Alright, show of hands, how many people here, when you heard that I was going to be speaking
at a political convention, said who on earth would invite that guy to speak at a political
convention?
Anybody?
Well, my hand is up because that was my response.
You want me to speak at a political convention.
You know what I'm going to say, right?
So here we are.
And you were warned in the way Drew described it, that this is not going to be entirely polite
and nice.
Now, I fully understand the pragmatic idea that some express that the Libertarian Party
needs to win people over and so needs to tone down the rhetoric, to cater to the masses,
to appeal to a more mainstream audience, to avoid sounding fringe or extremist.
And the people who take that approach, I would respectfully respond, get stuffed, you spineless
pansies.
Morality doesn't depend on what the majority thinks and it doesn't depend on what people
want to hear.
And having actual principles is the exact opposite of modifying the truth in order to
appease people who have crappy belief systems.
Now, it is perfectly possible to deliver the same message in a more polite and civil way
rather than being nasty about it.
I've done plenty of both criticizing statism the nice way and the nasty way.
Tomorrow I'll be hanging out at the convention being nice.
Tonight we'll see.
But there's a difference between delivering the same message in a gentler way and watering
down the message until its meaningless slop.
Allow me to illustrate the difference.
Let me whisk you back to a debate in Mississippi, say 1837.
On one side we have an abolitionist, someone who openly and zealously condemns the abominable
institution of slavery.
And on the other side we have the equivalent of a modern day moderate, reasonable, libertarian
candidate.
So first the abolitionist.
Slavery is evil and must be ended by any means necessary.
And now the reserved, reasonable and moderate candidate.
Now I know people have different views on this topic and I and my party while respecting
all other points of view think that yes slavery is less than ideal or at least more abusive
than it should be.
So we are running on a platform that if elected we will propose a legislative agenda whereby
in the coming years certain policies might be enacted that we can gradually phase in
certain provisions that would for example require slave owners to whip their slaves
20% less often than they do now.
Dude.
And set certain standards concerning how many hours a day slaves can be forced to work, hopefully
getting that down to what the hell is wrong with you.
Slavery is evil, it doesn't need to be tinkered with, it doesn't need to be gradually phased
out it needs to be ended by any means necessary as soon as humanly possible.
Now we can agree to disagree but we can keep this civil and there's no reason to get judgmental.
If some demented bastards think they can own other people it's not time to be civil it's
time to be judgmental.
Okay I'm sure we can find a compromise that we can all agree on somewhere between the
extremes so that over time so for now if some bastard wants to own people you're
okay with that?
Well I'm sure we can all agree that we need to work within the system we have.
No we don't the system's bullshit we shouldn't wait around for the damn politicians to fix
this.
Okay but I'm sure none of us want to advocate violating the law.
I do.
Fuck the law.
The law is wrong.
It's evil.
End it.
Now now your rhetoric is getting rather militant and surely we don't need to talk about resorting
to violence.
Yes we do this injustice is inherently violent and it should be forcibly resisted.
But wouldn't it be better to abolish slavery in a more civilized peaceful and orderly
way by way of the lawful channels afforded to us?
No fuck you you spineless pussy.
Come on.
End the scene.
