January 6

The GOP's Authoritarian Sickness

Impeachment, 25th Amendment, or censure? Deplatforming, Section 230, or inclusion? The Reason Roundtable debates.


These are the times that try libertarians' souls. (And everyone else's, too.)

So in the waning hours of Donald Trump's presidency, Reason Roundtable podcasters Peter Suderman, Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, and Nick Gillespie debate the questions ripping through Washington and the rest of the country: Should Trump be impeached, removed, persuaded to resign, or endured? Is GOP sickness endemic to politics overall, or specific and acute in the host body? Should we be happy, sad, or indifferent at the sight of Planet MAGA being systematically deplatformed? And what kind of illiberal legislative and enforcement backlashes can we expect from the empowered Democratic Party?

That, plus some cultural recommendations and a listener question, is pretty much the whole show. (Speaking of the latter, please send your questions to roundtable@reason.com!)

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

Music: "Rhea" by Yehezkel Raz.

Relevant links from the show:

"Sedition Charges Are Almost Always a Terrible Idea," by J.D. Tuccille

"The Case for Impeaching Trump," by Meredith Bragg

"MAGA-Powered Parler Is Down After Amazon Cancels Its Web Hosting Services," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Trump's Lawyers Surrender in Georgia Despite Giuliani's 'Conclusive Proof' of Election Fraud," by Jacob Sullum

"West Virginia Lawmaker and Man Photographed at Pelosi's Desk Among Those Arrested for Capitol Riot," by C.J. Ciaramella

"What Should Happen to the Capitol Invaders?" by Scott Shackford

"Did Trump Commit a Crime When He Riled Up His Supporters Before They Rioted?" by Jacob Sullum

"Amash's Successor Peter Meijer: Trump's Deceptions Are 'Rankly Unfit,'" by Matt Welch

"Citing Trump's Rhetoric, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos Resigns," by Robby Soave

"Donald Trump Is a Bad Person," by Peter Suderman

"Donald Trump and the Libertarian Future," by Nick Gillespie and Veronique de Rugy

NEXT: Alex Winter: Frank Zappa's Ultra-Individualist Legacy

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.

  1. Ah just wait until your new masters arrive. And they will be watching.

    1. Everybody can earn $500 Daily… Yes! you can earn more than you think by working online from home. I have been doing this job for like a few weeks and my last week payment was exactly 2537 dollars.
      See More Info…..EASY ONLINE EARNING

      1. The democrats/media/big tech are shutting down free speech. Any concern by the so-called libertarians? Nope. Orange man bad.

        He was the most libertarian president we will probably ever see. Fake Nick Gillespie. He sticks by his big brother friends.

        1. Buddy, you don’t know what “libertarian” means. Orange man *is* bad, and you can’t secure “freedom” with an authoritarian. It should be obvious, but apparently it’s not to Trumpists.

          Again, Trump is definitely not a libertarian, or a conservative, and he doesn’t give a shit about federalism, limited government and freedom. Trump is basically a South American dictator wannabe. You got played.

          1. I am making over $9k a month working part time. I stored being attentive to different human beings inform me how much money they are able to make on line so I decided to lok into it.HRd well, it turned into all actual and has completely modified my life.

            That is what I do.... Home Profit System

            1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple jobS to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
              on this page.....READ MORE

          2. Again, Trump is definitely not a libertarian, or a conservative, and he doesn’t give a shit about federalism, limited government and freedom.
            Right. President Trump was so authoritarian the Left spent most of 2020 criticizing him for letting governors run their state Covid responses instead of imposing federal mask and shutdown orders as Biden has promised to do, then called him a tyrant when he offered to send the National Guard to burning cities, instead of doing it unilaterally.
            See how much "federalism, limited government and freedom" we get over the next two years.

            1. It more has to do with the fact that he tried to overthrow the US government and install himself as leader.

              1. Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet.Anm Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions
                COPY This Website OPEN HERE..... Visit Here

              2. Your fantasies are almost as amusing as your imbecility.

        2. How is banning bump stocks, using tariffs(something Milton Friedman was against), and wanting to use eminent domain to take away people's private property on the border so he could build a border wall in anyway libertarian?

          The Media and Big Tech are privately held companies and they have the right to freely associate with whomever they want.

    2. "GOP Authoritarian Sickness".

      Let's see here...

      Trump has attempted everything under the sun to get people to use their government powers to give him the win, and even among the GOP, every time he has failed.

      GOP-appointed judges refused Trump. GOP election chiefs and governors rebuffed him. By and large, GOP senators and reps shrugged. But the *GOP* has an authoritarian sickness?

      1. They believe they should win regardless of what the election results say.

        1. Some of them believe that the elections were stolen and used the process that is laid out in the constitution, unsuccessfully to get that view accepted.

          1. And Democratic legislatures and operatives used similar tactics the last three times Republicans won the presidency. So at best you can call it a pox on both houses.

            1. Those goddamn Dems stormed the capitol during the electoral count in 2000, 2004, and 2016.

              How do you make so many good points bud?

              1. I don't see much difference between storming the capital and, say, lighting the city of DC on fire on Trump's inauguration day, so...meh.

                1. Rioting trying to stop electoral certification and regular rioting are not the same in my opinion.

                  1. Coming from a guy who openly advocates violence against rednecks and Mormons I kinda doubt anybody gives a shit about your opinion.

                    1. Just Mormons. No one cares what you think Mormon lover!

                    2. Reason cares what you think WK, enough to ban you for it. lol

                    3. You should be banned red rocks with all your homophobia.
                      People don't choose to be gay.
                      People choose to be Mormon!

                      Kill every mormon on earth!

                    4. Hey WK just becaue you got banned that's no reason to send them after us.

                      You did that to yourself WK.

                    5. I hope you have a lovely evening red rocks white privilege!

                    6. You really don't need lose your mind like that just about getting banned WK.

                    7. So pogo is a bot, killrednecks is a parody, and they still kept a thread going with gibberish for half a dozen posts. Libertarian moment!?

                    8. Wait, sorry pogo. Dee got banned? She seemed more unraveled than normal the other day, using such language! But she got banned?

                  2. Occupy the capital.

                    "Rioting trying to stop electoral certification and regular rioting are not the same in my opinion."

                    Yep. One policeman was hit over the head with a fire extinguisher. We don't know who is responsible. One peaceful protester was shot in the throat a died.The riots after George Floyd were not "mostly peaceful". 12 Police officers were shot with 3 killed. Countless others had military grade fireworks shot at them. High powered lasers were used to try to blind them. Countless minority owned businesses were burned or looted or both.

              2. Number of Dwm representatives voted against certification in those elections.

            2. I screenshotted that and am sending it to their lawyers Jeff. You just committed libel.

          2. Hope you're doing ok bud!

            1. He didn't have to retire his spckpuppet like you did WK.

              1. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a sock.

                I have one account, and a couple names in mind if I was banned. Not bloody likely...

