Is Javier Milei's Movement in Argentina a Cult of Personality in the Name of Liberty?
The stakes are high for this weekend's presidential election.

Javier Milei—the Argentine presidential candidate who rose to fame with a shock win in August's primary election—is popular among libertarians, who join him in wanting to eliminate the central bank, lower taxes, and privatize some state-owned industries. Yet as we near Sunday's elections, an in-depth look at his rhetoric and policy proposals raises questions about Milei's commitment to libertarian principles.
Milei's personal style is reminiscent of populist authoritarians such as Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and Viktor Orbán of Hungary. Populists, whether from the left or the right, capitalize on social discontent, and Milei is no different. In his case, the economic turmoil in Argentina has created a political opportunity.
The economist and TV pundit claims to fight against Argentina's "political caste," a group he defines as "those who are in politics but are immoral" because they implement policies that harm people while safeguarding their personal privileges. Yet a closer look at his own policies suggests he might be part of the same "caste" he opposes.
Consider, for instance, his new alliance with one of Argentina's most powerful union leaders, Luis Barrionuevo. The collaboration reveals Milei's plan to entrust his new unemployment insurance program to the same unions that have overseen the country's mandatory health insurance since the mid-'60s. Even the current Minister of Economy and left-wing political candidate, Sergio Massa, has placed his own candidates on Milei's list of congressional candidates.
Milei is famous for talking about the importance of private property, a fundamental libertarian principle. Yet he is being accused of plagiarizing his books, copy-pasting passages from renowned authors such as Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, Friedrich Hayek, and Murray Rothbard.
Milei offers a unique combination of national-Catholic populism and anarcho-capitalism. "God is a libertarian, and His model is the free market," he claims. But his rhetorical style makes it hard to tell whether he would preserve a key principle of liberalism: the separation of power of the state from religion. Instead, Milei and his running mate, Victoria Villarruel, advocate for their union. Earlier this year, for example, Milei posted a tweet saying that he and former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, whom news outlets have dubbed the "Trump of the Tropics," would "fight based on the values of 'God, homeland, and family.'"
Milei has claimed that God, along with his deceased dogs, personally asked him to be president and carry out the divine mission to "fight the forces of evil on Earth." Milei interprets this mission as "reducing public spending" and leading a culture war. His campaign is embodied by the slogan "The Forces of Heaven," which is prominently featured on hats worn by his supporters.
Milei and Villarruel oppose abortion and LGBTQ rights, which they call "cultural Marxism." During a recent interview with journalist Luis Novaresio, Villarruel stated: "Milei and I are against abortion because there are no human rights without life." Milei has similarly critiqued sectors that promote women's right to terminate their pregnancies, referring to them as "individuals with brainwashed minds in murderous policy."
When asked whether he believes that a woman who becomes pregnant through rape is committing aggravated homicide if she chooses to end her pregnancy, Milei responded, "I defend life. Biology states that life begins at conception. At that moment, a new being with a completely different DNA is created." In Argentina, however, abortion is legal nationwide. Milei is proposing to either repeal the abortion law or hold a referendum.
When asked about her opinion on same-sex marriage, Villarruel deemed it "unnecessary" because it was "already guaranteed through civil union." She even questioned the use of the term "marriage," suggesting it is related to religious institutions, instead of being a civil institution that has been secular throughout history. Ricardo Bussi, Milei's top candidate for Congress, recently stated that "homosexuals deserve our full respect, like people who can't walk, blind people, deaf people or just like people with other disabilities."
Villarruel also recently took to X (formerly Twitter), lamenting the end of military service in Argentina. She argued that this change "deprived the country of having its citizens trained in defense and made subsequent generations of men [and women] crybabies," adding that "compulsory military service prepares our citizens for the defense of our extensive and rich territory, nothing more." Yet, it is important to acknowledge that compulsory military service infringes upon the right to self-ownership, limiting the freedom to make decisions about one's own life.
Milei and Villaruel oppose the legalization of drugs, even marijuana in medicinal contexts. In September 2021, in response to a video shared by a journalist on X addressing the drug situation in Philadelphia and other U.S. cities, Villarruel commented: "That is our future if we approve drug legalization proposals." Later, in May 2022, Villarruel tweeted: "They're voting in two minutes on the law for 'medicinal cannabis,' where, without scientific evidence, they want to quasi-legalize marijuana. A millionaire business that thrives on consumption…It's encouraging addiction." A social media follower responded to her comments, arguing that cannabis can help alleviate pains from certain illnesses. Villarruel replied by saying that such a claim only "applies to refractory epilepsy" and that "the rest is pro-drug lobbying."
Milei has said that "consuming drugs is committing suicide slowly." When asked about the topic, he claims to be "against the public spending that could come with the legalization of drugs" and never says he would legalize. In fact, Villarruel has proposed a law to seize all drugs—and thereby, continue the war on drugs.
Other politicians, such as Mariela Weimer, Milei's candidate for vice mayor of Ramírez, shout Milei's slogan "Long live freedom, damn it" while simultaneously asserting that "if the military forces were in charge, there wouldn't be as much insecurity, drug issues, inflation, and social assistance programs," and that "with 40 years of military rule, we'd be better off." Milei has refrained from condemning Argentina's most recent military dictatorship: He characterizes it as a "war" and questions the official death toll figures. Villaruel goes a step further, claiming to support the military forces.
Milei's stance on several policy issues has changed over time. Consider his stance on dollarization. Despite having rejected the idea in the past, he has now made it a main pillar of his platform. But dollarization would require dollars to pay off the Central Bank's liabilities, and the dollars are simply not there.
Contrary to previous statements, Milei said in an interview with Radio Perfil, "If I become president in 2023, I will maintain social assistance programs." Similarly, after calling for fewer ministries and public employees to reduce public spending, he now claims that he would only eliminate managerial positions.
Milei argues that the core problem plaguing his country "is essentially moral" because "Argentina has strayed from the moral values of the West." The argument resembles those put forth by Jordan Peterson, an influential figure among these politicians, who claims that "culture is losing, and a cultural war is necessary" and that "the Russians have the highest moral duty to oppose the degenerate ideas of the West." But as Tom Palmer claims in "Jordan Peterson: Putin's Useless Idiot": "It turns out that there are people who believe that Putin was forced to invade Ukraine because Russia is a part of the West and, therefore, has a stake in its culture war whose Ground Zero is somehow Ukraine."
Villarruel insists on "national sovereignty," a slogan used by Hugo Chávez, Fidel Castro, and the left they claim to be battling. As his national profile gains popularity, Milei reveals himself to have all the characteristics of a traditional populist who claims the cult of his personality. Milei is not the "crazy libertarian" people make him out to be, instead he could pose a threat to the very liberalism he claims to protect.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Javier Milei wants to keep the womb-slaves enslaved... And the pot-smokers jailed! In the Name of God! Libertarian?!?! Ha!
If you're going to make shit up, you should at least stick to your own material instead of heisting Hanky's deranged womb-slave rape-fantasy copypasta, sarcasmic.
They're both deranged old progressives with an affinity for trolling. Their narratives are going to overlap.
And then the rantings of the deranged tend to converge besides.
Slaves, or inn keepers? Who let the guests in? Hard to charge them with trespassing after that. And not many states make it legal to kill trespassers.
Killing trespassers might not be technically legal, but it's common in many places for people to get away with it.
Shooting people for trespassing on public property is cool by sarc.
The fetus didn't start outside and enter the woman's body...
Which would seem to make it nobody else's business but the woman's...
Sperm have rights.
If you're ever curious on if you're on the right side if an argument, ask if JFree agrees with you or not.
Maybe not, but people do regardless of whether or not they're 21 weeks, 21 months, 21 years or 121.
Your rejoiner makes no fucking sense. The child is still an individual. Do you garner rights over others for inviting them to your house.
You "garner" the "right" to insist that they leave.
So you’re up for infanticide. Got it.
No. I know the difference between an embryo and an infant, and so do you.
Who let the guests in? Hard to charge them with trespassing after that.
If you let someone in, and then decide they must leave, and they refuse, and you call the police, the cops will eventually escalate to deadly force to remove them.
A plethora of squatters stories tell me it takes longer than 9 months.