As a fun fact the word pussy the derogatory insult derives from the word pusillanimous meaning
weak timid lily livid and so on so when for example I call certain political libertarians
pussies I'm not implying that they are genitalia I am implying they are spineless
unprincipled cowardly wusses just to work clear on that and if that offends anyone
here I'm sorry that you're such a pussy surely he's not comparing our modern political system
to slavery actually surely I am now in severity and open brutality now they don't compare
not even close but consider the underlying principle those in the party of principle
ought to be able to do that for starters what are taxes that's when those who wheel
political power demand money from people is it a polite request nope the demand is backed
by a threat of violence and who decides the tax rates do you get to decide how much you
can afford to give them nope the politicians decide I mean they make you fill out stupid
forms and do the math but they decide through the legislative process how much money
you must hand over to them in order to avoid the nastiness that they will inflict
upon the disobedient there's another way to describe that you can either say that politicians
decide how much you have to give them or you can describe it as the politicians decide
how much of what you earn they will let you keep allow me to state the bleeding obvious
if someone else gets to decide how much of what you earn they will let you keep
you are their slave by definition but courageous libertarians want tax cuts okay sounds nice until
you realize that the underlying message of that is we accept that it's up to the master to
decide how much of our earnings we should be allowed to keep but we're gonna pathetically
beg him to please let us keep more ill no free human beings people who are not slaves
don't need someone else's permission to keep what they earn but this nicer slave master might let
us keep 60% of what we earn this means they master will only let us keep 50% okay so you've
conceded that you are and should be somebody else's slave now you're just hoping to be
the property of a slightly more permissive owner we're not slaves because we're allowed
to vote and there's a political process and a legislative process and we can petition and
there are checks and balances and there's a house and a Senate if someone else gets to decide how
much of what you earn you will be allowed to keep you are their slave no matter how much
convoluted bullshit excuses they try to use to make it sound like something else actual
libertarians understand that lots of political libertarians if they can even comprehend it don't
have the balls to say it because they don't want to sound fringe as some of you may know I spent
just over a year in a cage for the heinous crime of not helping the federal extortion racket to
rob me wasn't even tax evasion it was misdemeanor failure to file so I don't even get the
street cred of being a felon which at least would sound cool no I'm merely a misdemeanant
which is a term nobody's even heard of anyway while sitting in a stupid box for a year writing
books that the ruling class doesn't like I also happen to read the works of Frederick Douglass
and one particular part made me almost fall out of my prison chair having grown up as a
slave at one point Frederick Douglass had a master who decided to let him work somewhere else
sometimes and would like even let him keep some of what he earned how kind and generous of the
master from Frederick Douglass his own words quote I was to be allowed all my time make all
contracts with those for whom I worked and find my own employment and in return for this
liberty I was to pay him $3 at the end of each week this arrangement it will be perceived was
decidedly in my master's favor he received all the benefits of slave holding without its
evils while I endured all the evils of a slave and suffered all the care and anxiety of a
free man how dare Fred not be grateful to be allowed such freedom and all he had to
do was pay an income tax now this next quote you might have heard quote I have
found that to make a contented slave it is necessary to make a thoughtless one it is necessary to
darken his moral and mental vision and as far as possible to annihilate the power of reason he
must be able to detect no inconsistencies in slavery he must be made to feel that slavery
is right and he can be brought to that only when he ceases to be a man how many of you
heard that quote okay a lot of you might not have heard what came next quote I was now
getting $1.50 per day I contracted for it I earned it it was paid to me it was rightfully my
own yet upon each returning Saturday night I was compelled to deliver every cent of that
money to master Hugh and why not because he earned it not because he had any hand in earning it
not because I owed it to him nor because he possessed the slightest shadow of a right to
it but solely because he had the power to compel me to give it up the right of the grim
visage pirate upon the high seas is exactly the same end quote pay your fair share Frederick
ungrateful mal content but here comes the part almost made me fall out of my chair quote when I
carried to him my weekly wages he would after counting all the money look me in the face for
the robber like fierceness and ask is this all he was satisfied with nothing less than the
last cent oh so an IRS audit he would however when I made him $6 sometimes give me six cents to
encourage me it had the opposite effect the fact that he gave me any part of my wages was
proof to my mind that he believed me entitled to the whole of them I always felt worse for
having received anything for I feared that the giving me a few cents would ease his
conscience and make him feel himself to be a pretty honorable sort of robber end quote wow
doesn't sound like this literal slave was a big fan of what was essentially an income tax
sort of sounds like he thought it was almost more insulting and offensive than simple direct
open slavery so if you don't like me comparing an income tax to slavery you can take it up
