#Libertarianism Moribund Institute

[morlibertarianism]

The traditional libertarian position, the position I argued for in my first book, is support for open borders. That was also the traditional American policy. For the first century of the country’s history, anyone who could get here was welcome to come. Limits on Chinese immigration were imposed in the late nineteenth century but broader restrictions only came in in the nineteen-twenties and did not, at the time, apply to immigrants from other parts of the New World.

[sasquapossum]

On my mind: why has there been such an increase in adulation and loyalty toward obviously defective people like Trump and Musk? Have people become more gullible than they were when I was younger? Seems unlikely. We internalized all sorts of stupid shit too, but it wasn't so focused on personalities. Then it struck me: the problem is that we've lost faith in institutions and personalities are what's left. Consider...

Politicians: believe it or not, we used to trust that they were at least sane and working generally for some vision of public good, even when we disagreed. Not since Nixon, Reagan, Dubya, etc.

Journalists: we used to trust them to report the facts in a reasonably objective way, even when that isn't necessarily what they were doing. Then came Fox and that all went out the window.

TV/radio media became all about engagement, a form of entertainment, not actual reporting. Now it's all podcasts and TikTok or YouTube, but basically same. There are some who believe one particular favorite speaks the truth, but few who would say these folks in general are trustworthy.

Print media failed in a different way, partly by being partisans for the establishment (e.g. NYT and the Iraq war) but mostly by totally missing the boat on going online. They could have agreed on a single shared subscription or micropayment system, but they each had to be greedy with their own paywalls etc. So their lunch got eaten by social media (who bear their own share of blame for eroding trust), and the press got even more unhinged about it.

Science, engineering, academe: we used to believe promises about new miracle materials, chemicals, drugs, etc. Even before anti-vaccine lunacy became a thing, a long string of disasters - microplastics, DDT, thalidomide - changed that.

Unions: they've experienced a resurgence very recently, but that's almost a "dead cat bounce" after being moribund for decades. Some people would blame Reagan and PATCO. I think the collapse of major union-heavy industries - auto, steel, mining - had more to do with it, but the result was the same.

I could go on - there's a whole other post I could write about the mixed role of churches in this context - but you get the idea. The fact that in many cases there were good reasons to withdraw our trust doesn't change the fact that such a general withdrawal creates a vacuum which we've filled with hero worship instead. That's where people like Musk and Trump come from.

Here's the kicker: it's not an accident. Undermining trust in institutions has been part of the authoritarian playbook since forever. Julius Caesar is the earliest example that most people would be familiar with, hence the silly illustration, but the phenomenon goes back much further than that. Creating that vacuum is central to authoritarian strategy. Remember Reagan's "nine most terrifying words"? Some people think of that as a libertarian statement but, with the so-called Moral Majority and various militia groups (then as now galvanized by immigration) behind him, that misses the mark. It was part of an authoritarian strategy, demeaning the administrative state and permanent civil service (i.e. institutions) in favor of raw executive power (i.e. personalities).

I'm all for unions, co-ops, mutual aid, etc. but they can't stand alone. Never have. Without a government enforcing rules (including against itself), anarchy will always evolve toward autocracy. If you think the role of government should be minimized, then congratulations, you're part of the Reagan Left ... or worse. A red hat with a hammer and sickle on it is still a red hat. You are effectively supporting authoritarianism whether you mean to or not. Also, since there's no significant left-authoritarian element in US politics - no Stalin or Mao and thank FSM for that - that means you're supporting right-authoritarians. You should stop, especially if you're a member of a group that would suffer most under such a regime.

[beardedmrbean]

Wait

The Native Americans are fighting against the wokies?

It not surprising because how problematic they see things as. Fuck the recent Predator movie Prey did more to preserve the Comanche language it’s was also fully dub into it

But seriously I seen it in black media, notice how 95% of black media only focus on blm stuff or how many black historical figures are often erased by white wokies? Like black peopke can’t thrive in capitalism…please ignore that restaurant owner that inspire the Disney Princess Tiana

But back to the natives, yeah they would attack you guys. The left can barely understand Japanese POP CULTURE much as native historical stuff.

Good luck natives…tbh I think I know more about the Iroquois playing via playing a fictional historical game more than what leftist learn about native Americans in college.

