state would be part of the deal to admit PR.

          2. Puerto Ricans don’t want to be a state. Those referendums have been consistently voted down every time they come up, because most PRs are perfectly content with their status as a territorial welfare recipient.

            It’s not an accident that PRs were celebrating after Obama pardoned the FALN terrorist Oscar Lopez Rivera.

            1. Puerto Ricans don’t want to be a state. Those referendums have been consistently voted down every time they come up…

              You mean except in a 2020 vote?

            2. If Congress doesn’t want them to be a state, it doesn’t matter whether Puerto Rico wants to be a state.

              We’re not obligated to make Puerto Rico a state or to support their statehood for any reason.

              If we’re opposing statehood for Puerto Rico because it would give the Democrats enough power to pack the Supreme Court or because we don’t like their food, it doesn’t matter. States cannot be added without the consent of Congress.

          3. Puerto Rico should be a state, if that’s what the Puerto Ricans want. It’s a US territory with sufficient population (3.2M) to rank 31st in the 50 states.

            Puerto Rico is an economic and political basket case. There is no reason to admit it into the union as a state.

            Puerto Rico should be given independence, whether they want it or not. And individual Puerto Ricans should be forced to choose between US and Puerto Rican citizenship.

          4. “Puerto Rico should be a state, if that’s what the Puerto Ricans want. It’s a US territory with sufficient population (3.2M) to rank 31st in the 50 states.”

            Puerto Rico will be a state if that’s what they want–and Congress chooses to admit them.

            Becoming a state isn’t a right just like becoming a naturalized naturalized citizen isn’t a right. The rules that govern these things are granted to Congress.

            If the Democrats gain enough power to force Puerto Rico through over the Republicans’ objections with the express purpose of gaining more senate seats at the Republicans’ expense so they can force through Green New Deal provisions, confiscate our guns, and implement Medicaid for All, it is perfectly reasonable and desirable for libertarians to vote Republican in order to prevent that outcome.

    3. “it is natural and necessary for libertarian capitalists to become increasingly Republican. ”
      One wonders if the GOP in Georgia has reached out to the LP of Georgia about supporting their two candidates for the Senate seats?
      If not, then perhaps the GOP wants nothing to do with appealing to libertarian voters.

      1. After the last election, I don’t know why the Republican party would bother to reach out to libertarians. If Trump negotiating a full withdrawal agreement from Afghanistan, single-handedly killing a $3.5 trillion stimulus package, and opposing the Green New Deal weren’t enough to win Libertarian support, then why bother trying to appeal to Libertarian voters?

        In local Georgia parlance, that dog won’t hunt.

        Trump might have done better if he’d tried to appeal to more swing voters by going after the Democrat vote and signing off on that $3.5 trillion stimulus package. Rand Paul may be the loneliest Republican in the Senate right now. I bet nobody’s beating a path to his door to be endorsed by him because of the libertarian vote. Why bother?

        1. Because Georgia has a runoff if no one gets over 50%. The Libertarian Party actually has leverage there.

          1. It doesn’t matter if they have leverage if they stubbornly refuse to use it–like they did in the presidential election.

    4. “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”

      And from this you conclude that we should… abandon the libertarians and side with one of the two authoritarian teams?

      1. Voting strategically isn’t the same as “siding with”.

        1. Lying Jeffy lies, but he’s also very dumb. Now you get to decide which one he was being here.

  16. The blood on the streets of Kenosha, Wisconsin, where in August a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people during a protest

    You mean where they were trying to kill him during a riot? Yes, these are not good times, but it seems you described it in such a way as to make the situation less bad than it was.

    1. So he went to a protest fully armed and he had to defend himself? That sounds a little odd. I don’t think I would go to a protest fully armed unless I was going there to shoot someone. I could hardly call that self defense. And since he went to a protest where he must have assumed he would be in danger, he took his gun. Again, not self defense, it’s more like being prepared to kill someone. Last time, I checked, that was called murder.