with Frederick Douglass so where does the party of principle stand on taxation well first of all
what's the foundational principle of libertarianism all together now the non-aggression principle
okay and what does that principle say as the name implies it says that committing aggression
starting a fight using force against someone who wasn't harming anybody else
is wrong unless people press buttons and booths and then politicians do weird rituals
and scribble stuff down and proclaim that certain aggression is legal legitimate and righteous
now you might not have heard the last part of that principle before you might just think the
non-aggression principle means don't commit aggression but if that were the case why would
libertarians be running for office trying to get elected talking about legislating new policies
unless that status voodoo bullshit somehow alters or outranks the idea of don't commit
aggression don't commit aggression unless some people vote a few robbing and assaulting people
is wrong unless some weird pseudo religious political rituals happen beforehand being an
attacker bad defending against an attacker good you'd think everyone who identifies as libertarian
would be able to grasp that but is that actually the message of political libertarians allow me
to give an example the free state project and their porcupine freedom festival also known as
pork fest which i attended for many years before it became more of a give me the ring of power
event one year many years back the organizers let it be known in no uncertain term that they
didn't want any speakers talking about the use of defensive force against state thugs because
talking about that might spook the peasants talk of trying to stop violent thugs of the state from
assaulting innocent people we can't have that was that because it's wrong to forcibly resist violent
thugs if they have badges no the event organizers know for well that's justified they just didn't
want us talking about it even though the ideal is absolutely fundamental to the concepts of
non-aggression and libertarianism but there was an extra twist because the event invited
the number of political candidates to speak candidates who very much advocate the use of
violent aggression by the state in the form of taxation and legislation robbing people and
forcibly controlling nonviolent behaviors so as i gently pointed out to the organizers it wasn't
that they weren't going to allow anyone to condone the use of brute force they would
absolutely allow people to condone immoral state violence they just weren't allowed
anyone to talk about using force against state violence party of principle my ass
party of water down lukewarm sniveling unprincipled state of slight bullshit they should put that on
their logo i told you i wasn't going to be nice tonight as another example that just showed up
a few days ago while i was writing this chase oliver libertarian now running for governor of
georgia made a post boldly saying we should seek to abolish ice sounds good as long as you don't
think too much about it yeah the ice Gestapo shouldn't freaking exist but what does it mean to
seek to abolish it it means trying to get the ruling class to pass legislation to stop having
their thug of gang of thugs do evil crap shouldn't a libertarian know that such thuggery
even if legal is still immoral and psychotic and therefore should be disobeyed and resisted
why imply that we should play stupid political games in the hopes of getting the masters
to decide to be slightly less evil why only speak of the tyrant approved way of opposing injustice
so back to the concept of taxation lots of libertarians including some people in this
room tonight like to say taxation is theft okay good yes it absolutely is what do libertarian
candidates say sometimes they say that but do they all condemn and oppose all legalized extortion
in principle do they say that disobeying and resisting such extortion even if possibly hazardous
is moral unjustified or do they kind of flounder around with lukewarm evasive evasive bs
talking about how we need to change the laws and repeal this repeal that
and if you'll just give them the ring of power they'll try to let you keep more of what you earn
mostly the latter if you think i'm being unfair in 2016 the libertarian party was having its
conventions and primaries to choose their candidate for president of the united states and in
pennsylvania will all me had the privilege of being one of the panel members asking the candidates
questions so i asked this do you think the constitution is compatible with the non-aggression
principle particularly the taxing clause when it came to gary johnson some of you know who he is
here was his answer verbatim quote well i do believe in the non-aggression principle but i also
think that and i'm not picking on the question at all but this is one of those questions where
america or me anyway it just goes over my head and i'm sorry but it does it's it's just it's not
something i engage in conversation with people and if i do they just glaze over so the fact
that government should not be engaged in force how that's relative to the constitution i really i
can't i can't answer the question i'm not smart enough to answer the question end quote
you can still find that on youtube if you think i'm making it up at that point a friend of mine
who you may know is josey the outlaw who was also on the panel chimed in to say the non-aggression
principle is a basic libertarian principle if you're going to run as a libertarian candidate
you should be able to answer that question to which gary johnson responded i know i should
but i can't by now half the audience was laughing at his lame bs so as a follow-up i reiterated and
clarified the question saying as someone who spent a year in a cage for not paying tribute to the irs
can you tell me whether you think the constitution is in line with the non-aggression principle
gary johnson's response quote no i hear what you're saying i mean i hear your frustration