                1. Lol Reason banhammered you WK and you hypocritize yourself not leaving when they told you to lolol

                  1. Did your Red Rocks white privilege account get banned? You were talking shit to me hours ago.

                    1. Wow you sure are upset about getting banned WK

                    2. You're the one commenting on all my posts red rocks. I find it funny that you're so obbessed with me!

                    3. Wow you sure are more upset about now getting banned WK. Didn't mean to upset you by laughing at you for it.

                    4. Good night red rocks white privilege!

                    5. Somehow you got even madder about getting banned WK

          3. And when that didn't work, a disturbingly large number of them decided that they should storm the Capitol and murder the Vice President in order to get their way.

            1. And an even greater number didn't.

              1. That looks a lot like he comitted libel. I think the webmaster should be made aware.

            2. It is amazing how willingly you lie fatwit.

                1. It's on the internet so you know it's true.


            3. Why do you even come here? Your not libertarian. You're not intelligent. And you're not even good at trolling, as you tried to do with the reference to the vp.

              You are a failure Jeff. Just like hihn. No amount of internet commenting will change your life. You. Are. Worthless.

      2. He should resign asap. The reality TV show needs to end and we need to go back to the old cronyism and corruption of DC. And there is some media blame here. they pumped Trump up cause it got ratings and they wanted to deep six any viable candidate against Clinton (boy did that backfire), then told so many lies during the admin (recall the "Putin is controlling our power plants") that when Trump made claims and the media said it was bs (widespread voting fraud) half the population didn't believe them. Trump was a systematic failure of the media, major political parties and in the end himself.

        1. I agree, Trump resigning would be the best move here.

        2. There is great truth in that. All you have to do is look up on Wikipedia Donald Trump in song lyrics and Most songs from 1989 to 2014 were all positive about him. Trump is as much the media's baby as he is the Populist rabble's baby.

  2. "what kind of illiberal legislative and enforcement backlashes can we expect from the empowered Democratic Party?"

    Lube up and bend over, clingers!

    1. Backlashes? Those evil Republicans FORCED the Democrats to suspend our 1st, 2nd, 3rd...etc amendment rights. If only they hadn't taken legal avenues to dispute shady elections in the exact same way that Democrats have been doing for decades.

    2. I can't wait to be Venezuela in two years. You know, like all conservatives say anytime a Dem is elected.

      Somehow hasn't panned out yet but hey- they can't possibly be, gasp, lying can they?

      1. "raspberrydinners
        January.11.2021 at 4:56 pm
        I can’t wait to be Venezuela in two years. You know, like all conservatives say anytime a Dem is elected."

        "Latin American Socialism Comes Home To Roost in Spain
        Spain's progressive tax offensive vs. Madrid's rebel government"

        Wow you sure look stupid.

      2. Somehow hasn’t panned out yet but hey- they can’t possibly be, gasp, lying can they?

        Come to California, where we have some of the highest levels of income inequality and poverty in the country, sewage in the streets, literal shanty towns, and where the electrical grid is mostly reliable . . .

        1. Yup. CA sure has changed since I lived there 40 years ago. I wonder what is different?

  3. Yeah purging their eneimes has made the GOP's authoritarian wait whaaaaaaa?

  4. The GOP's Authoritarian Sickness"

    Then Biden says "hold my beer"

    1. Ron Paul is on line two.

    2. Don't you know, questioning states that don't follow their own elections laws = Authoritarian Sickness.

      And, FFS, those deplorables ran across the sacred and holy Capital building, taking selfies, walking between the velvet ropes and even broke a few windows. THE HORROR!!!

      1. ... smearing poo on the walls, pissing on the carpet, attacking police officers, tearing down American flags, calling for the execution of the VP...

        1. Not bad - for a start! Wait until they come back with their guns!

        2. I've not read any of that, even in the MSM. You're welcome to share evidence to contrary.

          1. It's enhancements to the narrative. Added along the way through the various streams of Social media until it becomes the truth. Like the cop that died was bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher. And, you know, the Capitol was 'Invaded!!!', 'Stormed!!!', 'Overrun!!'

        3. Leprechauns, unicorns, intelligent comments front Lord of Str...

          See, I can write a bunch of things that don't exist just like you.

  5. "Is GOP sickness endemic to politics overall, or specific and acute in the host body?"

    Voting for President Trump was the only way to avoid the most anti-libertarian, anti-capitalist policies in American history, and I don't believe you still haven't figured that out.

    Oh, and get ready, because the only way out for libertarian capitalists is to vote for Republicans two years from now.

    1. You wouldn't know a libertarian if it smacked you in the face.

      Wanting a fascist like Trump tells me all I need to know about you.

      1. Ken has fully joined Team Red now.

        1. Says the blue globalist.

      2. Forgive Ken. He’s normally quite rational, but he bought into THE END OF THE WORLD hype from the nutjob right.

        1. Fuck off SQRLSY

          1. HEY! I'm the funny sock reference 'round these parts, bub.

            1. No, silly. It's well known that you are one of my 27.485,299 socks.

              1. Shut the fuck up retard

                  1. Says JesseBahnFuhrer, the utterly OBTUSE retard! Who NEVER will learn that what is good for the goose, is good for the gander! Who will be lusting to pile NEW powers onto the desk of Der TrumpfenFuhrer, on the 19th of January, never ONCE imagining (despite endless warnings) that Der BidenFuhrer will inherit said new powers the very next day!

                    Wise UP, infinitely foolish fool!

                    1. Fuck off sarcasmic

                    2. Jeff Jr thinks nobody knows sqrsly is him.

        2. "Forgive Ken. He’s normally quite rational, but he bought into THE END OF THE WORLD hype from the nutjob right."

          The fact that voting for Republicans is the only way to end one party Democrat rule two years from now isn't an opinion.

          If you do not share this "opinion", you are factually incorrect.

          1. In which Ken makes it quite clear that he is no longer in favor of voting in favor of libertarian ideas, he is instead in favor of voting against Democrats.

            Welcome to Team Red, Ken. Enjoy your MAGA hat.

            1. No Ken had stated he felt that voting Republican this time was the best way to protect libertarian principles, as the LP candidate had little real chance of winning and Biden was less friendly to libertarian ideals. Not at all how you described it. I don't necessarily agree with him, but your evaluation of his stance is not supported by what he has actually stated.

              1. And that has proven to be the case, and will continue to be the case.

                Trump losing and the Democrats taking the senate is the biggest tragedy for libertarianism since the New Deal--and it may prove to be worse than that.

              2. My buddy soldiermedic76 has morals and voted Jorgenson!

                Hope your cattle produce a bountiful crop this year friend!

                1. At last you realized everyone mocked your WK sock and you had to retire it lololol

                  1. If people wanna think I'm white knight or whatever that's cool.

                    It'll make it easier to kill Mormons. Which is easy already. If they had brains they wouldn't be Mormon.

                    1. Your WK sock got banned ahahaahah

                    2. Your red rocks white privilege account got banned!!!! Hahaha!

                    3. I didn't know your sock getting banned would trigger you this much WK.

                    4. You seem to be obsessed with me red rocks/Pogo! I'm flattered, but not gay...

                    5. I'm out of your league anyway WK I don't fuck people who got banned by Reason

                    6. Then why aren't you using your red rocks white privilege account? Why the need to go by "Pogo" red rocks white privilege?