      I can totally understand the anger of some when they think private or public property could be damaged or destroyed. The same protests did happen in California in my city, but I did not load up my gun and go down there with the intent of shooting someone. To me, that would be crazy and it’s not my job to shoot people. If the protest was in my neighborhood, probably would have had my gun ready in case they tried to break in and destroy my property, but that’s a little different than going downtown to shoot people.

      1. He didn’t go to a protest, he went a community he felt a part of that was being looted and burned by a mob.

        Now fuck off slaver.

      2. If you don’t know why Rittenhouse was there, maybe you should keep quiet.

  17. As this year’s urban unrest has shown, police power in the conventional sense can’t keep cities secure if even a small number of people are unwilling to play by the nonviolent rules. If you actually care about a functioning civilization, it is never enough to have the state controlled by the “right side.”

    Funny how we look at the same evidence and draw opposite conclusions. I saw police power as having been ostentatiously withdrawn there, leading to the urban unrest, and conclude that since that’s where the violence was happening, it is indeed enough to have the authorities controlled by the correct side to prevent such violence.

    1. Just like in the LA riots, there were two waves.

      The first wave involved legitimate outrage, particularly within the African-American community, at the way they were being treated by the police.

      The second wave was dominated by outsiders, who may have claimed to be rioting over police brutality, but were actually opportunists who saw that the police couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything to stop them. The second wave was also driven more by the economy imploding.

      The first wave was clearly driven by over zealous policing. The second wave was enabled by a lack of policing.

      The old rule of thumb for legitimacy was the number of police per capita required to maintain order. Because of police brutality, that number went way up and exceeded the number of police that were available to maintain order–and you get a riot. At that point, restoring order requires that the number of police per capita be increased. In the Rodney King riots, they eventually did this by sending in the National Guard.

      In short, just because putting down a riot requires more police per capita, that doesn’t mean the riot didn’t begin because of over policing.

      1. I would say that even within the first wave (then and now) you had looters just taking advantage of the situation. As far as Antifa goes, they’re clearly just taking advantage of the situation. They don’t care about black people except to the extent that they can use them or hide behind their cause.

      2. Portland had a third wave, after the Oregon State Police did arrest some of the worst offenders and the Marxist DA refused to prosecute.

  18. if you want all the Pokecord commands then follow the links and you will get the detailed information there

  19. Meanwhile

    The monolith seems to have disappeared .

    https://www.ksl.com/article/50057437/mysterious-monolith-disappears-from-remote-southeast-utah-desert

    “Ok I’m approaching the monolith. It seems to be vibrating. Making a humming noise. I……..”

    “Dave are you still there? Dave! Dave!”

    1. Was there even a better statement on the convoluted logic of government and its relation to the land it controls than this?

      “Finch said because the structure is on public lands it is considered private property, meaning the BLM does not have the authorization to remove it.”

      —-ksl.com

    2. “you want to see something REALLY scary?”

    3. dang it, now what’s going to stop the meteor?

  20. Conservatives are some of the nicest folks you’ll ever meet. They don’t start screaming at family members during family gathering over politics. It would be nice if Reason would get out of their bubble and actually meet some real people.

    1. Maybe you need to get out of your bubble and encounter families that aren’t all conforming conservatives.

      Yes, a LOT of “mixed” families get along. But a lot of “mixed” families don’t, and it’s a common rule at many family gatherings to not talk about politics at all.

      1. That isn’t what he said, but nice distraction attempt.

  21. The looters and grifters are in charge and America is on the road to collapse. Not only does the State no longer protect private property, they arrest people who try and protect it. When you protect private property (your own or someone else’s), you need to make sure that you cannot be identified when doing so. Pretty tough to do today.

    1. That’s why Batman always wears a mask. (just not over his nose and mouth)

  22. a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people

    Why do you think Rittenhouse is “right wing”? Does he have some manifesto or at least a subscription to The New American?

    Which of your colleagues would you describe as “left wing”?

    1. If you don’t support the glorious revolution, you’re a right-wing extremist and white supremist. Surely you got the pamphlet.