but but at this these are the questions that i think get people is is you knee jerk the answer and then
you end up you end up having to explain something you can't explain i can't obviously fervently
believe in what you're asking but it's not something i relate to i'm sorry it's just not it just goes
right over my head end quote gary johnson ended up being the libertarian candidate for president
of the united frigan states in 2016 holy crap by the way that's the same gary johnson of bake that
cake fame who opined that government violence should be used to force private businesses
to serve people they don't want to serve so pro freedom so libertarian but besides being a yammering
stammering moronic dunce he made a pretty amazing admission in there he referred to my simple basic
question as the type of question that might get people because you might knee jerk the answer and
then end up having to explain something that you can't explain so of course he knew the answer no the
taxing clause is obviously not in line with the non-aggression principle but he didn't want to
say that because then he might have to stick to the principle he pretended to believe in
spineless weasley politician bitch party of principle my ass
then we have the frauds who love to say well i'm libertarian on some issues good for you dumb
ass so is literally every other human being on the planet in some cases i don't advocate violent
government aggression how noble courageous and virtuous i don't think people should be murdered
for wearing purple socks and i think it should be legal for people to play the accordion
those are libertarian positions yeah and saying you're libertarian on some issues is like
a serial killer saying he's a pacifist on most days there's a term for people who are
libertarian on some issues that term is statist that ranks up there with the meaningless label of
minarchist i only want the minimum necessary amount of violent extortion and subjugation of
mankind how only the necessary amount so you're exactly like every other stages on the planet
you might disagree about what you think is necessary but every status thinks that the
authoritarian bs he wants is necessary and the minimum government needs to do
which makes every status the minarchist so you can drop that bs and stop pretending
necessary enslavement is a thing quote necessity is the plea for every infringement
of human freedom it is the argument of tyrants it is the creed of slaves end quote william pit the
younger then there are conditional libertarians i may be approaching some of the people in this
room well i would be in favor of freedom in this area if only then you're not your anti-freedom
you're not a libertarian well i oppose the initiation of violence as long as i think certain
other things are going to happen or unless the state violences for something i think is really
important or unless i get really scared of of germs or foreign brown people or drugs or then you're
not a libertarian and don't give me the no true scotsman bs words mean things if you don't advocate
the non-aggression principle you're not a libertarian period and having long-winded convoluted
excuses for being an unprincipled bootlicker doesn't change that and given the current state of
fascist affairs going on in this country right now can't really leave out the ever popular
well as long as there's a welfare state then we need border controls so as long as there is
authoritarian evil you're going to personally condone other authoritarian evil gee what could
possibly go wrong and for any of you who think that you have the best libertarian argument
for why politicians should have the final say who can set foot on my property and your property
and everyone else's property maybe just shut the fuck up you're not libertarians i'm not
widespread state violence just say so admit it be yourself embrace and celebrate the cowardly
state worshiping mental slave that you are maybe you can have a statist pride parade
then there are those who think we should phase out evil violent aggression the
eventual libertarians well that's the ideal and maybe we'll get through eventually but for now
i'm going to cheer for the authoritarian enslavement of mankind to be practical and realistic
you know saying you don't think we're going to have a free society tomorrow is fine yeah we're not
but if you advocate non-freedom and your excuse for doing that is because well it's
unrealistic to advocate actual freedom you suck well ideally there would be no murder
but that's unrealistic so i'm going to advocate just a moderate reasonable amount of murder just
the minimum necessary amount of murder and i love it when people try to make having principles into
an insult oh you're one of these purists or even better your purity spiraling oh no if this
continues i might plummet into the hopeless abyss of advocating that no one be forcibly
enslaved the horror the horror then of course there's the ever popular but if we didn't have
government warlords would take over and enslave and impress us so we might end up with government
you think we need government in order to avoid ending up with government you might want to
think that through a bit more but now given where we are let's look at the very concept
of a libertarian political party and why that's inherently bonkers no offense or a little bit
of offense whatever for starters what would the ultimate goal be if libertarians won all the seats
all the offices and all the governments what would that mean what would a libertarian
government look like it would look something like an abolitionist slave owner or a pacifist
serial killer in other words it wouldn't look like anything because the idea is oxymoronic and
makes no sense now it's only fair since i'm being mean to all sorts of people that at this point
i make fun of my own former self once upon a time you would have heard me saying what a lot of
status dupes have said and it would go something like this a legitimate government is one that only
protects the liberty and property of people and otherwise leaves people in freedom such wisdom