                    7. Wow you sure are upset about now getting banned WK. Didn't mean to upset you by laughing at you for it.

                    8. It's all good red rocks white privilege! Take care pal!

                    9. Listen, can I send you some tissues so you don't getall chafed crying about your banning WK?

            2. No, he's saying voting should be pragmatic and that Democrats are much more hostile to libertarian ideas than Republicans. I think he is at least half right, and even if you disagree, it's not that hard of a stance to comprehend.

              1. Just to be clear!

                The Democrats control the White House, the House, and the senate.

                Two years from now, if we get out of that situation, it will be because they no longer control the House or because they no longer control the senate.

                If the Democrats no longer control one of the houses of Congress two years from now, it will ONLY ONLY ONLY be because they lost seats to Republicans.

                In order for the Republicans to win those seats, it is necessary for people to vote for Republicans.

                The Democrats are more authoritarian and socialist than they've ever been--and they control both houses of congress and the White House. The ONLY ONLY ONLY way to get out of that situation is voting for Republicans.

                And anyone who believes that the Democrats will lose control of one of the chambers of congress in some other way is wrong.

                1. Sooner or later, our fellow libertarians will need to come to terms with this fact, and seeing my fellow libertarians continue to demonize the GOP by habit . . . that's embarrassing.

                  They're just gonna have to walk it back later. There's no other way out.

                  1. Yes, but you've shot your credibility all to hell. Why should anyone listen to you, since you've admitted to cravenly supporting a Big Lie about election fraud?


                    1. And? Many have questioned your credibility for over a year.

                    2. Who ever thought he was honest?

                    3. Hahahahahahahaha.

                      You are the last person to talk about anyone’s credibility.

                    4. DOL - as you never had any credibility here due to constant lies, you questioning someone else's credibility is a joke, just like you.

                  2. Except there is another way out. Let the Dems ruin things as they will if their plans succeed. Then offer a real alternative.

                    1. This will never happen because libertarians suck ass at politics. Just look at this article.

                      Rather than acknowledge the libertarian arguments behind election related issues, like say Pennsylvania violating it's own constitution 7 weeks before the election, and try to pull voters into the LP...Libertarians would rather label (so libertarian) all trump supporters as conspirators in a coup, ensuring none will be brought into the party and the LP will further alienate itself from relevancy.

                      The LP should be trying to pull fairer minded trump voters in, not generalizing and labeling them like leftists propagandists. But it's 2021 and these hacks at reason are the new libertarian fascists I guess.

            3. Again says the admitted blue globalist.

              1. See this is what you do. You post a lie in a hit-and-run comment and you never apologize for doing this crap.

                1. Said the unapologetic liar

          2. I agree with your sentiment, but voting Republican this time only meant they had to pull the late shift

          3. Sorry Ken. If all goes well there won't be any Republicans 2 years from now.

            1. Cause it's worked so well for CA, Chicago, NY, NYC, Seattle, Portland, Detroit, Minneapolis, etc, etc, etc...

        3. Says sqrsly and the guy with Biden posters.

      3. It does feel a little like being caught between National Socialists and Bolsheviks in Weimar at times...hopefully I'm wrong and we can go back to a the normal crony DC situation (regardless of party). Trump versus the DNC authoritarianism...I feel like I lose no matter what...

      4. Imagine calling Trump a fascist when everyone else thinks they have the power to direct every business in the country.

  6. So the Democrats are preparing to go full tinpot dictatorship, but those evil Republicans, am I right?

    1. I have a hard time believing they're so out of touch.

      It must be willfully blindness, right?

      To some extent, there's gotta be like a defense mechanism at work here.

      They got what they wanted when they got rid of Trump, but somehow, as a defense mechanism, maybe, they still haven't come to terms with the fact that the negative consequences of Trump being out of office for libertarians are fucking horrible.

      Matt Welch is acting like Baghdad Bob!


      1. We're in a one party government controlled by authoritarians and socialists--and they're actively shutting down social media to anybody who might object to their policies, from everyone on Parler to Ron Paul's Facebook account . . .

        Libertarian moment, thank goodness we're safe from the Republicans?!

        1. Sure- *they* are shutting down your social media.

          Guess what faux libertarian- if you really were a libertarian you'd be perfectly fine saying that those companies can do what they want with their PRIVATE PROPERTY. You have no right to it.

          If loonies like you were ever really that popular then you could start your own hosting company. Or self-host. I mean, no one is stopping that.

          Heaven forbid you're called out for the dumbass you are Ken.

          1. Governement threatens big tech with regs if they don't censor, big tech censors.

            Idiots cry "PRIVATE PROPERTY."

            Libertarians mock idiots.

            1. The people you're seeing regurgitate about private property and freedom of association here in comments either a) have no idea what they're talking about, b) oppose freedom of association in other contexts, or c) are completely ignore the facts in this situation.

              The legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights, and IF IF IF antitrust has any legitimate purpose at all from a libertarian perspective, it's to protect our rights from this kind of collusion. As you say, the government, in this case, is forcing the collusion on purpose.

              This is not only the government failing in its legitimate purpose to protect our rights but also the government actively leading the charge to violate our rights. The Democrats have been actively threatening to break these companies apart unless they did a better job of censoring conservative speech, and now that the Democratic Party and the government are one in the same, these companies are falling in line.

              That isn't an excellent example of private property rights and freedom of association. That's a pogrom like action against free speech, and libertarians have no business defending it.

              1. This is not only the government failing in its legitimate purpose to protect our rights but also the government actively leading the charge to violate our rights.

                Precisely what right are you asserting is being violated here, Ken? The supposed "right" for private property owners to be forced by the state to use their property for the benefit of others against their will?

                1. The 1a you fucking globalist fuck. Freedom of the press was not referring to corporate media but to using technology to amplify ones voice. All the founders owned presses and used them gladly to fight tyranny. Volokh has penned scholarly articles on this fact. You are cheering the destruction of communication tools for your opponents. Youre a literal obese piece of shit.

                  1. You don't have a right to steal someone else's printing press.

                    Try again.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist
                      January.10.2021 at 9:28 pm
                      I try to think of these things in analogy with the physical world because it’s just easier for me to think of things this way.

                    2. Having a twitter account is not equivalent to stealing idiot.

                  2. Omg. Jesse just falls flat on his face every time.

                    Tell us more how 1a protects your ability to use someone else's property to amplify your speech.

                    And please do actually go read Volokh. You wouldn't say half the dumb shit you do if you did.

                    1. Lol half the shit Volokh says is dumb Jeff.

                    2. Here you go stolen Valor.


                      Please explain how multiple companies colluding together to kill a competitor isn't collusion.

                      Explain how Amazon violating the 30 day termination clause of Parler isn't a contract violation.

                      You keep claiming to be about property rights but freely enjoy the destruction of private party for actors you disagree with.

                      Youre just an authoritarian piece of shit like the rest of the lefties.

                      This is how we know you were never in the military.