Depends on the situation. Usually it can be done much faster than that. I've had sad experiences with this.
"If you let someone in, and then decide they must leave, and they refuse, and you call the police,"
A far more accurate analogy is if you deliberately put someone in your home, and then decide to kill them because they're unable to leave on their own for another six months, so you hire a serial killer.
"If you deliberately put someone in your home"
Your analogy fails right there.
What do you think happens when you fuck?
This is such a stupid line of argument. It does a disservice to anyone who might be on the pro-choice side.
The stupidity comes in when making any analogy between pregnancy and any other human relationship, instead of recognizing that pregnancy is a unique situation. However, even if you accept for the purposes of silly discussion that an embryo is analogous to a house guest, you still must arrive at the pro-choice position. You have the right to eject an unwanted guest.
Yup. The secret is to try to blame the Fed for Panics, Crashes and Depressions caused by superstitious sumptuary laws and asset-forteiture looting. That cashes in on the only real error in the original LP platform and ramps it into People's Temple Kool-Ade.
Without the Fed and income taxes we couldn’t afford constant war, wouldn’t that be a disaster if we didn’t have them?
Without wars you would be living under either Nazi or Communist tyranny.
Tell people you’re retarded without telling people you’re retarded.
You and your fellow travelers are making that happen without a war. At least so far. Hopefully, one is coming soon.
And Life begins at Erection! It did not begin billions of years ago as the Devil, Darwin and Biology insist.
“Ha, ha, those deranged, anti-science, god-botherers think a unique organism forms when the gametes fuse together creating a zygote, and not when the birth-canal fairy magically bestows “personhood” as the clump of cells pass through her sacred halls”
Take your meds, Hank.
https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/1715705692324016626?t=tthGnAhApbJ8eFOoxyxIRw&s=19
Imagine being an English passenger on this train. How would you feel? Probably perplexed that the government decided to import desert problems from a thousand miles away and now you have to be subjected to them. Let's hope nobody from that region does anything nuts.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/Babygravy9/status/1715687478571548752?t=nCvuVaLerAZVif9cODDvbA&s=19
It's long been the policy of Western governments to hide the details of Islamic terror attacks in their nations, as I discussed yesterday with regard to the Bataclan massacre, but now it's apparently UK government policy to hide attacks altogether. The absolute state.
[Link]
Wouldn’t want to stir up hate now.
But a state that bans a gentleman from carrying a sword cane is already absolute.
https://twitter.com/FuckKoroks/status/1715555907374031193?t=TRFAFIwVNpmMzpMUeIiWkw&s=19
The funniest thing about leftist Jews losing control of their DEI golem is the 85IQ minorities they lifted to (unearned) positions of power don’t really have the intellect to grasp the unsaid rule that Jews have a near-absolute exception to everything DEI discriminates against.
It’s all well and good when DEI eviscerates the earning potential for whites by giving just 6% of the new jobs to a group representing 60% of the nation. It’s fine when the top colleges discriminate against whites in admissions. But speak against Israel and it’s a bridge too far.
And always remember: leftists are not capable of change.
[Links]
Post WW2 nobody has fucked over Israel and regular Jews like the elite, progressive, American Jews (EPAJ) have.
Sure Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO and their nation state supporters have been more dramatic and violent, but on a deep cultural and global policy level the EPAJ have been more dangerous to them.
Actually Presidents Eisenhower and Ford did much worse.
Uh oh. Milei’s not so dreamy anymore.
*chefs kiss* to the exceedingly loose guilt by association to Jordan Peterson, via some book demonizing Peterson’s lack of enthusiasm about the Ukraine.
This is top notch stuff, Reason.
The most important thing for libertarians is that anything even hinting at trying to reconcile libertarianism with current reality fail. I love it.
Everyone knows Jordan Peterson is the high priest of global MAGA, and if you believe that Putin was incited by offers of NATO membership to Ukraine you're a c0nSpiRacY tHe0riSt.
I was wondering when Liberteen Magazine would decide they had to slag this guy to maintain the narrative. I guess he's finally gotten too close to potentially winning to put it off any longer.
He was invited by Bidenomics causing a spike in petroleum prices, and our disastrous pullout im Afghanistan. Plus emboldened by the fact that our president. Is senile.
It's not that Millei's imperfect. Simply that he contradicts his proclaimed anti-Statism all while claiming to be AnCap.
Well, sure. There are only two kinds of people Reason has supported for any political office anywhere in the last two decades -- isolated purists guaranteed not to wield any real power anywhere (whether because they'll lose the election or, like a Ron Paul or Justin Amash, have no power to actually accomplish anything), and, "reluctantly", left-of-center members of the establishment.
Yep.
Dealing with one who gained office and delivered the goods was too much for the faint of heart; had to be shunned for 'mean tweets'.
Reason was anti-Ron Paul though, because he is pro-life and ran an ad in South Carolina about protecting the border. Even though he was the most libertarian Congressman since Davy Crockett.
They liked Rand Paul, because he was more willing to accept political reality and seek compromises. At least, they liked him until he somewhat supported Trump out of political necessity.
There were idiots on here saying they’d vote for Trump just to sink Paul.
How’d that go guys?
Reason seemed to ignore the institutions of Argentina are using lawfare against political opponents.
https://www.dw.com/en/argentina-presidential-front-runner-charged-over-peso-panic/a-67072362
It’s clearly Reason’s official stance not to oppose the establishment using lawfare against outsiders.
Why bring it up? They cheer it on when it happens in the us
A lot of people were disappointed by My Lai as Richard Nixon's apotheosis of the Christian capitalist ordered liberty alternative to dog-eat-dog free-market liberalism Bert Hoover bequeathed. Milei is the latinized spelling of that same Crusade.
^Buttplug in 20 years.
His syphilus will speed up the process.
Can anyone translate that gibberish? Is he trying to blame My Lai on Nixon, when My Lai occurred in March of 1968, and who was president then? Hmmm, don't think it was Nixon.
He thinks truth is more important than facts.
I noticed the new handle. I think Hank might have somehow gotten the impression he's Henrietta.
At his age they probably just ejaculate a puff of dust so he might as well chop them off like all the hip kids are doing.
But his rhetorical style makes it hard to tell whether he would preserve a key principle of liberalism: the separation of power of the state from religion.
Many of the H&R Peanuts don't agree with this statement. Conservatives even today claim that the church should wield state power.
Instead, the church is a primary enemy of liberty.
"Many of the H&R Peanuts don’t agree with this statement"
Find just one example. Not asking for 'many', just one.
Anyone who wanted the Constitutional right to privacy in Roe overturned. The Canuck for example. They have no secular argument against privacy. They are beholden to church doctrine. They even made up a phony judicial "philosophy" to aid their judicial activism.
Lol. He doesn’t agree with a false right that even the liberal jurists admitted was a fabricated construction? That’s your proof?
And as you've been repeatedly shown being against abortion doesn't require a religious basis. It is a rights issue between two individuals.
But the LIBERTARIAN (or individualist) position is to not impose your will on another via police state force.
The clergy is the enemy of the individual.
Read some Ayn Rand some time.
https://newideal.aynrand.org/ayn-rands-radical-views-on-abortion/. Look her up.
The mother in her choice to kill a separate individual is imposing her will retard.
It's no different than imposing your will on serial serial killers.
Besides, everyone knows what fucking is for and its sole biological imperative. You make your choice when you take the cock instead of getting off on a dildo or fingers.
The host is the individual, stupid.
If I kick you out of my house in sub-zero temps and you freeze then I might have acted immorally but it would be my right to do so.
The baby is the other individual retard.
The TDS-addled turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
The host is the individual, stupid.
A Buttplug is back to using the old “Persons” arguments his team used to excuse slavery and in opposing women’s agency and suffrage.
Do you have the right to use another's property and food in freezing temperatures?
Answer the question.
The TDS-addled asshole turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
If you invited them in conditioned on letting them stay the winter, yes. Especially if a blizzard hits making it so they can't leave. The woman in 99.9% of cases used positive action to get into their situation.
Now your turn. Can a mother of a 1 month old just put her baby on the ground in a forest and walk away claiming she refuses to exert energy to care for it?