such virtue as long as you don't think about it too much now when i spouted that bs i felt
like i was in pretty good company hell the declaration of independence says that governments
are instituted among men in order to secure life liberty in the pursuit of happiness
many of our founding fathers have said the same thing in different ways too bad it's complete
bullshit government is an entity that exercises authority which means the right to rule over a
certain territory that's what the word means so it's a ruling class no matter how much euphemistic
bs you sprinkle on top of it so how exactly do you coercively dominate and rule over an area
without violating the non-aggression principle you don't that's why actual libertarianism
completely rules out any possibility of government entirely so actual libertarians are automatically
anarchists and it was my own gradual realization of this disturbing but bleeding obvious fact
that made me eventually fall off the political spectrum entirely 30 years ago here is a super
abbreviated reenactment of my own learning curve that took me an embarrassingly long time to go
through it started with my ideal government would tax people only to fund the enforcement of
righteous laws that would just protect individual rights i'm so smart oh wait a minute taxes are
demands for money under threat of force and forcing people to fund something even something good
lots of moral aggression okay so my ideal government would politely ask people to voluntarily
donate to fund the enforcement of righteous laws that would just protect individual rights
i'm so smart oh crap what if somebody else wants to protect individual rights some other way not
by way of my awesome government do i send thugs to beat them up that would make me an
authoritarian jerk so there goes my government's monopoly on defensive force well maybe i would
let other people also enforce my laws my my laws why should anyone else defer to whatever i think
the laws should be i mean i think i'm right what kind of narcissistic megalomaniac would call
his own opinions law and imagine that everyone else should feel obligated to obey them i sure
as hell wouldn't defer to some other bozo decide what i think is right and wrong dang so okay uh
not gonna tax people not gonna force people to use my version of protection and defense
not gonna call it law wait now it just sounds like i'm a guy offering protection services
to whomever might willingly pay for that which might be nobody and anybody and everyone else
could do the exact same thing uh well oh well no more contradictions no more violations
of the non-aggression principle nope i finally whittled government down to its ideal legitimate form
which has no authority and no right to rule and no special rights at all and no power to tax and
no power to legislate no monopoly on force and no reason anyone has to pay any attention to it
and no reason for anyone to call it government since it's completely indistinguishable
from normal people doing the same crap that everyone already had the right to do
okay well that's what i advocate but that is not government and if i'm not advocating any government
that makes me wait there's a word for it that makes me an anarchist meanwhile the libertarian
party is forever playing the game of if we can just add our own clown to the circus we can save
the day maybe if we join the mafia we can improve the system from the inside no you can't
by the way i think i think i have the perfect candidate for the libertarian party to run for
president next time around which would be burrow mirror the guy from lord of the rings
nay political power is a gift a gift to the foes of tyranny why not use it
give libertarians the weapon of the enemy let us use it against them
i mean would that be any worse than gary the non-aggression principle goes over my head johnson
or bob bar bob friggin bar former cia cheerleader for the war on drugs voted for the patriot act
voted for the war in iraq but don't worry he also pretended to have some pro freedom issues
who i'm libertarian on some issues and flip flopped on marijuana prohibition when he thought
he could benefit from it and then when he pretended to be when pretending to be libertarian failed
he went back to being a republican libertarian party sure seems to have a lot of opportunistic
grifters who think they can make a name for themselves and get support and get attention
and get money by pretending to be libertarian and look how many of those jumped right on the
nationalist bandwagon the moment they thought that that might get the more attention and support
and money incidentally that's also why it's a problem if your political party tries to have a
bigger tent approach by not having actual principles because then lots of state
worshiping jackasses will happily swagger in and crapple over your tent
yeah a number of libertarian candidates number of whom i actually like have said good stuff which
as far as i can tell they actually meant sometimes they even expressed actual principles consistent
with libertarianism and then ran for office trying to get their hands on the ring of power for
themselves thus sending a completely confusing self-contradictory message anyway no masters
and no slaves but also if you make me master i'll fix everything
when i asked google to name some well-known libertarians part of what it barfed out at
me said quote and contemporary activists and writers like glenn beck ben chapiro and rand paul
no none of them are libertarians now rand paul rand not ron spends lots of time bashing
even bigger states than himself but he in no way advocates actual freedom and glenn beck
and that weasley genocide apologist ben chapiro
but at least we have dav smith dav i support mass deportation smith because nothing says
i love the non-aggression principle more than cheering for huge numbers of nonviolent people
to be forcibly kidnapped for the heinous sin of standing on a certain piece of dirt
without the permission of the political scumbags in dc and of course dav and number of other