              2. And just to be clear:

                Big Tech WANTS government regulation of their platform so that they can assign responsibility for moderation decisions to the government, instead of having everyone blame them and hate them for it. So that when Twitter bans someone or AWS kicks someone off their servers, they can just say "sorry, just following the law, if you don't like it get the law changed". THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT TO HAPPEN.

                And besides we've all been hearing for years now that Big Tech is being run by left-wing radicals who hate conservatives and want to censor conservative views REGARDLESS of what the government desires to happen. So it is very difficult now to accept the argument that NOW, Big Tech has to be "threatened" into kicking the seditionist crowd off of their property. According to the popular narrative about Big Tech anyway, they don't need to be threatened by the state to kick conservatives off their property, they'd happily do so anyway.

                1. "Big Tech WANTS"

                  This has been explained to you fuckwit.

                2. No, they want regulation to stifle competition. Same as it ever was with any entrenched market actor.

            2. Oh give me a break. Big Tech WANTS regulations. Zuckerberg himself said so in front of Congress. It isn't a "threat" for Big Tech. It is welcome news. A far more plausible explanation for what Big Tech is doing is that they are covering their collective asses - they don't want to be exposed to liability for unintentionally causing the next seditionist riot.

              And what is your standard then? Should Big Tech be forced by the state to host Parler?

              1. No but maybe criticizing them, as they seem to welcome regulations, especially regulations that seem to stifle competition and for the fact that they claim to value viewpoint diversification while their actions do exactly the opposite. It doesn't require government actions to state principles. It doesn't even violate private property rights.

                1. Hope your boycott goes well bud!

                  1. Hope you find a new sock WK!

                    1. Goddamn you rednecks are dumb. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a sock.

                    2. Don't take it out on me because they banned you WK

                    3. Why do you respond to every comment of mine red rocks white privilege?

                    4. Wow getting banned has triggered you WK. Private Company!

                    5. You're the one who's pissed off all the time red rocks/Pogo!

                      Did my rejecting you trigger you?

                    6. Wow how are you still triggered about getting banned WK? Don't take it out on me.

                    7. Did your homophobia get you banned red rocks/Pogo?

                    8. Wow you sure are even more upset about now getting banned WK. Didn't mean to upset you by laughing at you for it.

                    9. I'm sure I'll catch you later red rocks white privilege! Have a great night!

                    10. You're still raging at me but I think you know in your heart that I wasn't the one who banned you WK.

              2. "Oh give me a break. Big Tech WANTS regulations. Zuckerberg himself said so in front of Congress."

                At a hearing for which he was threatened with regs if he didn't attend. He couldn't POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN PLACATING THEM.

                God damn you are stupid.

                1. Ariel Gomez,

                  Big tech did largely want to cleanse their own platforms of conservative voices, and they were reluctant to do so for fear of a backlash among consumers and because the consent decrees and regulations that result from Biden and a Democrat senate are very different from those that would have prevailed if Trump were still in the White House and/or the Republicans still controlled the senate.

                  The consent decrees resulting from the antirust cases will be finished some time over the next two years, and if they were negotiated by Trump and the Republicans, he would have (wrongly) required the social media companies to protect conservative voices on their platforms. In other words, big tech wanted the progressives' regulation, but they didn't want the regulations Trump would have negotiated.

                  The reason we're seeing this now is because since the Republicans lost the senate, there is no longer any reason not to treat the conservatives like shit--and every reason to flush them down the toilet. That's not only why they want the regulation, so long as Biden is negotiating the consent decree, that's also why Parler is gone. Parler isn't about regulation. They're gone because there's no one left in the government to protect them from the Democrats.

                  1. The eco system here is pretty interesting.

                    1) Liberal rag starts writing an article about a problematic person, book, platform, etc.
                    2) NGOs pick those up and start writing thoughtful descriptions of what needs to be done.
                    3) Government party members start describing these problems on sympathetic newscasts and the like
                    4) Everyone ban hammers them.

                    1. 5) faux Libertarians screech "PRIVATE PROPERTY"

                      6) real Libertarians ask why that means we have to allow customers we don't into our private businesses

                      7) faux Libertarians are stymied, scream "RACIST!!!"

                    2. Silly Pogo. You act as if Libertarians are of any consequence at all in that lifecycle. The left and right are two men fighting over the steering wheel of a bus. Libertarians are the bug splattered on the windshield.

              3. Is Chemjeff really this blind?

                They're different regulations. Facebook wants regs that stifle competition. The government wants regs that stifle speech. Facebook places no value on your free speech so Zuckerberg will gladly trade it for his own competition stifling regs and the grateful thanks of the government.

                This is Libertarinism 101.

                1. Not to mention the danger in expecting total honesty from a man being railroaded into a show trial. Hell yes he'll say he is for regs.

                  1. Wait wait wait I thought Zuckerberg was a left-wing radical who hated conservatives and gladly censors conservatives on his own. Now I'm supposed to believe he has to be "railroaded" into it? Which is it? Do get your narrative straight.

                    1. Wait wait wait I thought Zuckerberg was a left-wing radical

                      No you didnt. More importantly I never claimed that. No one thinks your fallacy game is convincing.

                    2. "I thought Zuckerberg was a left-wing radical who hated conservatives and gladly censors conservatives on his own"

                      The stupid shit you think indepedent of what people actually argue is why we all laugh at you.

                      I mean seriously, Ken destroyed you.

                    3. Spammy shit from Jeff, he must be losing a debate again.

                    4. Wait wait wait I thought

                      Why are you here? You claim to want intelligent libertarian discussion and then you pull this crap. Pick one.

                      And save the "they did it too" nonsense because Dave in a Cave has been nothing but civil to you so have some god damned decorum and take a lesson for once. No one made you do that. You did it because your arguments got crushed.

                    5. Jeff knows he got railed. He's waiting for everyone with lives to call it a night so he can shit out a bitchy little retort that only succeeds in making him look worse.

                2. Jeff knows nothing and isn't a libertarian.

                  I don't understand why anyone pays attention to him.

                  1. Good advice going forward.

                3. He said this as sv put a barrier on competing private entities to require costly and uniform policing policies to kill regulation. SV has done themselves what fat ass Jeff is claiming they want. He is a fucking idiot.

              4. Big tech wants collusion with the controlling government to enrich themselves which they have under Biden and the DNC halfwit.

                1. You are just spouting talking points at this point.

                  1. You literally just quoted someone else's talking points.

                2. It amazes me that anyone thinks these tech companies give a shit about anything except being the gatekeepers of “truth” and “knowledge”.

                  If they had any ducking principles they wouldn’t work with that fat Winnie the Pooh fuck to keep Chinese people from learning about things like Tienamen Square.

            3. Ariel Gomez,

              “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices…. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary.”

              —-Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations


              It keeps becoming necessary to post this--it's because the government has gone so far out of its way to make collusion between Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, etc. so necessary.

              Again, the legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights--and the Court protecting us from the government forcing this kind of collusion against the people may be a good example.