No, but you could perhaps be excused for your transgressions in certain circumstances. And you should of course be expected to reimburse the owners of the property for any loss or damage you cause.
The fact that you would be wrong to not compensate the owner in itself suggests that you did not have a 'right' to that property, does it not?
We've had lost, stranded hunters break into our rental cabin during a winter flood before - they left a note explaining themselves with their contact information and left some cash. We didn't prosecute because it was understandable that they couldn't attain permission beforehand, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't a violation of our property rights.
“Do you have the right to use another’s property and food in freezing temperatures?”
If you stuck me there yourself, abso-fucking-lutely.
Babies don’t just creep into the womb somehow. You really don’t think this shit through, do you?
"Answer the question"
The retard really thought he had some sort of gotcha.
Yes. "Moral Rights and Political Freedom" is the title of a book by Professor Tara Smith of UTexas at Austin. It turns out that letting Mohammed, The Pope or some Grand Goblin define "moral" in various conflicting ways is not conducive to Political Freedom, but to something quite different. "They Thought They Were Free," by Milton Meyer, is a book about that different thing.
You really are just mashing random words together at this point, huh?
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDSS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
https://twitter.com/TiredMemeClown/status/1715684361201389649?t=pZiWq1KhNlxV75eDPJ8T8A&s=19
[Meme]
One can disagree on the topic of abortion on purely libertarian grounds without invoking religion at all.
That's a far cry from arguing against the separation of church and state, or against freedom of/from religion.
Was that your best example?
One can disagree on the topic of abortion on purely libertarian grounds
No you can't. A libertarian must recognize the primacy of the individual.
A libertarian can be morally opposed to abortion, of course. But conservatives are like communists in that they need to enforce their ideology on others via an extra-moral police state.
Look at the laws red states are imposing since the activist judges killed Roe. Travel restrictions, reporting dictates, physician restrictions - the Church/State Leviathan has been unleashed.
This is why you are the one arguing from a religious perspective, one of religion to a leftist narrative, as you ignore the 2nd individual involved and will use any illogical construction to declare the 2nd individual to not be an individual.
You really shouldn't discuss libertarianism as you aren't one shrike.
Shrike has gods, just not Judeo-Christian ones. *cough* Moloch *cough*. But that's not going to stop him from pretending otherwise.
Yeah, Ayn Rand is a "leftist". You are dumb enough to believe that.
Ayn rand was wrong on abortion. It was possibly her most illogical construction. And she admitted it in various interview. And even then she considered it a balance of rights where she tipped the balance to the mother. She didn't deny the baby was an individual.
turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
I’ve read Ayn Rand – you are no Ayn Rand
Plus – on certain topics she was certifiable.
Hmm... maybe you're a bit Ayn Rand... 😉
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
I don't disagree that there may be some very religious people who exist and who want to use the power of the state to punish fornication outside of marriage by outlawing abortion.
I just disagree that you've shown that any of them exist on this board, let alone 'many'.
How about upthread by Mothers Lament?
Besides, everyone knows what fucking is for and its sole biological imperative. You make your choice when you take the cock instead of getting off on a dildo or fingers.
The Canuck supports theocracy.
turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Understanding biological functions is theocracy?
Microbe-driven tooth decay is a "biological function". Shall we PUNISH people... Those MASS MURDERERS!!!... For brushing their teeth and seeing the dentist! They are KILLING MILLIONS of microbes, which often show FAR more evidence of feeling (reacting to) pain, than a newly fartilized egg smell does!
Me: Everyone knows what fucking is for and its sole biological imperative.
Shrike: The Canuck supports theocracy.
1.05 billion years of sexual reproduction but acknowledging its purpose is theocracy.
Your trolling is getting super lazy, Pluggo. You don’t even seem to be trying to make sense anymore. You’re approaching Sqrlsy levels.
Stupid mind-cuntrolled fascist! Has it EVER Perfectly occurred to You that different people might have sex for DIFFERENT purposes? Is Your Perfect Power Lust SOOOO strong, that this obvious truth is TOOOO MUCH for You?
Sex to make babies, sex to PUNISH other people with, sex to gain a sense of POWER, sex for pleasure, sex to express love, sex for display and STATUS, and sex for money! I bet I could think of some more! Does Perfect Power Pig YOU want to outlaw ALL BUT ONE of them? I bet You DO, Perfect Asshole!
Has it EVER Perfectly occurred to You that different people might have sex for DIFFERENT purposes?"
You mean different "intents". Sexual reproduction only has one biological purpose. For example, you might ram your car up your ass for kicks but its purpose is transportation.
Your stupidity never fails to astound me.
Different sexual positions should result in different abortion laws.
Missionary style is obviously for the sole purpose of procreation and therefore abortion is forbidden.
Doggie style is emulating animals and therefore the fetus is not human and abortion is allowed for awhile at least. Perhaps the gestation of a dog or a lion.
Roleplaying sex also has many implications. For example, French maid and leather bound tourist requires a legal knowledge of many places and international/immigration law as well.
It all means that abortion decisions need to be made by a panel of judges
"Sexual reproduction only has one biological purpose." says the Perfectly Omniscient Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer, AKA the Perfect GIANT BOOB... TWAT, pray tell, is the "biological purpose" of SUICIDE, Perfect Death-Loving Necrophiliac Bitch?
Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, Supreme Demonic Director of Decay, Destruction, and Death, will now SPEAK! HARKKK silently and RESPECTFULLY, all ye lowly heathens, as She Directs Death, and announces WHICH few of us MIGHT deserve to live, and WHO all deserves to DIE-DIE-DIE!!!
https://reason.com/2022/01/25/did-these-three-officers-willfully-deprive-george-floyd-of-his-constitutional-rights/?comments=true#comment-9323626
“You should really join ᛋᛋqrlsy, ᛋᛋhrike. You two goosestepping fascists offing yourselves would definitely be a mitzvah.”
-Quote MammaryBahnFuhrer the "Expert Christian Theologian", AKA Mother’s Lament, with a head full of cement
"Different sexual positions should result in different abortion laws.
Missionary style is obviously for the sole purpose of procreation and therefore abortion is forbidden.
Doggie style is emulating animals and therefore the fetus is not human and abortion is allowed for awhile at least. Perhaps the gestation of a dog or a lion."
Note how because JFree and Sqrlsy don't actually have any scientific or moral arguments to support their position, they invent ridiculous scenarios, assign them to their interlocutors, and then argue against that.
Amazing.
My positions are primarily primate position and Missionary style, butt I'm tolerant of the positions and styles of others, and even of udders and GIANT FAKE BOOBS like Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer, and udder incels and femcels. So long ass they mind their own business, that is! It's just NONE OF MY BUSINESS to monitor the bedroom antics of others, or the barnyard antics of udders and GIANT FAKE BOOBS.
Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer, twat are YOUR "scientific or moral arguments to support" YOUR udder-whelming desires to Perfectly mind the business of others?
Yes, just like that.
Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer and Her GIANT FAKE BOOBS admits that Her Perfect “scientific or moral arguments to support” Her udder-whelming desires to Perfectly mind the business of others are EVERY BIT ASS GIANT AND FAKE ass Her GIANT FAKE BOOBS!
Udderly SHOCKING! More news at 11:00! Same Bat-Shit-Crazy time, same Bat-Shit-Crazy station!
Moosemama
I'm not interested in structuring some argument about abortion to fit what some man or post-menopausal woman has to say about its ethics. Only to mock you.
You want to make some serious argument about that - talk to a woman who can get pregnant. Ethics is not third person. And certainly not by avoiding second-person.
MooseMamma focuses on ALL of Her Perfect Efforts on saving ALL of the Earth and ALL of the Sacred Fartilized Egg Smells, yet NEVER finds the time to help Her Mamma wash the dishes!
PJ O’Rourke, “Everybody wants to save the earth; nobody wants to help Mom do the dishes.”
Better yet... look at how Army Of God Republican candidates have fared in most elections since the Trummpanzee and Long Dong pulled another Comstockist-Colfax Massacre drowning of individual rights.
"Army Of God Republican... Trummpanzee and Long Dong... Comstockist-Colfax Massacre"
Have we reached peak Hank?