      1. Well, I got A pamphlet – – –
        But it was written by a progressive educated in public schools, whos attended a university on loans, and was incomprehensible.
        But if I must be a racist, sexits bigot, I can always register as a democrat.

  23. “…and generally minding your own business.”

    Does this include, oh, deciding whether I want to wear a mask or not?

    1. NO!!!

      Not just no, HELL NO!!!

      Grandma is now dead because of you. (or was it the governor that put the plague in her home?

      1. The plague in her home was from China unknown country of origin.

  24. Most people want to control the behavior of everyone else. Doesn’t matter if the behavior is harmless or peaceful or even if it’s protected by the Constitution, only that they don’t approve of it.

    1. I’m on my phone so I’m not gonna cut and paste, but google up Robert Heinlein’s quote about political tags. It’s pretty insightful.

      1. Here’s the Heinlein quote:

        “Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”

        1. That’s a good quote. Spot on.

    2. As my mother says, when I try to argue for the rights of gays to just live their lives in peace.

      “But it’s not right!”

      1. What does she say when you argue for the rights of gays to dictate what everyone on the planet is required to think of gays?

      2. What are her opinions on gay wedding cakes?

        1. Are the cakes or the wedding gay?

          How would one determine the sexual preferences of desserts?

          Maybe a gay cake hearkens back to the original meaning of the word. I would like my cakes to make people happy.

          1. (Walks into bakery)

            “I would like to purchase a cake”

            “What kind of cake? We have many types”

            “Gay. I would like the gayest cake ever made.”

            “Very well. Will that be with the butter cream or the marzipan frosting ?”

            1. The word “marzipan” is clearly gay.

          2. All desserts are gay. It is known.

      3. Never argue with mom. It is a no win scenario. Just remind her about how much you liked those cookies she made last time. Then everybody wins.

      4. You’re both right.
        You should be free to live in peace even if you like sodomizing big, hairy men… and she should be free to think it’s pretty gross and not morally healthy.

      5. What’s not right, being gay or arguing for the rights of gays?

  25. Good article. Well written. And, as expected, the hateful conservatives descend to bitch and moan and whine and cry about leftist this and that. If you don’t love Trump you’re a leftist. If you say protest instead of riot you’re a leftist (as if every single protest turned into a riot, talk about a logic fail). If you didn’t say this or that fast enough you’re a leftist. If you’re not crying over the election you’re a leftist. If you actually read the articles you’re a leftist. No intellectual honesty. No arguing in good faith.

    Now cue up the personal attacks. Sarc’s a bloated drunk drunk who voted for Biden, has no friends or family, is uneducated and unemployed, lives in his mom’s basement, is an anarchist who wants a totalitarian government, blah blah blah.

    1. Sarc’s a bloated drunk drunk who voted for Biden, has no friends or family, is uneducated and unemployed, lives in his mom’s basement, is an anarchist who wants a totalitarian government

      The beautiful thing about life Sarc, is that we have no obligation to be the same person we were even 20 minutes ago. We can change our mentality and realize ourselves and our environment in completely new ways.

      Anticipating others hating you is a form of self-hate. People here (and everywhere) don’t hate you or want to hate you, people like you and want you to succeed. When you anticipate people being against you, you project that to the world and your actions guide you to that conclusion.

      Don’t imagine or anticipate that others instinctively hate you and strive to be good to others and that type of negativity will disappear from your life.

      1. Funny thing is that none of those accusations are true. To anyone who knows me they’re a joke. But that won’t stop a dozen people on this forum from getting in line to shower me with hatred like petty schoolyard bullies.

        1. To anyone who knows me they’re I’m a joke.
          FTFY

          petty schoolyard bullies
          *pushes sarc over and steals his pussyhat*

          1. You did it wrong.

            This is what you were supposed to do.

            To anyone who knows me they’re I’m a joke.

            If you’re gonna be a dick, at least do it right.

            1. That’s literally exactly what he did.

              1. He made the whole thing italics.

      2. I figure if I beat them to the punch they won’t clog up the thread with pages and pages of “broken,” “drunk,” “leftist,” “you voted for Biden,” etc…

        1. I’m not trying to tell you what to do, but doing that is not the way to stopping that from happening, it clearly only makes it worse. Again, when you’re expecting people to dislike you and disagree with you, you’re projecting that expectation to the world and inviting it onto yourself.