              That they're using antitrust law to hurt us this way is like a case of police brutality. The legitimate purpose of the police is to protect our rights from criminals--not to violate our rights with police brutality. And if antitrust law has a legitimate purpose, it isn't to force large tech companies to violate our rights on the government's behalf. It's to protect our rights from this kind of collusion.

              1. Wait, libertarians are against "collusion" in the marketplace now? Good heavens. Read this Ken:


                1. "Wait, libertarians are against “collusion” in the marketplace "

                  We always have been fuckwit. What we are not for is an extra-market solution.

                  Go away. You're too vapid to spam the board as much as you do.

                  1. ChemJeff doesn't know anything.

                    1. I know enough to realize that you have turned into a right-wing tool. You should be ashamed of yourself. Your hatred of Team Blue has melted away whatever libertarian principles you once had. It is your version of derangement, DDS - Democrat Derangement Syndrome.

                      What is the libertarian case against "collusion" exactly? Anti-competitive behavior created by voluntary market actors dissolves away in the face of freer competition.

                      Here is Milton Friedman on monopoly. The way to stop monopolistic practices, or "collusion", is with more trade and more competition, not more government intervention.


                      Fuck you Ken. You have let your hatred of Team Blue lead you to post-hoc rationalizations of your feelings and then you have the gall to try to point to others as being only motivated by feelings. At this point you're turning into Jesse with better grammar.

                    2. "you have turned into a right-wing tool"

                      Flagged and reported.

                    3. "Here is Milton Friedman on monopoly. The way to stop monopolistic practices, or “collusion”, is with more trade and more competition, not more government intervention."

                      January.11.2021 at 6:10 pm
                      “Wait, libertarians are against “collusion” in the marketplace ”

                      We always have been fuckwit. What we are not for is an extra-market solution

                      Lol you quote Friedman and prove my point

          2. One can both say they can do what they want on their property and also denounce what they choose to do. It is t hard to understand.

            1. soldiermedic76,

              I appreciate what you're saying if what you're saying is that just because we're talking about private property doesn't mean we can't criticize people for the way they use their property.

              But it's more than that.

              Premise One: The Democrats have repeatedly threatened to break up the big tech companies for failing to censor conservative voice, and there are antitrust cases pending against some of the biggest ones.

              Premise Two: Now that the Democratic Party and the Federal Government are one in the same, the big tech companies are suddenly doing everything the Democrats wanted them to do to conservative voices with enthusiasm.

              Conclusion: The big tech companies are doing this because of the government.

              Please Show me where I'm wrong (or what I could write better or clarify), and, again, take a look at what Adam Smith was writing about. That description of collusion Smith published in 1776 could have been written about Parler today. The Court may have a legitimate responsibility to protect our rights from what the government is doing by way of these big tech companies.

              1. I don't say you are wrong, my reply is to those who keep making what appears to be an argument that because they are a private business, that we can't even criticize their actions or denounce them.

                1. Hope your social media boycott is a success bud!

                  1. Hope you find a new sock WK!

                    1. Whatever you say red rocks!

                    2. Oh Red Rocks upset you too? Is threatening him what got you banned WK?

                    3. You'd know since YOU ARE red rocks silly goose!

                      You homophobic piece of white trash!

                    4. Wow how are you still that triggered about getting banned WK? Don’t take it out on me

                    5. You already posted that red rocks! You criticize people for copying and pasting but then do it yourself.

                    6. Ok WK you're super salty about getting banned, we get it.

                    7. Take care pal! My red rocked white privileged friend!

                    8. I'm not really sure how to help you get unbanned WK.

                    9. I never imagined WK could get even more annoying. I've had to spam flag half his posts as KAR for their sheer idiocy.

                2. Yeah, we're 100% together on that.

                  1. We're free to criticize their behavior even if we don't like the choices they should be free to make.

                    Incidentally, phony libertarians wilt when you make free association arguments like they are in other contexts.

                    Should fundamentalist Christians be forced by the government to bake cakes for gay couples? Should racists be forced by the government to serve customers of color? It's all private property right, so I guess some of these phonies are absolutists all the way across the board whether it's Facebook and Google or some homophobic racist that doesn't want to associate with somebody, right?

                    Those of us who genuinely believe in our rights are very comfortable with the fact that just because stupid and awful people have a right to do and say stupid and awful things, doesn't mean we don't have the right to criticize them for being stupid and awful. The rest of them are phonies--who probably don't really believe in association rights at all. They're just jumping on the bandwagon of tech companies crushing conservative voices because they hate conservatives.

              2. The big tech companies are doing this because of the government.

                Please Show me where I’m wrong

                Consider that they are allies working together.

                1. In Title IX "reform" the DOE illegitimately issued directives that the schools themselves wanted to follow but initiating on their own created substantial legal and customer risks. Citing government mandates allowed the schools to overcome the risk concern and since all schools adopted the rule at the same time customers could not choose to avoid them.

                2. It's routine for left wing "public policy" groups to sue the government forcing it to do something activist government employees want but is not authorized by congress. By getting an outside agency to sue and agreeing to the desired outcome the government agency effectively creates legislation.

                Collusion between ideologically allied institutions defeats the inherent protections of adversarial debate and independent review. This is why the left's primary goal is creating and controlling our institutions.

                1. Yes, they've wanted to do this in the past, to a certain extent, and now that they don't need to answer to any Republicans until the antitrust case is over, they're free to do what they always wanted to do--to a certain extent.

                  There are a lot of conservative consumers out there. The country is nearly divided in two. They don't want to alienate customers unnecessarily. But they do want to make advertisers happy, and because advertisers are far more interested in younger consumers who skew more liberal, their financial interests--if they have to choose which half to sacrifice--they're cutting the conservatives loose.

                  Still, they don't really have a choice. The Democrats really would force Facebook to spin off Instagram and WhatsApp if they don't do as they're told. The Democrats really would force Google to spin off YouTube and their advertising business. To a certain extent, they want conservative voices to go silent--without losing conservatives as customers, and if they have to choose, they'll side with the Democrats.

                  How does that explain Parler?

                  The antitrust case against Google claims that they're abusing their Google Play Store as if they were a monopoly. How does destroying Parler's ability to download onto Android phones fit into that narrative? They wouldn't do that if the government weren't dangling a sword over their heads. They'd be arguing that their Google Play store isn't really a monopolistic model at all. They'd be propping up competitors--like when Gates gave a ton of money to Apple to keep them solvent during his antitrust case, just to show that he still had a competitor.

                  1. Please note that Facebook is down 4% in trading on the day--all the social media companies are down today.

                    This isn't good news for them. They don't want conservative speech, but they don't want to alienate their customers.

                    They don't want to alienate their customers, but they don't want to be broken up either.

                    1. I don't think that they care.
                      They're all part of the government now. They can write their own regulations.

              3. "Conclusion: The big tech companies are doing this because of the government"

                You are missing a very important Premise:

                Premise Three: These tech companies have wanted to censor conservatives since 2016 at the least and have agitated for it in their conference rooms for much longer. (And this is a fact, I have observed it.)

                Premise Four: The cost of going ban-hammer crazy is that the company will be punished in the market, as Twitter was being punished by the rise of Parler.