fake-ass libertarians also acted as cheerleaders for trump for a while which brings me to something
that is truly babel on b level of absurd who here recalls the amazing spectacle when the
orange furor himself self-worshipping war criminal best buddy of jeffrey apstein
narcissistic creep and wannabe dictator was invited to speak at that huge libertarian party event
and stood up there and told everyone why he should rule the world as he stood in front of that
huge banner behind him that said become ungovernable what the actual fuck and i still hear some fake-ass
libertarians say well i still think i did the right thing voting for trump because he pardoned ross
olbrecht i'm glad ross's out but uh just to be clear you helped empower a demented megalomaniac
who has pushed multiple war crimes murdering dozens of people out in international waters
not to mention terrorizing assaulting kidnapping and occasionally murdering people
on the streets of america in broad daylight week after week but it's okay because by giving a
psychopathic terrorist the power he wanted you managed to get him to release one political
prisoner after ross spent the entire four years of mango mousseline his first term
in a cage showing that trump never gave a crap about him he just viewed ross the way he
views everything as something to use to increase his own power and so many libertarians helped him
do that so i guess to all the people whisked off without trial to be tortured in foreign slave camps
to the people murdered in yemen people murdered in venezuela people that trump helped the nutty
yahoo murder in gaza well fuck all of you because we wanted this one guy to be set free because
were the party of principle
what do you mean to the people who vote for libertarians they mean well and at least they're
doing something have you ever seen those pictures of the huge throngs of excited enthusiastic
politically involved people cheering on stalin mal hitler they meant well and at least they were
doing something how did that turn out come on now you can't compare communism to libertarianism
oh can't i let me ask you something what was the best attempt ever to create a
kind of sort of libertarian government was it the u.s constitution this ruling class will
just serve the people and protect individual rights and the adi adi adi okay and what was the actual
real world outcome of that did it in fact create the most powerful authoritarian empire in the
history of the world yes it did did it create the most massive imperialist standing army the world
has ever known yes it did did it create the most enormous intrusive and abusive extortion racket
in the history of mankind yeah best attempt ever at having a libertarian government now
why exactly would anyone want to try that again i mean you have zero chance of doing that anyway
but even if you could why the hell would you expect it to end any different any better than it
did now with the mess that we're all here objecting to right now we are living the inevitable result
of the best attempt at libertarian government ever and you want to do the same thing again
they didn't do it right sorry i couldn't hear you over the cliche communist excuse
that wasn't real limited government yeah it must just be bad luck that every time it's ever been
tried the result was authoritarian oppression when it works in theory to all communists and
political libertarians if your theory when applied to the real world always results in
complete catastrophe maybe your theory is shit this guy thinks he knows everything well instead of
just being critical why don't you run for office and show us how it's done smarty pants
okay here is what my campaign speech would sound like if i were to run for office
my name is larkin rose and i'm running for the office of president governor mayer whatever
now you might be wondering of all the candidates running why you should vote for me well you
shouldn't first of all how much of a colossal bonehead would you have to be to try to put me
into a position of power over you when my entire stinking messages stop giving other people power
over you like a bunch of slaves listening to an abolitionist cheering for what he said and
then saying we want you to be our new slave master and if you were hoping that i might get
elected and then change the magical politician scribbles and legislate some legal permission
for you to be a little bit more free there was any chance of me being able to actually do that in
any significant way they would shoot me in the head and then repeal whatever i had done
the very next day but way more importantly than that as long as you think that you
need the legislative permission of the ruling class to be free you're already a slave inside
your own damn head and maybe you should focus on that instead of thinking that somehow you're
going to win the insane and evil game called democracy a game by the psychopaths of the
psychopaths and for the psychopaths i'm just a guy if you were stupid enough to put me into a
position of political power i would still just be a guy i still wouldn't have the right to rule you
whether some stupid laws get repealed or not you still would have no obligation to obey those
political bastards or pay tribute to them so all voting for me could possibly accomplish is briefly
giving you a little false hope in a political solution when there is no such thing never was
such a thing and never will be such a thing if you vote for me it's because you're still a brainwashed
dupe so think that's a winning campaign speech all right let me wrap things up here before i get
before the pitches and pitchforks and torches come out let me wrap things up by being clear
about a few things i am not saying for example i'm not saying that the libertarian libertarian
party is completely worthless and doesn't accomplish anything it's so much worse than that
it accomplishes less than nothing its mere existence is mostly just an obstacle to people
learning about libertarianism because of some poor schmuck disillusioned with the atrocity
that is mainstream american politics here's tell of some weird ideology called libertarianism