The activist judges who overturned Roe or the activist judges who legislated from the bench to create Roe?
You’re entirely too retarded for logical thought,
There are two individuals.
This kind of retarded crap is why so many refuse to call themselves “pro-choice”.
"The Canuck for example."
What the fuck are you even talking about? You just type any old invective now and hope it will fly, huh?
"wanted the Constitutional right to privacy in Roe overturned... they have no secular argument against privacy. They are beholden to church doctrine."
How about murder? Here's famous religious figure Christopher Hitchen's on your abortion fetish:
“[A]nyone who has ever seen a sonogram or has spent even an hour with a textbook on embryology knows that emotions are not the deciding factor [in abortions].
In order to terminate a pregnancy, you have to still a heartbeat, switch off a developing brain…break some bones, and rupture some organs.” -Nation 1989
Why Christopher Hitchens was anti-abortion
You're like bad AI programmed on old proggy tropes, Shrike.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
The really funny thing about the overturning of Roe, to me, is that the case never would have been brought if it weren't for the judicial activism of the progressive left.
Reasonable people can disagree on the personhood of a fetus at various stages of development. Some people believe that the new individual life begins at conception, and therefore its inalienable rights should be respected from that point forward. Others say that from a secular, legal standpoint, one becomes a member of society at birth - that's when a new person receives a name, social security number etc. Both positions have at least some valid logic and merit to them.
So, what's a practical person to do in that situation, where there's a valid disagreement? Compromise somewhere in the middle - perhaps at 16 or 20 weeks into a 39-week pregnancy would be a good starting point. Seem fair?
But that's exactly what the pro-abortion activists were fighting against, unwilling to compromise. Look what it got them. They brought the lawsuit that ended Roe.
I don't disagree with one word of that.
But you started out challenging me to provide the identity of a single anti-liberty, pro church dogma poster here.
See Mother's Lament above.
turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
Except you didnt do so.
Apparently invoking evolutionary biology that challenges Pluggo's deeply-held religious beliefs is now "pro-church dogma".
"But you started out challenging me to provide the identity of a single anti-liberty, pro church dogma poster here."
No, I asked you provide an example of someone arguing against the separation of church and state. Let's rewind:
["But his rhetorical style makes it hard to tell whether he would preserve a key principle of liberalism: the separation of power of the state from religion."]
"Many of the H&R Peanuts don’t agree with this statement."
Find just one example. Not asking for ‘many’, just one.
Not an identity, not a person, just an example of the argument itself. Not what you imagine their argument to be, either - you clearly don't understand any of the nuances of the various positions on abortion, which isn't even the primary topic here - but an actual advocacy against the concept of separation of church and state. You have not delivered.
Nor will he because he has no clue what he's actually arguing about outside of a few hackneyed tropes he picked up half a century ago.
His real purpose here is to troll, not debate.
See also AfD control of von Mises and Hayek eurotrash. (http://bit.ly/3DZrEa3)
You poor broken NPC.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Most of the people you are mentioning prefer discussing actions and things that happen rather than words and narratives.
No libertarian is claiming the state should wield political power. Even the most conservative people here don’t go that far. The Christian Nationalist Menace that Reason panics over is a small splinter of a small splinter.
Christian Nationalist Menace
I side with Reason (again).
Libertarianism is about a lot more than arguing about the top marginal income tax rate.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
BTW turd, here's the total number of individuals who give a shit about who you 'side with':
Zero.
Fuck off and die.
False. Sarc is his buddy now.
You were banned for posting a link to child pornography.
That isn’t what libertarianism is all about?
This thread may be the silliest discussion of abortion I’ve read in a long, long time! There is only one libertarian argument against laws forbidding abortion: government should make no law without a compelling common interest supported by a supermajority of the citizens. There is a clear majority of Americans who would allow abortions in one or more cases (for example rape and incest) and a similarly large majority would would allow abortions up to a clearly defined gestational age. All moral positions and claims that abortion is murder are spurious and intended to divert attention from the key issue. Almost everyone would agree that murder and armed robbery should be illegal. The further advocates of “there oughta be a law” move from clearly defined crimes into the realm of “fifty percent plus one” imposing their opinions on everyone, the less likely it is to become settled, accepted, enforceable law. But by all means try to make it a religious dogma or moral issue if you enjoy endlessly mouthing slogans.
All moral positions and claims that abortion is murder are spurious and intended to divert attention from the key issue.
Not only is this a false assertion contravened by a basic knowledge of reproductive biology and human development, it is actually spurious itself.
And without this key assertion which is not backed up by any evidence your whole specious argument falls apart.
Milei offers a unique combination of national-Catholic populism and anarcho-capitalism. "God is a libertarian, and His model is the free market," he claims.
If God is a Libertarian, then there is finally someone who implements Libertarianism worse than the Libertarian Party!
🙂
😉
Small wonder Liberty has never fully existed or prevailed on Earth throughout human history, M'Lady,
*Puts fedora to chest.*
Adolf Hitler became Europe's most popular practicing Catholic leader in 1933. This was thanks to Herbert Hoover forcing substance prohibitionist conspiracies on Germany in July 1931. Leading up to that, China offered--in League of Nations meetings--to run a drug plant producing a central-government-planned narcotics supply for the entire planet. The idea was: Not Chinee, not legalee! The outcome was another world war producing Communist China and Korea.
"Adolf Hitler became Europe’s most popular practicing Catholic"
Huh, Wikipedia says the opposite:
Hitler was born to a practising Catholic mother and an anti-clerical father; after leaving home, Hitler never again attended Mass or received the sacraments.[380][381][382] Albert Speer states that Hitler railed against the church to his political associates, and though he never officially left the church, he had no attachment to it.[383] He adds that Hitler felt that in the absence of organised religion, people would turn to mysticism, which he considered regressive.[383] According to Speer, Hitler believed that Japanese religious beliefs or Islam would have been a more suitable religion for Germans than Christianity, with its "meekness and flabbiness".[384] Historian John S. Conway states that Hitler was fundamentally opposed to the Christian churches.[385] According to Bullock, Hitler did not believe in God, was anticlerical, and held Christian ethics in contempt because they contravened his preferred view of "survival of the fittest".[386] He favoured aspects of Protestantism that suited his own views, and adopted some elements of the Catholic Church's hierarchical organisation, liturgy, and phraseology.[387] In a 1932 speech, Hitler stated that he was not a Catholic...
Goddamn, this comment section has been the Pamplona Running of the Morons today. Ai yi yi.
I've seen that argument from plenty of leftists trying to argue Nazism was a Christian dogma:
'He was baptized a Catholic!!!'
'And he denounced it as an adult and planned to replace Christianity with worship of the state.'
'But he was baptized ergo he was a Catholic'.
'Being baptized as a baby doesn't mean you stay a member of the church'
'He was a Catholic rheeee'.
Fuck off, bigot.
Milei's personal style is reminiscent of populist authoritarians such as Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and Viktor Orbán of Hungary. Populists, whether from the left or the right, capitalize on social discontent, and Milei is no different. In his case, the economic turmoil in Argentina has created a political opportunity.
This is just a fucked up paragraph. Comparing authoritarianism to liberty is always bad just because you hate populism.
Why is reason pushing the narrative that appealing to voters is bad? I know that reason has a penchant to promote elitism and institutionalism. But what the fuck. Populism isn't a dirty word.
Come on now, it's been established that populism is a threat to democracy.
Fair. We need institutions to tell us who we are allowed to select. That is true democracy. And if you keep voting wrong, they will select them for you.
I thought democracy was the biggest threat to democracy.
Or was that fair elections? I can't remember.
Nobody read that shit.only billionaire approved elections count.
The outcome of elections is far too important to leave it up to voters.
Populism isn’t a dirty word.
Sure it is. The term represents a dirty movement.
The TDS-addled asshole turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Like... Palin's?
I know that reason has a penchant to promote elitism and institutionalism. But what the fuck. Populism isn’t a dirty word.
This encapsulates exactly what I was thinking when I saw the title.
So what if a populist wants liberty for the people... what? he can only be a globalist fascist for it to be acceptable?
So prohibitionist Comstockism is freedom? By what standard?
Go fuck off and eat some pudding, Hank.