                Revised Conclusion: These companies have wanted to silence political opponents for years, but market forces have made that difficult. So they are working hand in hand with their political allies in government to do exactly what they wanted, while paying no market cost.

                1. Oh for heaven's sake. Zuckerberg has bent over backwards trying to appease right-wingers, including the very same ones who routinely accuse him of trying to censor conservatives.


                  Once again, I repeat: Zillions of right-wing topics, commenters, tweets, Facebook posts, etc., are all over social media. If they are suppressing conservative voices they are doing a very bad job of it.

                  So they are working hand in hand with their political allies in government

                  Where is the proof of this? You all seem quite certain that Zuckerberg is getting his marching orders from Pelosi or something. Where is the proof?

                  1. Cites a story from two years ago to try and discredit what I is self evidently happening today?

            2. We are free to criticize our social betters!

              However no one is better than you bud!

              Take care friend!

              1. Your WK sock got banned?

                1. You're in a better mood red rocks than you were earlier red rocks! Your sister give you head or something?

                  1. You seem supermad that they banned you WK

                    1. You seemed to be obsessed with me red rocks/Pogo/I'm sure you have other names since you assume everyone does.

                    2. Somehow you got even madder about getting banned WK

                    3. Red rocks white privilege and Pogo are the same person!

                    4. Ok WK you're still super salty about getting banned, we get it.

                    5. Catch ya later Red Rocks white privilege!

                    6. Planning to get banned again WK?

          3. Libertarians don't support soft fascism because they aren't retarded.

            1. Libertarians don't let bogeymen living under their bed drive them away from their principles.

              1. Youre a globalist obese fuck. You've admitted this.

                Libertarians aren't for corporations blatantly violating contracts like you have supported the last 48 hours, the AWS contract has a 30 day termination clause fatwit.

                You dont believe on freedom. Youre perfectly happy in a corporatist world that decides what others can think. Youre perfectly fine with market collusion to harm competitors.

                Youre not a libertarian and never have been.

                1. Amazon's honor has been besmirched! I hereby summon....Outside the Box!

                  You'll like this particular shill, Jesse. Argues like WK did, back when it gave a shit.

                  I'm out. Enjoy the decline.

                2. Jesse, you are just boring. Your only purpose here is to shill for Team Red, push fake news, and stir up shit. That's it. Go away. You are even less interesting than Tulpa now.

                  1. Ah yes, Jeff goes full bitchcunt because he lost.

                  2. Jeff, a fucking fifty-center like you is the very last person on earth who should be calling anyone else a shill.

                  3. Fatwit loses yet another argument.

                3. You don't even know what "corporatist" means, you right-wing shill.

                  All you do is come here and stir up shit. You really are just Tulpa with slightly better grammar. You couldn't argue out of a paper bag. Your idea of a "killer argument" is WHATABOUT OBAMA????????? It is ridiculous.

          4. Hey fucking leftwit. The contract clause Parler had with AWS required a 30 day notice for termination, not 30 hours.

            They are about to get fucked.

            1. Yup. Parler about to get a huge influx of amazon cash to scale up the parler operation thanks to amazon breach of contract.

            2. There's anti trust issues, as well as the fact that their web security firm also lost access when aws dropped them, resulting in the hack we saw yesterday. Every user now has a lawsuit against Amazon for not providing the 30 day notice, which caused the security lapse allowing their data to be stolen.

          5. The fact you think The issue is that simple says more to your ignorance and stupidity than anything else.

  7. Trump, his cultists, and his brand of GOP has us right on the edge of His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hajj Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of all the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular and his Kakwas level of government, incumbency, cronyism, and cultism.

    "Donald Trump - America's African President"

    1. Guess what Bill Clinton said about himself.

    2. fuck off SQRLSY

    3. Kim Jong Un seems to be the only one agreeing with Trump and his Trumpanzees on Trump's full and formal title:

      His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hajj Doctor Donald John Baron Trump Dada, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of all the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea and Conqueror of the American Republic in North America in General and the United States in Particular.

      "Trump gloats about the half-dozen or so letters Kim has written him as if he were a smitten teenager in possession of valentines from a crush. White House officials refer to the diplomatic correspondence jokingly as “love letters.” Kim addresses Trump as “Your Excellency” and employs flowery language to describe the president’s energy and political smarts, according to people who have read them. Trump has shown the documents to dozens of Oval Office visitors and bragged about them in public.

      “He wrote me beautiful letters, and they’re great letters,” Trump said at a September rally in West Virginia. “We fell in love.”"


      1. Yes, this! Der TrumpfenFuhrer has a heart full of LOVE!

        MORE evidence of this is below:

        Mash Letter from The Donald to Leona Helmsley

        Roses are red,
        Violets are blue,
        Won’t you come here,
        And join My Crew?
        Won’t you please join My Quest?
        The honest taxpayers, to molest?
        I like to collect babes, as if they were Cocker Spaniels,
        You’d look quite nice, right next to Stormy Daniels!
        You’d be quite sexy, in My YUUGE harem,
        With My BIGLY contributors, I like to share ‘em!
        “Taxes are for the little people”
        For a campaign slogan, it sounds GREAT!
        Won’t you help Me fool the greedy sheeple?
        To their suffering, you and I, we could masturbate!
        Brad Parscale, My old campaign pal,
        Wants to kill himself, what killer style!
        Won’t you stay with Me a while,
        And be My campaign gal?

        1. Sqrlsy, it's beyond obvious that BigGiveNotBigGov is you.
          Replying like it isn't is kinda sad.

      2. Imagine being pissy about North Korean rapproachment attempts on a (purportedly) libertarian website.

        1. Der TrumpfenFuhrer can love on King Ill Dung-breath all day if He wants to! That's not the issue! The issue is, Der TrumpfenFuhrer loves '1) Himself, and '2) King Ill Dung-breath one HELL of a LOT more than He EVER gave the tiniest of shits about His subjects and taxpayers!

  8. So now Mexico, France, and Germany have all better stances on censorship than Reason does.


  9. So much pearl-clutching about the republic, and Nick then immediately suggests the military keep nuke codes away from the commander in chief, thereby usurping his authority and breaching chain of command. That is the definition of a military coup, Nick.

    1. What is with this concern about nukes? What the fuck do people think he's going to do? This is absurd.

      1. What is with this concern about nukes?...This is absurd.

        They're LARPing just like the people they criticize are. What's interesting is noting how the same people have such extreme reactions to the right's political theater say nothing or even support the left's. These people are a joke.

        1. The fact that Gillespie is playing along just destroyed the last bit of respect I had for him.
          Is Rommelman and Stossel the only two actual libertarians still writing for Reason?

          I hope his leather jacket hauled him outside after, and horsewhipped his ass for being so stupid.

          1. I don't know that Rommelman is especially libertarian. However, she did cover the riots better as a journalist as they went on. She has been better at bucking the left wing narrative than most of her colleagues.
            Soave has also been mostly good. He still has some of his reactive ticks, but has brought up actual libertarian concerns

      2. It is more than a little bizarre, and out of left field.

      3. Consider their concern about nukes very seriously.
        They project their intentions.

        1. Oh, Nardz. There you are. I was a little worried that perhaps you had been thrown in jail for taking part in the seditionist riot.