and decides to look into it what will he find oh there's a libertarian political party sounds like
the place to learn about libertarianism huh they think taxes are theft and they think that
people should be robbed less if we can get the politicians to agree to legislate that
but they think aggression they think aggression is wrong and that if thugs of the government are
initiating violence against innocent people we should well mostly beg and wine a lot and
ask the political psychos to please be nicer well but but they think that as long as people aren't
committing force or fraud they should otherwise be free to live their own lives however they
choose and they seem to think that the way to achieve that is to continue to vote for a
political party that never friggin wins they also sometimes cheer for authoritarian thuggery
and say that in the long run that will have pro-freedom results party also kind of seems
like a magnet for opportunistic lying creeps trying to make a name for themselves who don't
really seem to understand or advocate that non-aggression print principled well if that's
what it means to be libertarian perpetually whiny spineless inconsistent confused status
begging for scraps from political psychopaths no thanks now to be clear i'm also not saying
that the libertarian party sold their souls in exchange for power because if they had
sold their souls in exchange for power they would have some fucking power and they don't
they gave their souls away for free for nothing after half a century they still have no real
influence no coherent message and accomplish damn near nothing except to keep decent people
focused on the pointless hopeless ritual of trying to appoint a nicer slave master which
never works anyway but we don't want to sound extreme or fringe by talking about things like
disobeying and resisting the sort of things that people do if they actually believe in freedom
holy crap people no the answer is not in fact a new slavery light party or the old slavery
light party the answer is not politics at all the answer is people understanding freedom and no
longer talking and acting as if the worst people in the world have the right to rule them
the libertarian philosophy is great for that the libertarian party not so much
and lastly i'm also not saying that the libertarian party is controlled opposition i assume most
people involved are actually trying to serve the cause of liberty kind of sort of in a largely
demented incoherent counterproductive sort of way however if i was an evil tyrant trying to confuse
people trying to divert and waste the time energy money and hope of people who want freedom i would
absolutely create something that looks almost exactly like the libertarian party who here
i'll let you in on a little secret here the character noah the slave who makes a feeble run
at being elected plantation manager he represents the libertarian party so it seems fitting that i
end my talk here with a little excerpt from the novel the jones plantation which i wrote while we
were filming the movie so i could put back in a bunch of stuff that doesn't fit in a normal
length movie you can imagine how long the script would have been long winded me it had his way
the setting is good old noah well intentioned guy trying to make a difference just gave his
somewhat pathetic campaign speech and now the conspiring slime balls smith jones and johnson
are behind closed doors discussing it i still don't think we should let him criticize us like that
jones complained i could hear what noah was saying from in here they still need an outlet for their
frustration smith replied allowing them to moan and complain lets them release a lot of anger
and resentment if you try to bottle that up eventually something will break also allowing
them to state their grievances allowed lets us know what needs to be dealt with and when
before there is any threat of them doing something more serious but more importantly
if you limit what a man can think you don't have to limit what he can say
i can see what they think jones grumbled and i don't like it one bit what exactly did you see
smith asked him directly yes they are frustrated are they talking about running away or refusing
to work no they think that this election is the proper civilized way to try to change things
they think that this gives them some control over things here we are creating something to deflect
and diffuse their resentment so it doesn't become something more problematic their focus and their
mindset are exactly where i want them to be okay but what if no it doesn't win johnson spoke
up then this whole charade years collapses now has no chance of winning smith opine with
complete confidence with a dismissive wave of his hand how could he be so sure jones asked they
seemed to lack what he was saying aside from having my spies who will let me know exactly how much
support noah has at any given moment i have a dozen different ways to make him lose smith
responded and if all else fails we bribe him or threaten him or kill him don't worry about it
we need him running that's why i made it happen there was a brief pause in the meaning of smith's
sunk in what johnson asked in surprise was your idea to have him run and to say all that
absolutely smith admitted everything that happens here happens because i wanted to
a few of them out there still weren't going to be appeased by choosing between you two
we can either have those few sowing seeds of discontent and rebelliousness among the others
or we can bait them into playing our game a game they are forever doomed to lose
smith still saw a trace of skepticism on the others faces we let noah join in the spectacle
a few of the workers will get excited about it will feel a surge of hope will give it their
all and will fail and then they will meekly slink back into line we choose for them an outlet
for their frustration an outlet which will accomplish nothing other than occupying their
attention just long enough to tire them out and break them down enjoy your political convention
don't forget to vote