And a giant handful of sleeping pills.
You might actually be dumber than shrike.
It’s concern trolling, hiding some agenda other than a libertarian one. They identify characteristics plausibly labeled as “populist”, then infer a connection to the most authoritarian tendencies that can also be labeled populist, and hope we won’t examine the details.
The unwitting scholars who facilitated this particular confusion were Maddox and Lilie close to 45 years ago, promoted by Cato, who cast around for a label for the authoritarian quadrant in the Nolan chart that could be explained on the basis of American history. America had no broad tendency corresponding to the dirigiste, Marxist, etc. movements of Europe, so the closest they could find were American populists. Cato then ran with this, identifying “populist” with authoritarians in the contemporary American context. In reality, as I’m sure Maddox and Lillie would agree, there’s no reason libertarians can’t be just as populist, or populists just as libertarian, as the next guy. And when the elites are authoritarian, which they repeatedly tend to be, it makes sense for populists opposing them to be libertarian.
Well said.
If the populous demands liberty then the populism they they support is libertarian. I don't understand why Reason can't wrap their brains around that.
Can’t we just get back to climate green stocks /mandates and the profits from building public housing?
Reason likes to ban products they’re not invested in, and mandate products they are invested in.
I can understand: They're disingenuous. They really are concern trolling us. They can wrap their own heads around it, they just think some of their readers might not be able to.
There was a time when being anti-popular was part and parcel of many libertarians' attitude, sincerely. At one time radical libertarians felt so embattled, they thought the only way they might have influence was as a remnant, keeping the fire alive for some distant future generation, because "everyone else was against them". Of course this is a tendency all those with extreme opinions can develop, not just among libertarians, but here we are. This is how many viewed things 50+ years ago, when the rest of the world already looked hopeless, and then in the USA Nixonites had decisively defeated Goldwaterites, Nixon became president, and he instituted Nixonomics. Libertarians got the idea that since we were losers, winners therefore would naturally be anti-liberty, so any sign of popularity was a bad sign.
Those times have long since ended, not just in the USA but elsewhere. But some didn't get the message. To them it's quite plausible still that popular movements are all authoritarian, so these libertarians are susceptible to concern trolling by those who know better.
John Chodes had that attitude. He used to quote a boxer who, when asked how he defeated opponents, said, "I make them think they're winning." John used that to justify his opposition to some education reforms, although those he liked I didn't think were any more libertarian.
But what if you really are winning? Then the suspicion that it's a trap will keep you from pressing your advantage and succeeding as much as conditions permit.
As a libertarian I don't think of myself as an extremist, and the closest I get to populism is wondering why the people are no longer worried about losing our liberty. The basic principle of libertarianism is limited government authority with clearly defined functions to which government agencies and officials are strictly limited. I don't see how that's extremist or "populist" in any way, nor do I see why a supermajority of people do not continue to support it. Power-loving politicians have exploited the notion that smaller segments of "the People" should have the opportunity to impose their "every right-thinking person" opinions on everyone - one segment at a time. Of course the outcome of that strategy is dozens of single-issue groups having imposed their opinions through the law one at a time over a long time, resulting in dozens of laws that no single supermajority would have approved of in retrospect, but that they cannot form a big enough group to repeal now. If the Supreme Court had nullified every one of those laws as they were passed, we would still have our liberty now, together with a much smaller less expensive government and a lot fewer laws and regulations.
Simple: It’s extreme out of the existing range of opinions and their frequency. If you gave your opinion about, say, two dozen matters of public policy on diverse issues, yours would probably lie at an extreme if a few hundred of your peers were polled on them.
Some people may have a few extreme opinions, but most people’s opinions on most things would be an intermediate position on a scale between the two poles regarding that issue. So, for instance, nearly everybody would agree with you that the government functions you’re thinking of should be limited; however, most of them would not want them as strictly limited as you.
The problem is with the word "extremist", which came into wide use only about 65 years ago to indicate bomb-throwing types.
The exact technical term, which anyone can demonstrate by comparing party platforms, is Christian National Socialist: The GOP and NSDAP party platforms overlap better than any others except maybe AfD and NSDAP.
What did you do to your brain?
Aged it like fine milk.
Much like nationalism, populism is one of those scare words only idiots with a journalism degree are actually scared of. A little nationalism by itself is not a bad thing. Taken to extremes it can be. Populism is not a bad thing, appealing to voters is the job of elected representatives, after all. Taken to the extreme it can be a bad thing. Nuance escapes many journalists.
Populism: losers led by "winners". 'Twas ever thus.
https://twitter.com/shannonsharpeee/status/1715552611867541630?t=K99SBTRGYofr0h7hxfm4Ug&s=19
Michael Irvin going on live tv & saying his son “tut Tarantino” is lying in all his raps is the best thing of 2023
“You grew up in a gated community”
[Video]
And would still get an edge in Harvard admissions, prior to this year.
actually it's still going on they just mask it.
The california system has banned affirmative action for decades and they just work around it anyway. It's still way easier to get in if you are not a white male
Cult of personality, but more freedom compared to the alternative? Sounds sorta like Trump....
^This^
And this is exactly why they are suspicious and reflexively resist [and probably secretly fear and hate] him
"Cult of personality..."
Not so sure about this.
Never been a fan of Trump; he's a self-promoting blow-hard, and he did not get my vote vs the hag.
But then, after winning, he started to do things like take the US out of the Paris 'feel-good' agreement, appointing De Vos and, of course (his most lasting contributions), cutting taxes, nominating SCOTUS justices who had at least some acquaintance with the Constitution (imagine if HRC had won!).
Anyhow, I probably still would not like the man, personally, but I'd take him over the ones who have sat in that chair for the last 100 years.
If that's a 'personality cult', I'm guilty. Seems more like acknowledgement for achievements to me.
Exactly. I look at the results, plus the known attempts that were thwarted, and have to conclude that libertarians who oppose him are perverse.
Remember when you were 15 or so? Remember focusing totally on personality, regardless of any abilities or achievements?
There’s the “personality cult”: TDS. Arrested development.
Yes, childish is a perfect description of Reason’s coverage of Trump.
Orwell remarked in his review of Mein Kampf that the one thing that never changed or evolved were Hitler's idées fixes. The Kaiser, Teedy Rosenfeld and Girl-bullying Trumpanzees all share that particular feature of der Fuhrer's ideology.
Teedy Rosenfeld
Lol, what the fuck, you deranged old kook.
That freak is making Misek look good.
My view exactly Sevo. The narrative has always been that Trump supporters are a cult of personality that are attracted to his bombastic personality. I didn't vote Trump in 2016 because I didn't like his personality. I voted Trump in 2020 because of his foreign policy, economic policies, and regulatory policies. He was by far the best president of my lifetime. Yeah he's an asshole. I don't give a shit.
"...Yeah he’s an asshole. I don’t give a shit."
And FDR was a wonderful, fatherly figure who managed to screw the entire country.
But would you concede that a good chunk of Trump supporters are a cult of personality? That's true of many successful politicians. It doesn't hurt that the guy who does the things you like has many sycophants and 'shippers.
Sure I'll concede that point. But I still don't give a shit. A lot of "Trumpists" were neocons and hard core anti abortionists and evangelicals. Trump is none of those things. But they set aside those things because we had something like peace and prosperity for a few short years.
I don't give a shit either. It's just business.
This asshole Javier Millei is begging for the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 treatment...And brother, you asked for it and I'm gonna give it!
🙂
😉
Milei posted a tweet saying that he and former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, whom news outlets have dubbed the "Trump of the Tropics," would "fight based on the values of 'God, homeland, and family.'"
In a certain time in Germany, B.Y.K.W.E. and during Y.K.W.E., it was the triumvirate of "Kinder, Küche, Kirche" (Children, Kitchen, Church.)
Milei has claimed that God, along with his deceased dogs, personally asked him to be president and carry out the divine mission to "fight the forces of evil on Earth."
At least with David Berkowitz "The Son of Sam," the dog was alive when giving commands to murder.
His campaign is embodied by the slogan "The Forces of Heaven," which is prominently featured on hats worn by his supporters.