          Well, perhaps "worried" isn't the right word.

          1. Yes because we know you would prefer anyone who disagrees with you jailed. Thanks for saying it in not so many words. Really, that was rather silly because it was rather simplistic to turn back on you.

          2. Was it seditionist when antifa/blm/Chaz rioted into Seattle city hall?

            Or was it sedition when you and your pussyhatter friends stormed the capitol during the Kavanagh hearings?

            Thought so. Keep gaslighting yourself Jeff, no one here buys it.

      4. He was okay with the codes and avoided new wars for 3 years and 51 weeks, but a few of his crazier supporters got out of control, so now he must be removed from office tomorrow, or sooner! It's just round 47 for the "now we've got him!" crowd.

  10. I saw a recent tweet from Nick Gillespie, where he was quoting a Washington Post article, correctly calling Biden's agenda out as being further to the left than that of any president in American history.

    They're not obtuse, they're just massively disoriented. They've had TDS for a very long time, and there's a hangover associated with that.

    1. Disoriented? Says the guy thinking Trump is good for libertarians when he's organizing a damn coup on the government.

      Snowflake tears for dinner.

      1. "coup"

        Appropriate that you spam this as you are a pigeon Jeff.

      2. What evidence is there for that claim?

        It was a protest where a bunch of idiots crossed the line to illegality. If there were hundreds of organized dudes with rifles, you might have a point. But this was a protest that devolved into a riot, or at least a shit-show. There was never any chance that these idiots were going to stop anything. Even if they had been armed and organized and started shooting people in Congress there was no way they were going to stop anything.

        1. Jeff's a habitual liar and a shill.
          He totally already knows that this was no more an insurrection or coup than the Kavanagh protests were.

          But he's paid to shitpost and dissemble, so here we are.

          1. Him being paid makes sense, no one claiming to be libertarian could be that obtuse without forcing it.

      3. Ku-klux Ken is another hostile mystical bigot infiltrator. There is little point to arguing with mystics.

        1. Claims go be libertarian yet seems supportive of self evident progressives and attacks libertarians.... Hmmm and he labels others as infiltrators.

          1. Hank is a piece of shit anti-religionist.

    2. Nick should take over again and fire everyone except Soave and maybe Tucille. There may be some others who are OK who I am forgetting.

      1. If you don't like Reason, build your own libertarian website. If you can find anyone to host it, or anyone to offer you a credit card or a bank account after you do.

  11. Should we be happy, sad, or indifferent at the sight of Planet MAGA being systematically deplatformed?


    1. Its a difficult question!

    2. Remember, the people asking that question are posing as libertarians.

      What a bizarre world it's become.

    3. Here's to the crocodile eating Reason last!

  12. Listing efforts by progressives to punish people for thinking the wrong way or saying the wrong thing (which is even what impeachment can be interpreted as and will be by many people) and then labeling the ones having these actions taking against them the authoritarians? Really?
    At this point I have no hope that Reason will be as critical of government overreach after January 20th as they have been for 4 years.

    1. Yeah it's those lousy democrats that wanna force social media companies to publish conservative bullsh... I mean truth.

      You sure tell it like it is buddy!

      1. Your WK sock got banned?

        1. Thanks for being less rude red rocks white privilege and losing the homophobic slurs!

          Who knew your sister sucking your cock would put you in such a good mood?

          1. You tired to fit in and failed WK, then tantrumed and got banned.

            1. Have you ever considered the reason you're so homophobic red rocks/Pogo is because YOU'RE gay?

              Be yourself! You'll be much happier!

              1. Amazing somehow you got even madder about getting banned WK

                1. I'm in a great mood Red Rocks! Bout to crack a beer and watch some football!

                  You're the one whose grumpy and homophobic all the time!

                  Cheer up pal!

                  1. You only got banned WK. Let it go your anger is bad for you.

                  2. Said the genocidal bigot

      2. No it is progressive celebrating everyone who disagrees with them be censored.

  13. Come on you guys. Trump will be gone soon. Who the fuck cares how he goes? Just let it go.
    And while Republicans certainly have their authoritarian aspects, we've got a guy coming into office who is promising a whole bunch of real, no-shit, authoritarian policies and his party controls the legislature. How about focusing on that now?

    1. If you have a corporation or platform, and the concentration of supporters of an unfavorable candidate becomes too high, you may find the lights turned out and doors locked, and many of the users on your platform may not be able to return to the other platforms after you foolishly tried to Build Your Own Twitter, because they were banned from that Platform for saying things like #WalkAway. At the end of this dark road, there's clearly only one group to blame: The GOP.

    2. and he's the "moderate" in the bunch, with the former extremists lined up to fight for power once his mind fully checks out.

  14. Yeah it`s Possible...Anybody can earn 250$+ daily... You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job...It's easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish... It's a flexible job but a good
    eaning opportunity.. Here is More information.

  15. At this point, after seeing some of the comments reactions to the increasing deplatdforming and continued focus on Trump, who is gone in eight days and a wake-up, I m convinced that as we stand against the wall together, denied even a cigarette as they are bad for us, and the commandant is giving the order to fire, a good many will be stating "while at least it isn't Trump giving the order."

    1. I have an extra cigarette for ya buddy!

      1. Yes, he meant you.

        1. Friends stick together!

          1. Your WK sock got banned?

            1. You got sand in your vag or something?

              1. It did! Your WK sock got banned lololol

                1. Do you have split personality or something? Red Rocks white privilege when you're pissed off and Pogo when you're in a good mood?

                  1. Getting banned has made you salty WK.

                    1. Your sister sucking your cock has made you happy red rocks/Pogo!

                    2. Your WK sock got banned lololol

                    3. Have a great night red rocks!

                    4. Bye WK!

                      Is what Reason said and then they banned you.

  16. These are the times that try libertarians' souls.

    How would you know?

  17. Drowning deep in my sea of loathing
    Broken your servant I kneel
    (Will you give in to me?)
    It seems what's left of my human side
    Is slowly changing in me
    (Will you give in to me?)

    Looking at my own reflection
    When suddenly it changes
    Violently it changes (oh no)
    There is no turning back now
    You've woken up the demon in me

    Get up, come on get down with the sickness
    Get up, come on get down with the sickness
    Get up, come on get down with the sickness
    Open up your hate, and let it flow into me
    Get up, come on get down with the sickness
    You mother get up come on get down with the sickness
    You fucker get up come on get down with the sickness
    Madness is the gift, that has been given to me

  18. Just look at that picture. Look at it! Fucking Republicans. Man, Republicans just make me sick, with their entitled attitudes, their Ivy League credentialism, their wing tips and their three-piece suits, their clubby exclusiveness, their snotty "I got mine" superiority, their whole "born on third base and thinking they hit a home run" wrongheadedness on the way the world works for the rest of us common folks, the ones who weren't born rich and entitled. Fuck those Republicans for supporting Trump and I hope people like Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan really regret ever supporting him in the first place.