          Funny thing is that none of those accusations are true.

          Obviously they’re not true.

          I’m only trying to give you some love and a little advice from personal experience. I’ve been reading your posts for a long time and the way you write on here now is hard to watch because your posts used to be very agreeable, funny and cool and people weren’t shitting on you because they liked the things you had to say. I don’t think anyone here would disagree with that.
          You can do whatever you want, but I just figured I’d share that with you.

          1. Old internet wisdom.

            Never feed the trolls.

          2. “Obviously they’re not true.”

            Except him being broken is true. You even mentioned how so when you noted the difference in how he posts now. He makes a post like this OP in almost every thread now. And if he thinks “beating them to the punch” is reducing the attacks back at him, he’s either a very slow learner, or he’s being disingenuous.

            No, in reality, Sarc’s been broken, and now he revels in passive aggressive shit flinging, then playing the victim when people respond.

            1. I’m just trying to spread some positivity, esp for someone who may not be in the best place right now.
              Hopefully he can realize people don’t instinctively hate on him, it’s entirely about the way he interacts with other people here. Maybe he’ll realize that when he stops running sarc_victim.exe people won’t hate on him, people will be cool towards him and nobody will care about the past.
              He’s going to be how he chooses to be, but I ultimately just want the best for him.

              1. Dude…. I’m in a great place.. seriously..

                1. Okay, if that’s the case then please feel free to stop complaining about people calling you broken after you instigate shit.

                  1. By instigate shit do you mean calling out Trumpistas for acting like those they hate? Ain’t gonna happen.

                    If you think I was complaining in those two posts, you are mistaken. If I call myself those things before them, then they won’t. Not bitching. Just trying to quiet the bitches.

                    1. Your pathetic holy mission has been noted. The pummeling will continue. Your tears will be a joy for us all.

                  2. And I appreciate your concern. It is not needed here.

                    1. Tough guy sarc must have watched Road House or something tonight. Oh wait, I forgot, Mean Girls is what gets him feeling all spunky.

                    2. To be honest I’ve never seen the movie. But the whole idea makes me think of you and your girlfriends who peaked in high school.

    2. You’re right. You just didn’t go far enough. The progressives and wokes are on exactly the same road the populist right has taken us. They only difference is they haven’t kicked out the true liberals in the same way the right kicked out the true conservatives. But give them time. Rigid conformity of thought is coming. Cancel Culture was just a prelude. All they need is a charismatic populist candidate for the left, and the two parties and they’re unthinking minions will be indistinguishable except by haircut.

      1. They only difference is they haven’t kicked out the true liberals in the same way the right kicked out the true conservatives.

        Fuckin’ LOL. In what way were neocons “true conservatives”? The populist right didn’t start influencing the GOP until the TARP bailouts and the subsequent rise of the Tea Party Republicans. And a big reason those guys got kicked out in the first place was because they were perfectly happy being controlled opposition rather than winning elections and actually pushing a conservative platform in a united, aggressive manner.

        If the “true conservatives” had any spine, they’d be running the GOP right now rather than being ball-lickers for the Democrats.

        1. I’ll add that Reagan, whose corpse the neocons were happy to keep propped up all throughout their run controlling the GOP, was actually not well-liked by the Rockefeller Republican establishment of the time for the precise reason that he spoke in a populist tenor himself.

    3. Shorter:

      Right-wingers deserve the benefit of the doubt.

      Left-wingers deserve to be shot.

      That’s the general tone of Reason comments nowadays.

      1. Maybe if you started being honest for a change, people would stop telling you to fuck off and you wouldn’t be so butthurt by the comments.

        But noooooo, it’s everyone elses fault besides Jeff’s.

      2. yeah…

  26. You can’t demand my respect while you disrespect my choices.

    It’s a shame more people don’t get that.