Didn't China's Emperor's claim "The Mandate of Heaven?". Don't the Commie Emperor's of today hold to this also by having cartographers draw The Middle Kingdom in Beijing as the center of China and China as the center of the Earth and as the biggest nation on Earth?
Milei and Villarruel oppose abortion and LGBTQ rights, which they call "cultural Marxism."
Even though both existed since time immemorial prior to Karl Marx.
During a recent interview with journalist Luis Novaresio, Villarruel stated: "Milei and I are against abortion because there are no human rights without life."
Though these candidates are also proof that there can be life without human rights.
"I defend life. Biology states that life begins at conception. At that moment, a new being with a completely different DNA is created."
Well the separate sperm and egg are alive too. So no masturbating and menstruating either? So every woman is Susan Smith every month and every man is Pol Pot anytime his gets a wet dream or a stiffy?
Ricardo Bussi, Milei's top candidate for Congress, recently stated that "homosexuals deserve our full respect, like people who can't walk, blind people, deaf people or just like people with other disabilities."
"Help, Life Alert! I'm a Pansexual and I'm in a crowd of attractive Men, Women, and Trans!! I've got it up and I can't get it down!!!"
Milei has said that "consuming drugs is committing suicide slowly." When asked about the topic, he claims to be "against the public spending that could come with the legalization of drugs" and never says he would legalize. In fact, Villarruel has proposed a law to seize all drugs—and thereby, continue the war on drugs.
No word on how he would treat cloves and Victory Gin?
Contrary to previous statements, Milei said in an interview with Radio Perfil, "If I become president in 2023, I will maintain social assistance programs." Similarly, after calling for fewer ministries and public employees to reduce public spending, he now claims that he would only eliminate managerial positions.
So unmanaged distribution of the dole? Don't Welfare States have that already?
Villarruel insists on "national sovereignty," a slogan used by Hugo Chávez, Fidel Castro, and the left they claim to be battling. As his national profile gains popularity, Milei reveals himself to have all the characteristics of a traditional populist who claims the cult of his personality.
I see now where Anarcho-Capitalism fits in here. With Millei's and Villurruel's policies, their slogan could be "Make Argentina Non-Existent Again!"
Brazil's government has had Christian National Socialist laws forcing pregnant women to reproduce since Torquemada and slavery--which lasted decades after its abolition in the USA. Argentina's women voters, as in Ireland, repealed Banana Republiccan Comstock laws. The shrieking reaction by Argentine fascisti is a repeat of America's Prohibition Party and Grabbers Of Pussy joining forces to stench until the Supreme Court recited another Colfax Massacre ruling to weaken individual rights. Brazil is proof that banning abortion can easily mean Chicom Ownership of seaports. Bullying women and shooting hippies does not save the economy from looter parasitism.
We used to have a libertarian translator here. He might have been able to make sense of this gibberish. But alas. He is no longer with us.
Need a deranged old establishmentarian translator.
No, that person only translated libertarian into gibberish, not the other way around.
Jair Bolsonaro's second pet female recently had her Brazilian citizenship revoked.
Nobody read that shit.
Before reading the article, I'll just comment that it's so typical of HyR now to run pieces saying someone who appears so libertarian to us in the commentariat isn't really libertarian, or that someone who appears in practically no significant measure libertarian to us is arguably radically libertarian. It's like a long gaslighting campaign to get us to doubt our independent judgement in such matters. OK, now I'll read it.
Only libertarians who support institutions and have approval of the elite can be considered libertarian. If they aren’t up to institutional standards, vote for the pro government statist.
Reason does seem yo have less issues with libertarians that can act as spoilers such as Chase Oliver. Or applaud dems who have one common viewpoint as their form of libertarianism like Polis.
If the leading candidate who is more libertarians than Polis is running, Reason has no leg to stand on for criticism.
It's like that Doonesbury cartoon that Marshal Fritz liked: Reason stirs the pot of ingredients they like and come out with a bigot who eats Brie. And celebrate their creation.
"...a bigot who eats Brie..."
I'm stealing that.
https://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/1985/01/16
Yeah, about as bad as I thought it might be.
Worse, I suspect.
I don't mind that they brought out that he and his running mate are against medical marijuana or drug legalization. Good to know, but not heavily weighted in the opinion I'm forming of these people in a world where that's still the side of the issue that ranges from popular to extremely popular/commonplace. Good to know where they stand on abortions too. But the rest of the article is crap that says more about who's writing, editing, and publishing it than about what it's ostensibly about.
For the time being, in a region like Latin America, liberalization of narcotics laws is going to be seen as an elite attitude that "they" are trying to put over on "the people". Those well informed on the subject know that it was an elite that imposed what's now the common attitude about "drug abuse", but after generations the population's been imbued with it, so it seems the other way around — and maybe in some places it really is! Anyway, it seems to them like surrender to gangsters they've just spent a generation fighting nearby.
One of the non-core principles of liberty is that local people know more about the issues that face them than central or higher authorities can possibly know. I will leave the political issues surrounding the elections in South America to the South Americans. An academic look at elections in South America may be interesting to academics or bored Reason readers, but it will be ultimately unsatisfying. My own approach to libertarianism closer to home is, I hope, pragmatic: will a particular election result in an official who will repeal – or at least oppose more – legislation, regulation and other modes of government interference on our lives? The only way Argentina can get my attention at all is when they give our current American lords and masters yet another excuse to interfere in yet another regional crisis to Make the World Safe for Democracy (TM)
Reason-style libertarian is having the same existential crisis the entire Western World is having: It's lost confidence in itself, is terrified that it will be called Racist etc. etc. etc. etc.
Direct payment of a company to jim who sent money to Joe the same day. All through personal accounts. Check to Joe stated as a loan repayment. We know from Hunters laptop and IRS data, loan repayment was the Bidens preferred attempt to not report income and do wire transfers. Hunter had dozens of "forgivable loans" attempting to hide money from foreign companies.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/joe-bidens-200k-check-brother-first-direct-payment-evidence-says
Impossible, there's no real evidence. Just ask Buttplug, Sqrlsy and Hank.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649277/Joe-Biden-paid-nearly-2-75million-CASH-Rehoboth-Beach-house-weeks-Hunter-sending-threatening-text-Chinese-business-partner-demanding-close-10million-deal.html
Joe Biden paid nearly $2.75million CASH for Rehoboth Beach house within weeks of Hunter sending 'threatening' text to Chinese business partner demanding to close $10million deal
Still no smoking gun.
5 months after leaving office. He didnt transfer the Celtics Corp funds until around 5 months later. His monetary declaration in office never showed 3M. So where was the cash from?
"b0oK dEaLs"
That money's already been accounted for.
"TRUMP ASKED TOO MUCH FOR HIS HOUSE!!!"
"California Governor Gavin Newsom traveling to Israel ahead of China trip"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/california-governor-gavin-newsom-traveling-to-israel-ahead-of-china-trip/ar-AA1iwybe
Does CA have foreign policies?
At least he can't do worse than droolin' Joe unless he cheers for the wrong "team".
Ironicallly this results from Gary's 4M pro-choice LP spoiler votes that accidentally defeated each looter party candidate in a different vote count. The increase signalled to nazis and communists alike that "libertarian" ought to be smeared into a Bolivian. Communists want us associated with girl-enslaving mystical bigots on a race suicide campaign of prohibitionist Gestapo on no-knock "shoot & loot" raids. Christian National Socialists want us associated with uninspected importation of Brown September ISIS veterans, banning of electrical energy and mutilation as a response to the Trumpanzee war on sex. Banana Republican boy is just another christian national socialist anarco-fascist hunting women instead of just Jews.
I’d call you AI, but that would be an insult to AI.
"Natural Psychosis".
The cheap smear by association of to Trump via Bolsonaro with "some call h im the Trump of the Tropics while referencing something Milie said that seems to align with a Bolsonaro position, ... well done regime apparatchik!
We have a saying at my design firm:
'Don't allow perfection to be the enemy of good'.
Most of the time - hell, all of the time - you can't get something that's perfect. So, you make the best choice among a set of imperfect options.
I tell people I'm a pretty good lead engineer, because all of the sub groups complain the same amount about the rrquirements
Too bad politics, the economy and society aren't anything at all like engineering. Otherwise that would have been a very good illustration of some basic principle here.