    1. No guy. Your never-Trump ass is responsible too.

      1. Just in case ya missed it: I hope you have a wonderful night red rocks white privilege!

        1. I hope you get over you rage at being banned WK. It's a bad look fo you.

  19. "Facebook, Inc. said it is removing all content mentioning “stop the steal""


    It's a purge.

    1. Does anyone know the new process yet?

      Should we be Sieg-Heiling Twitter Jack? Should I hang a picture of Tim Cook in my living room? Do "libertarians" swear allegiance to Charles Koch? Which oligarch do we call Mein Fuhrer?

      So many questions.

    2. But it's not censorship, because you can still sneak out to your backyard at night, with the lights off, and whisper those words under your breath as long as no one but you and the stars hear it.

      1. The telescreen was on the whole time Diane.

        1. If someone would have told me fifteen years ago that Emmanuel Goldstein was going to be played IRL by Donald Trump, I would have thought you insane.

      2. The South China Sea is always listening

        1. This was too obscure, the CCP call the moon "our South China Sea"

          1. Too late...

            Theyre called: yo yo bank
            Yo yo sea
            Yo yo toy maker
            Yo yo democrat briber company....

  20. Man i came back after not being here for a few months cause I thought maybe Reason had tried to go back to a more libertarian approach. Apparently the TDS was too much. when the left has gotten all the horrible things theyve ever lusted for, reason may see the light but i doubt it.. For the non trolls on here maybe its time for you guys and gals to step out as well. The libertarian party isnt going anywhere with people like this claiming the same title. Theres aint no libertarian moments in our future, just tyranny. Better pick a side for the future. See ya.

    1. "Man i came back after not being here for a few months cause I thought maybe Reason had tried to go back to a more libertarian approach."

      I'm sorry, and I really get what you're saying, but holy shit, that's hilarious.

  21. The GOP's Authoritarian Sickness

    Wow, not even Pravda, Izvestia or the Daily Stormer would have had the stones to make this kind of inference after the last 72 hours.

    Is there still any doubt that Reason and Cato are puppets of rich Uncle Charles, and not only are they un-libertarian, but anti-libertarian?

    Facebook just blocked Ron Paul from his own page, BTW. The move came hours after he shared an article he wrote criticizing Twitter and Facebook for banning Trump from their platforms.
    ENB must be nutting with glee.

    Hey Jeff and Sarc! Explain to us again why this is a good thing.

    1. Observe that Ron Paul is and always has been an antichoice Republican, yet cross dressing plants like Mother Slammer never tire of repeating the suggestion that antichoice republicans are libertarian

      1. So ban him because he disagrees with you. Seems totally libertarian.

  22. For those who find the hyperventilation about the shortest riot in the past 12 months to be incredible: just wait until you hear Matt Welch's primal scream about it on the most recent 5th Column podcast. Go listen. I'll wait...
    Kmele Foster is the bomb.

    1. I got a hint of the pearl clutching on Twitter this last weekend form the Roundtable, but didn’t think they would have fallen for the “insurrection” narrative so completely. I mean, we knew Suderman would let his TDS fly, but I was hoping Nick would at least present some pushback at the idea that Trump was directly responsible for mounting a coup. The beltway really does have a way of making sure opinions are within the 3x5 card.

      1. If insurrection happened it would have justified the 4 years they propped up russia and impeachment. They are trying to save face and digging a bigger hole.

        1. The commies at unreason ignore actual insurrection because Lefties do it every day.

          Unreason does it every day. They literally advocate coup a duly elected Trump because of falsehoods. Then democrats commit a coup again via massive election fraud and kungflu hysteria tyranny and unreason staffers are on their knees slurping hillarys cock.

          The major difference between patriots and democrats is that patriots want America to remain a constitutional republic even after civil war 2.0. Democrats want commie- topia or anarchyland depending on who the democrats are.

      2. "...but didn’t think they would have fallen for the “insurrection” narrative so completely..."

        Reason used to get a sizable contribution, but they got $1 in 2020, just so they know I didn't forget.
        These guys
        are doing something about the governments' power grabs rather than screaming ORANGE MAN BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        My contributions were re-directed in 2020; TDS-addled orgs got that $1. Several 0f them, right Cato?

  23. Poor commies at unreason.

    They were liars before election 2020 and theyre liars now.

    Republicans tend to be social conservatives so they are fine with government using force to protect people from themselves. It doesnt work.

    I would still rather have republicans who are misguided trying to help people than commies as democrats who lie that they want to help people but do nothing but harm. Evidence? Over 100 years of socialism which killed over 100 million pepp
    E worldwide.

    1. Until google , facebook, and twatter do anything serious about the CPUSA whatever they do to conservatives is straight up censorship and they should be blasted for that.

      The communists literally advocate overthrowing any American government that is not commie and enslaving Americans into a commie dystopia.

      I have started a new trend by selling all tech stocks high and sending emails to all Lefty cock sucking companies that publicly said they are not supporting challenges to bidens commie regime.

      I already received a response from a major company after I included a snapshot of my stock sell. It took them 2 days to respond they were not happy that there is dissent.

      I also wonder how many other people sold Bitcoin high like I did...again. This shit is fun. Buy bitcoin low, wait for commies to hyper-inflate currency and then sell bitcoin high.

      At this rate, Im looking at making unreason owner cucks an offer. They might take $10,000 the way unreason staffers are fucking up. I would certainly fire every staffer that works at unreason.

  24. We’re here because Donald Trump is the first President in American history who lost an election who refused to give up power. ~ Joe Walsh

  25. Does Peter Suderman have to wear a special kind strangulation underwear to remain in such a perpetual state of blurting hysteria about nothing? His pearl-clutching act must be wearing out his finger joints.

  26. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/feds-capitol-mob-aimed-assassinate-elected-officials-75277876?cid=clicksource_4380645_6_heads_hero_live_hero_hed

    THAT is one of the differences between people protesting police shooting them without consequence (and burning down a police station) and people blaming the government for all problems, claiming the liberals are baby-eating, child trafficking pedophiles, who, believing in a lie that there is election fraud (as obviously that's the ONLY way they'd lose an election) - those in the second group didn't want to just protest, they wanted to kill politicians, they wanted to overthrow lawfully elected representatives from other parts of the country.

    False equivalency does not an argument make. Trumpinistas were all about preventing the end of a Presidency, through violent means, including assassination.

    Still want to claim this was "mostly peaceful"?

    1. "...Still want to claim this was “mostly peaceful”?

      You bet.
      TDS-addled assholes still want to claim 'Trumpinistas were all about preventing the end of a Presidency, through violent means, including assassination', TDS-addled asshole?

      "Feds back away from claim of assassination plot at Capitol
      Prosecutors who initially said there was “strong evidence” the pro-Trump mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol last week aimed to “capture and assassinate elected officials” have backed away from that allegation..."

      Your link has been updated, you gulible pile of lefty shit.

    2. Assassination? How many weapons were taken off the protestors?


  27. We have been following you for a long time from the best sites
    Thank you so much.

Please to post comments