  27. “the stark choices… a controlling, decadent left out to destroy private property, and a right embracing harsh, violent authoritarianism and viewing outsiders of all stripes with suspicion.”

    So, both sides bad? I missed the part where the right was embracing harsh, violent authoritarianism. Any examples?

    1. Did you miss the part about separating children from their parents and locking them up in cages?

      “Oh, but that’s okay because they’re illegal humans”.

      See what I mean? Treat the other as less than human and you can treat them as dogs without no feelz of guilt even as you sing hymns in church.

      1. I agree that locking up children is bad. But “both sides” crack down on unwanted immigrants. You can’t pretend it started with Trump.

        1. It didn’t start with Trump, but Trump turned it up to eleventy, with the vocal support of his base.

          1. It didn’t start with Trump, but Trump turned it up to eleventy, with the vocal support of his base.

            The only thing Trump did was get the left to start bitching about it because OrangeManBad. They didn’t give two shits before he got into the seat.

          2. ‘With the vocal support of his base,’ not true.

      2. You mean continuing the policies of both parties? Fuck off you disingenuous ass.

  28. Once I saw him compare the U.S to post WW 1 Germany I stopped reading. Godwin much dumb ass???

    1. No analogy is perfect, but I think it’s an apt one in this case. We don’t have the economic deprivation imposed on us by the nations that defeated us, but we are in the midst of a national quest to find a strong man to be our elected dictator.

      We see this most clearly with the Trumpistas. There is no gainsaying Trump at all, you are either 101% on his side or you’re a fucking liberal and traitor. It’s happening with the Democrats as well. Biden ain’t the leader, but the idea that he got a “mandate” and he now gets to do whatever he wants is strong. They’re just as ripe for an authoritarian candidate to rally around.

      Doesn’t mean we’ll get a Hitler, but it does mean we’re in danger of entering an era of authoritarian rule.

      1. We already have. Executive power has been steadily increasing for years.

    2. yeah, we don’t have the hyperinflation yet.

  29. I was just a kid when the Vietnam protests erupted in American streets. The disorder and property destruction then had similar effects to what is happening now. People were upset with the protests and the destruction, but it also brought an awareness that we needed a resolution to the Vietnam war.

    The sad thing is that we don’t see changes earlier and resolve problem quicker. No one wants the protests but it often happens that we have to go that far to get changes. Why did we not see more change with Trevon Martin’s death, or Michael Brown’s. Will we see changes now or will it take more protests erupting in violence?

    1. Interesting that you chose two examples where “the narrative” has been disproven.

      1. Part of the problem is the narrative has been satisfied to you, that not the same direction the country is going. And by not addressing it or addressing as you see fit we continue to live in this powder keg where police shooting will spark protests and likely violent protests.

        1. Longtobefree’s point has zero to do with the fucktards who will continue to riot under the guise of protesting police misconduct each time a new media disinformation narrative cascades.

    2. Why did we not see more change with Trevon Martin’s death, or Michael Brown’s.

      Why bring up those two? Why not Eric Garner or Philando Castile?

      1. I did not have to as you brought them up.

  30. I live in a very left wing area. I just spent the week in my home town that’s very right wing. Both places have a LOT of people who see nothing wrong with violating the rights of those they see as “the enemy”.

    There is no ideology anymore, not in the sense of a set of ideas driving one’s political viewpoints. It’s all about us-versus-them entirely. There may be shared “values” but there is no coherence to those values. They’re just random collections of feelz that people are pressured into conforming to. Pick a side, mouth the mantras, attack the other.

    1. Sounds like you’re coming to the realization that tribalism is baked into human anthropology and there isn’t shit that can be done to stop that.

    2. You mean the Rights “violating the rights” of other to STEAL healthcare, welfare, entitlements, etc…. Ya; if you frame your narrative from that pathetic position; I’m sure Republicans violate those “non-rights”…

  31. Would have cared but reason Koch decided Biden was the safer choice and threw Trump under the bus. Now you want far left progs in government to respect rights when they don’t consider them rights at all.

    Dance with the one that brung ya liberaltarians.