Very surprised still nothing from Reason about the California ruling striking down the so-called "assault weapon" ban. This is a Big Deal and i know shitlibs are pissing themselves all over the state.
2Chili is the only one of them that even owns a gun, let alone likes them.
For the rest 'gun control' is an academic thought exercise - the cops will protect them;)
After all, sure, freedom means you can have a 100 round magazine. - but does anyone *really need one*?
A 100 round mag would be handy when a mob of hundreds of juvenile delinquents is ransacking your store.
That's a myth perpetrated by Fox News to destabilize the Soros and Reason-supported reform DAs.
Is it supported by the science? Jacob Sullum takes on this thorny question in his next feature article.
Can't wait to see the deep dive into cherry picked statistics.
I thought that Sullum was on the 2A beat. Maybe he's out for the weekend.
Sullum only covers 2A when he doesn't have a TDS screed on tap.
Redneck infiltrators who imagine Pig Latin is their second language are constantly baffled that Reason does not advocate the entire George Wallace platform. It all sounds sooo goood... to them.
The more "diversity" fails and produces tragedies, the more tempting it is to give segregation another look.
Egalitarians hate hearing it, but segregation worked specifically because people didn't mix at the ratios their ideology demands.
And forced desegregation killed the incipient black business culture.
In part. Bullets and fire also played a role in killing the Black business culture.
And yet Wallace won a third of the black vote in the '82 primary. Libertarians backed girl bullier LBJ. Go figure.
You can’t defend liberty without arms you senile leftist fuck.
"California Gov. Gavin Newsom lashed out at Benitez in a tweet following the ruling, accusing him of being an "NRA puppet.""
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/federal-judge-overturns-california-s-longstanding-ban-on-assault-weapons/ar-AA1iC0AG
Cool!
It's ok when he does it. But it's a dAnGeR to dEmOcRacY when someone else does it with the wrong letter after their name.
I thought attacks in judges were horrible and sign the politician should be removed.
"This is exactly why America needs a constitutional amendment to enshrine commonsense gun safety…
— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) October 19, 2023"
Yeah, that is never, ever going to happen.
We have that amendment. The framers listed as #2.
Everytime a politician get popular talking about 'freedom' Reason gets scared it's a 'cult of personality' or 'populist'.
People supported by the deplorable - cult of personality.
People supported by the proles and the Ivy League elite - totally normal politicians, the adults are in charge
It's frustrating, to say the least. Reason writers are like the atheists that describe themselves acting out a religious existence, and then criticizing it.
Pure libertarianism isn't popular. It simply isn't. There are some core principles that most everyone can generally agree with (although that's becoming increasingly narrow), but if you're pretty far-libertarian, you're way outside the "normative band" of the political zeitgeist, and so.... yes, you're probably going to look like a "cult of personality". That's uh, what happens when politicians show up who offer REAL change, not that fucking corporatized, pre-packaged "hope and change".
Pure anything isn’t popular…especially in the USA, where ideology itself is viewed with suspicion. Or, as RAW said, "Convictions make convicts."
I need to look it up, but Douglas Murray talked about a German word that described a philosophical disposition of Germans and their tendency to take and idea or social movement to its extreme, logical conclusion which has led to several "collapses" in the German social order. Germany: The birthplace of Marxism.
I don't think of libertarian principles as pure in the usual sense of that word. Libertarians themselves can be more pure or less pure in how they support the principles of freedom, but as poles of a spectrum of beliefs the world's smallest political quiz is as good as anything I've seen to illustrate the range of attitudes towards government and society. The most fundamental question is actually quite simple: is the individual the subject of society through the government; or do the people create the government to serve its purposes? Of course you can always pick one or the other and then declare exceptions. But no one can escape the basic question and all of the ramifications it entails.
https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1715768266835009679?t=wshAC2AdNsu7Gb5MGLbxBw&s=19
It is just a matter of time before this breaks out into open conflict in Europe. They are not in Europe to assimilate into German or French or Swedish culture. They are there to conquer the European continent.
Either the Europeans will defend themselves or they will disappear within the next 50 to 100 years.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1715764660752797716?t=HsWFGew_44QTR_4Jj8PCEQ&s=19
What do you think of this in NYC last night?
There seems to be plenty of people marching in support of Hamas in the United States.
[Link]
Deport them all to Gaza strip
Coming to a continent near you.
Either the Europeans will defend themselves or they will disappear
I'd say the smart money is on their disappearance.
Alarmists always start their crusades in just that way and with just such thinly veiled racism. Europe has survived similar migrations and similar social unrest and similar protests and violent upheavals and even religious wars for well over a thousand years over many generations and still looks very much like it did in the Dark Ages. There is no reason to think this particular episode will become an existential crisis for the Europeans despite your transparent attempt to stir up a pogrom against the latest racial group. You xenophobes give me a royal pain! Go back into your echo chamber with your fellow reactionaries where someone might actually listen to your crap!
People are waking up to your bullshit.
People don’t want your disgusting world.
Of course there was that whole thing where they were invaded by the Moors and had to eventually fight them off. So why are you so opposed to the idea that a culture might need to actually take an active role in maintaining itself in the face of hostile actors?
That was a military invasion. The Turks also invaded and got to keep Constantinople. Likewise the Tatars and the Mongols. Sometimes the Europeans were able to fend off the military invasions and sometimes they weren't. This is not a military invasion in any sense of the word. This is a migration by refugees, some of whom are terrorists disguised as refugees. A totally different problem with a totally different social response.
It is an invasion in the same way that Europeans invaded the Americas. Sometimes peaceful, sometimes not, but with a goal of taking over the land, incrementally if necessary
Kill yourself
https://twitter.com/iamyesyouareno/status/1715883759357100280?t=VcnkbcOzh2JvR1riscxZvg&s=19
White people are “an obsolete racial classification of humans” according to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia hates white people.
[Link]
Does that mean I'm not going to get yelled at about being an oppressor for being white anymore?
https://twitter.com/ReedCoverdale/status/1715753687052595386?t=8_JlvfcY5vKuKFhDhGzfIw&s=19
It's impressive how the talking heads who capitalize on being against identity politics and critical race theory end up shilling for an ethnostate that looks back thousands of years through bloodlines to justify their policies.
https://twitter.com/iamyesyouareno/status/1715818109926338797?t=4G3ThE-MVtSIKpS_NGkrIw&s=19
Tucker Carlson on mass immigration: "Letting in 7 million people from the poorest countries in the world illegally and immediately putting them all on public benefits, that right there will destroy the country, and they did it on purpose"
He’s right.
[Video]
Tucker Carlson is siding with Hamas against Israel.
You.
Are.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Which is not great surprise, given that you are a TDS-addled "personality cult" shit pile:
"...Both Carlson and Ramaswamy were clear that Hamas was wrong to invade Israel and stressed that Israel has every right to defend itself, but questioned what response would now be in America’s best interests..."
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/10/12/ben-shapiro-and-tucker-battle-over-response-to-hamas-i-dont-know-the-game-hes-playing-1403641/
Encountered
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1715765246344790168?t=DGIn608hHUZZH3XfAuwcdg&s=19
JUST IN - United States authorities encountered 269,735 illegal migrants at the southern border in September, the highest number for a single month ever recorded.
[Graph]
With all that profit the deficit will disappear.
There’s big profits in building state run public subsidized housing, and mandated green new deal crap.
And how many more were NOT "encountered"?
Yet it only takes 50 of them to turn official DNC policy into recognizing borders.
Minefields and belt fed machine guns would probably lower that, rapidly.
Reason stands congratulated for prospecting out two free minds and free markets libertarians amid the flotsam of mystical bullies, caudillo fascisti and anarco-communists cross-dressing as "Libertarians" all over Latin America. Bert Hoover and Monroe Doctrinaire meddling have done everything possible to install Italian Fascism all over the continent. It worked. The resulting poverty makes those régimes dependent sycophants rather than economic equals and
competitors. I'm now searching for more writings by BENEGAS & MARTY!
Maybe you should read Orwell and Huxley. That's the world you actually live in.
He should read “final exit.”