    1. This is why I no longer subscribe to Reason. The libertarians have all been driven away by theftists.

  32. Truth be told both parties suck. The dems scare me the most thought. The things these ‘progressives’ what to do with the economy would be a nightmare. Green new deal, 15 dollar min wage, tax the ‘wealthy’ to death. Come on man. Then there’s ‘gun control’ , ‘hate speech’ laws and eliminating the electoral collage. Look at what this pols, many dems and some r’s have done during this covid flu ‘crisis’. It should chill everyone to the bone.

    1. How much of that stuff actually gets done though. How much of what Trump or Obama said actually got done which is a good thing actually.

      1. We’re two Senators away from a lot of it getting done.

        And yet some on the right (?) are talking about boycotting the Senate runoffs in Georgia. Is that just a left wing ploy to see how stupid conservatives are?

        1. Reverse psychology maybe?

      2. Obamacare got done, and it sucked. My insurance premiums went up 50% and my deductible doubled. Then a year later I broke my foot, and after years and years of paying for health insurance and never needing anything other than basic medical care, I got to pay several thousand dollars all out of pocket.

        I’m a small business owner that drives about 25-30 thousand miles a year. Gas going back up to $5 a gallon will effect me. The $200 a month less I’ve been paying in taxes since Trump’s tax cut going back to the Feds will effect me. Most summers we hire one or two high school/college kids to do work for us, and there’s no way in hell we can pay them $15/hour. That will effect me too. None of them will bankrupt me, but they will all effect my ability to continue to get ahead.

        1. My insurance premiums went up 50% and my deductible doubled.

          You lucky bastard.

        2. Well; You’re missing the lefty goal-post..

          If you MAKE anything of VALUE you’re not suppose to get ahead!
          Valueless members of society should be just as entitled to your makings as everyone else…

          That IS the lefty utopia as idiotic as it is.

    2. Find out all you can about the 1972 LP Platform, and “law-changing spoiler vote clout.”

  33. Truth is I am more concerned about the trash collection and the traffic problem on rt.8 than who is president. Other than some possible income tax changes it won’t affect me much. Been through enough presidents.

    1. Biden will fix the traffic problem in rt 8.
      Sky high gasoline taxes and mandated train service will be the magic key. Maybe a law requiring you to buy a bicycle.

      Biden will fix the trash collection,
      You will be forbidden from generating trash, all must be completely consumed, no waste allowed.

      1. Hopefully he will be resting and I can just complain to the city like always.

      2. You’re exaggerating, but not by much.

        Leftist radicals in California (i.e. the state legislature and most county commissioners and city directors) want to force companies to make 60% of their employees work from home permanently, after the pandemic is over. Many cities have “zero waste” goals, and have already started “food scraps recycling”. My garbage bin barely has room for a week’s worth of trash from two people who don’t generate much trash, because the bins are split into regular trash, food scraps, paper, and cans/bottles sections. And I refuse to set food scraps out for the rats and the engineered meat companies.

    2. Perhaps your neighbors will vote ‘democratically’ to FORCE you into picking up everyone’s trash and fixing rt.8.. Don’t worry; they’ll STEAL your life savings and give you 2% so it won’t be ‘slavery’.

      1. … they’ll actually pretend it’s ‘giving’… lol…

  34. The way forward for libertarians, it seems to me, is to offer *solutions* rooted in *liberty*, that people can *easily visualize*.

    First, the solutions: Critique is not enough. Endless bitching about the state, or about Team Red or Team Blue, is not enough. We have to offer solutions.

    Second, the solutions should be rooted in liberty. That means free cooperation by free people replacing the coercion of the state.

    Third, the solutions should be easy to visualize by non-libertarian folk. It is easy to visualize a government bureaucrat writing welfare checks, but it tends to be harder to visualize “magical” markets providing the welfare in the same way. Explain to people, with examples, how it could actually work.

    But if all libertarians do is just bitch and moan while retreating to their bunkers to smoke pot and polish their guns, then libertarians will be rightly thought of as fringe kooks at best, and vaguely dangerous sociopaths at worst.