Yet as we near Sunday's elections, an in-depth look at his rhetoric and policy proposals raises questions about Milei's commitment to libertarian principles.
Damnit, those darned libertarian-ish candidates have to keep nodding to the political reality that 99.9999% of the human population isn't Libertarian.
What's the point of this article? He is clearly the most libertarian of the possible Argentinian candidates. What are we supposed to do, root for the fucking commies since Miliel is less than perfect?
We're a systemically racist society and as such, need to check our libertarian privilege at the door. Take the knee. Read Robin DiAngelo's book. Take your HR sensitivity training and answer the preferred-pronoun questions correctly... or face the consequences.
If social discontent exists and it’s illegitimate for politicians to take advantage of it through the electoral process, that leaves only one option on the table.
Do you really want that Reason?
https://twitter.com/ArmchairW/status/1715830800179245244?t=wbhw0Hrr66WHTbyRwSOfbg&s=19
Excellent thread pointing out that the USS Carney - after one engagement with Yemeni missiles and drones apparently heading to Israel - is likely "red" on antiaircraft ammunition right now, with no easy way to resupply.
Burke-class destroyers have 96 VLS cells, which sounds like a lot until you: (1) realize many of those are going to be loaded with surface attack rather than AA missiles; (2) start having to fight off modern swarm drones.
* in fairness ESSM can be quad-packed in VLS tubes but it's much shorter-ranged
The Navy has, moreover, been blowing off this well-known problem for years now, pushing questions of reloading VLS launchers in a war zone at sea into the indefinite future to the point they actually deleted their original Reagan-era solution - a folding crane tucked into the VLS silo - from newer destroyers.
[Link]
I guess they're thinking that when you run out of conventional ordinance, it's time to go to the nukes.
They don’t think.
As the son of a naval architect, I can confirm that the US Navy does not think. He's got too many stories about them being retarded.
https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1715834149074833717?t=ZtL6r8NxJ1SsvYmijuDHvA&s=19
Rumors are that the Crew onboard the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) in the Eastern Mediterranean have been served Steak & Lobster tonight for Dinner which is usually reserved for either Holidays (Which today isn’t) or News which is expected to Lower the Crew’s Morale like a Deployment Extension or possible something else.
I’ve heard that of all the services the Navy has the best food, so there’s that.
AF has better food - Navy is just fatter;)
Its also done when Supply needs to balance the books such as not spending as much on food as the ship took in on BAS.
And keep in mind that we can’t reload VLS at sea.
With that said - Carney isn't the only destroyer there.
Remember that abandoned biolab in the CA desert? Yeah me neither.
https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/behind-secret-chinese-biolab-california-global-web-connections
I'm sure that's nothing to be concerned with.
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2023/october/20/former-us-rep-justin-amashs-relatives-killed-in-israeli-bombing/
Former US Rep. Justin Amash's Relatives Killed in Israeli Bombing
All hail Trotsky..it is always about Trotsky...
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1715828932337959049?t=SmC4UJy6N3kHErqyU6aAJA&s=19
BREAKING:
The President of one of Detroit’s best known synagogues, Samantha Woll, has been found stabbed to death in front of her house.
She was also the founder of the Muslim-Jewish Forum of Detroit, an organization created to build better relations between the 2 communities
More MAGA terrorism no doubt.
It was a mostly peaceful stabbing.
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1715882595794276482?t=1wRoJOycjnuTGR-9KEQ2Gw&s=19
Jewish synagogue president Samantha Woll was stabbed to death on Saturday outside of her home. This was in Rashida Tlaib’s district.
Woll was a liberal social justice activist who worked to “build bridges between Jews and Muslims”.
She was instrumental in the founding of the Muslim-Jewish Forum of Detroit. She also hosted events welcoming Syrian refugees.
Woll was a liberal social justice activist who worked to “build bridges between Jews and Muslims”.
Doesn't seem to have worked.
The knife formed the bridge between the jew and the muslum
You joke, but you know that’s going to be the narrative that gets pushed.
https://twitter.com/i_aver/status/1715813888846102926?t=OT26jOjxmy_LOo5VT_i3bA&s=19
“Welcome refugees” Samantha Woll said.
[Link]
What is wrong with people?
Suicidal, but want to take others with them?
'he might be part of the same "caste" he opposes.'
Precisely like Donald Trump.
You are certainly part of the TDS-addled ‘personality cult’ asshole. Fuck off and die.
You are certainly part of the TDS-addled 'personality cult' asshole. Fuck off and die.
Wrong place. The shit-pile member of the TDS-addled "personality cult" needs this.
https://arizonasuntimes.com/news/in-his-disbarment-trial-trumps-attorney-john-eastman-discusses-alarming-findings-of-wrongdoing-from-official-reports-about-the-2020-election/ralexander/2023/10/21/
Reason seems to lose the big picture at times. Elminating central banks, strongnational borders which are enforced, voluntary exchange of goods and services and a very small govt are a hellva more important than abortion and gay marriage. A corrupt govt funded by central banks is the largest threat to our liberty, period. Get over it Nick and Jake and the rest of the fake libertarians who want to be the cool kids at the WaPo party. And no more of this promoting sexual mutilation with the "trans movement" of kids. Cultrual marxism is just degeneracy...and not libertarian.
nice
The Navy has, moreover, been blowing off this well-known problem for years now, pushing questions of reloading VLS launchers in a war zone at sea into the indefinite future to the point they actually deleted their original Reagan-era solution – a folding crane tucked into the VLS silo – from newer destroyers.
https://ermiclub.com/
The sad fact is that a lot of libertarians are in it for the cult of personality, despite a lack of such personalities. Ron Paul being the notable exception. Having been in the LP for most of forty years (currently not registered with any party), I see this type of libertarian a lot. Constantly thumping Rothbard who can do no wrong. Or constantly thumping Ayn Rand who can do no wrong. Which is doubly ironic because they will argue against cults of personality at the same time they follow Rand religiously. And of course the Ron Paul.
I suppose all political parties are this way. Republicans and Trump. The Bernie Bros of the Democrats.
Which is why I strictly adhere to Skwire's Law: "All politicians are asshats." And Brandybuck's corrolary: Never get a woodie over a politician.
Ok, so, if this libertarian-minded politician has a cult of personality, so what? Are his policies generally better than the other options, or are they not?
Do we want another Juan Perón or Cristina Fernández de Kirchner? They had cults of personality too, but they were also fascists / socialists / Nazis.
Here's the best part.
The main competition, the finance minister, has suspended the income tax and is paying for government by printing money.
But its *this guy* who's the 'dangerous populist'?
The good news is a politician calling himself a libertarian got elected. A national unemployment insurance policy certainly isn’t libertarian, but if unions choose to do it (so their members pay for it, and it’s not government funded) then it is. It’s also a way for unions to bankrupt themselves.
I’ve got nothing against politicians who believe in God, as the alternative is worse, except of course when they render onto Ceasar authority over what is in God’s domain, rather than the domain of the State (which is to defend our freedoms and stick to resolving disputes).
We’ll have to see what Milei actually does. If he frees up the economy and cuts government spending, that’s a big win and very libertarian.
And I guess it’s to be expected from Reason these days, as unlike Yahoo and other outlets, Reason doesn’t compare him to Trump like WaPo’s article “Argentina’s new president is Trump-like libertarian Javier Milei”, or Business Insider’s article titled “Argentina’s Trump-Like Presidential Candidate Javier Milei Wins Election”. IMHO, Trump was the most libertarian president since Eisenhower. It’s just that Congress and the political class were all against him and worked against him – even many in the executive branch who were supposed to be working for him. Instead, they impeached him 3 times, unsuccessfully because it was all a bunch of fake allegations.
I'm glad that you're saddened by punitive power pigs falsely claiming to love liberty! Now PLEASE get sad that SOME people around here clutter up the socio-political comments here, with COMMERCIAL SPAM!!!
Make extra profit every week... this is a great part-time job for everyone... best part about it is that you can work from your home and earn from $100-$2000 each week ... start today and have your first payment at the end of the week.
This Website➤---------------➤ http://Www.Smartcash1.com
Retard is yelling at bots.
Sarc has had a bad week.
Given his obvious condition, I'd say he's had a bad life.
Fair.