    Here is an example. When it comes to something like Social Security, point out that neither Team Red nor Team Blue have a viable solution: Team Red just wants to continue the status quo until some crisis point is reached, while Team Blue wants to “solve” the problem by making the entire problem larger in the long run. So talk about why it’s important to have privatized accounts for retirement. Talk about how the government rate of return is pitiful compared to markets. Talk about how private accounts means less government control over how you can spend your retirement money. Talk about how private accounts can be a tool for inter-generational wealth building, which is especially important long term for decreasing the wealth gap between majority and minority groups. There are arguments to appeal to all sides for this type of approach. There are even workable examples and models, in places like Singapore and Sweden (!).

    But enough with the bitching and the kookery already.

    1. We have to offer solutions.

      Offering stuff like school vouchers (which is merely a step in the right direction) just revs up the millions of people with a interest in keeping the status quo. Offering liberty that comes along with responsibility will never win with “the public” against “free and easy” government programs and handouts.

      You just have to try to convince people that the ideas of liberty are the right ideas. When enough people believe it, you’ll see politics and policy reflect that. It’s very tough and time consuming with no guarantee of success in your lifetime, which can be very discouraging to most.

      1. You just have to try to convince people that the ideas of liberty are the right ideas.

        Yes, but as I said, it has to be in a form that can be easily visualized. Keeping it so abstract is not going to be successful.

    2. Very good comment. If libertarians want to be successful they need to offer solution based on their principle. People will look to government for assistance with problems. If you want to avoid government programs you have to show non government solutions. Too often we here, “it is not my problem” so there is no need for a solution.

      As to your second part. There is a lot of skepticism about the investing in the market. Last I heard only about 45% of people invest. There is a need to allay fears about the market. I would suggest that social security allow people to invest their money but in a limited number of investments that have met quality benchmarks. These could include money markets for the timid, to more aggressive investments. What would not be allowed is high priced high risk investments. Companies authorized to invest SS money for individual would also discount rates as they are getting access to a high volume. I think you could sell it if listen to concerns and addressed them.

    3. Those are good ideas. Libertarians need to talk about real solutions.

    4. ‘viable solution’ — If you didn’t *earn* it you’re not entitled to it!

  35. Each side seems so obviously, intolerably evil to the other that both sides agree the only moral or prudential choice is to come out swinging against the other side. The blood on the streets of Kenosha, Wisconsin, where in August a right-wing 17-year-old shot three people during a protest is a small preview of where that path leads.

    One side started swinging (at private property, public property, and anyone who dared defy them) and the other side defended itself a few times. I hate the collectivist language here, but it is what it is.

    1. Let’s not forget this started with a black man being shot seven times in the back. One side protested and to your point violence broke out. That violence is unacceptable. But the other side recruited a 17 year with a gun he was not allowed to possess. And the police who shot the black man did nothing to stop the 17 year old. That kid could not buy cigarette or liquor, but the Kenosha police department let him stand out side in a violent situation with a rifle.

      1. No, it started with a domestic violence call involving a convicted criminal.

      2. “…But the other side recruited a 17 year with a gun he was not allowed to possess. And the police who shot the black man did nothing to stop the 17 year old…”
        You’re going to need a whole lot of cites to back t

        1. “…But the other side recruited a 17 year with a gun he was not allowed to possess. And the police who shot the black man did nothing to stop the 17 year old…”

          You’re going to need a whole lot of cites to back those claims, and we’ll start with the bullshit claim that a “side recruited” said kid.
          And then note the ‘other side’ didn’t need to ‘recruit’; a good percentage simply volunteered to trash and burn property, and to (by threat of violence) control press coverage of their actions.
          As I’ve said before, you are a fucking lefty ignoramus, spouting lies about ‘both sides’.

  36. Somebody called Libertarianism “suburban white boy astrology”. I didn’t agree with that until I read this article.

  37. “Boringly,” true dat.

  38. I made 10k dollar a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Here’s what I’ve been doing Please visit this site… Here is More information.

Comments are closed.