But seriously I seen it in black media, notice how 95% of black media only focus on blm stuff or how many black historical figures are often erased by white wokies? Like black peopke can’t thrive in capitalism…please ignore that restaurant owner that inspire the Disney Princess Tiana

Admittedly it got shit on pretty hard in the Tulsa Race Riots, but "black wall street" was a thing and there were many thriving former slaves and children of former slaves at that point. Would have been nice if they'd managed to rebuild I will admit the cards were not just stacked against them, there was bulldozers pushing those cards too, few still managed.

Would have been nice if they could have been more able to defend themselves properly, trying to find NRA activity for southern Black folks post reconstruction/Jim crow era not much popping up other than.

Begin Tangent

This guy who just popped on to my radar.

Born in North Carolina in 1925, Williams’ experience mirrors that of many African-Americans of his generation. He moved to Detroit as part of the Second Great Migration, where he was privy to race rioting over jobs. He served in the then-segregated United States Marine Corps for a year and a half after being drafted in 1944. Upon returning to his North Carolina hometown, Williams found a moribund chapter of the NAACP. With only six members and little opposition, he used his USMC training to commandeer the local branch and turn it in a decidedly more military direction. The local chapter soon had over 200 members under Williams’ leadership. If nothing else, his leadership was effective at building the movement from the ground up.

An early incident is particularly instructive in how effective these new tactics were. The KKK was very active in Monroe, with an estimated 7,500 members in a town of 12,000. After hearing rumors that the Klan intended to attack NAACP chapter Vice President Dr. Albert Perry’s house, Williams and members of the Black Armed Guard surrounded the doctor’s house with sandbags and showed up with rifles. Klansman fired on the house from a moving vehicle and the Guard returned fire. Soon after, the Klan required a special permit from the city’s police chief to meet. One incident of self-defense did more to move the goalposts than all previous legislative pressure had.

Monroe’s Black Armed Guard wasn’t a subsidiary of the Communist Party, nor an independent organization like the Black Panther Party that would use similar tactics of arming their members later. In fact, “Black Armed Guard” was nothing more than a fancy name for an officially chartered National Rifle Association chapter.

He got a bit more militant later on, I will blame a good deal of that on the fbi doing what the fbi did to black people that stood up for other black people. Not gonna call him a hero just yet because I haven't looked far enough into him to have a full picture, but this stuff is pretty damn heroic. Remember gun control has frequently been used as a tool to keep minorities in check, and will continue to be used as so until more people put their foot down.

End tangent __________________

Ya we went over this before with Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben among others, removing minority representation in order to not offend white leftists who will just find something else to be offended about anyhow so just please ignore them and ask the people you're supposedly doing it for, I will say I'm glad that the "latinx" debate is over, only took most of Latin America and the royal Spanish society both saying it's stupid and insulting to get it killed.

Also don't try to turn it around on white people because

_____________________

We eat this shit up, fighting whites one went on sale, sold out really fast and the money went to a scholarship program for indigenous students I think, it's in the link and they should make them again if you ask me.

[politicsmoribund]

Political Polyglotism

Political Polyglotism - the ability to speak many political languages

Дана: "Yo! Taylor's political polyglotism is really impressive she can speak conservatism's civility versus barbarism, progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed, and libertarianism's freedom versus coercion."

설현: "Damn I have enough trouble speaking progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed -- I'm surprised she can all those languages of politics. She must be really well read."

Дана: "Oh I also speak progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed -- that's my lingo"

설현: "Oh cool! Do you speak any other political languages?"

Дана: "No not really. I tried Libertarianism & I could only understand about half of what they saying & with conservatism I was totally lost".

Дана & 설현: Wow we wish we were like Taylor (able to speak many of the political languages) then we would be truly ""liberal by definition"".

Written By Charla Mcvey (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Radical Centrist perspective/bias -- who is also the Moribund Institute’s resident political lexicographer)

[homostasisformemory]

[morlibertarianism]

The Falsehood of the "Meth-Caused Homelessness" Claim: A Libertarian Response

Homelessness is a complex and multifaceted issue, and it is simplistic and reductionist to suggest that it is caused by a single factor such as meth addiction. While meth addiction may be a factor for some homeless individuals, it is important to recognize that it is not the sole cause and that a one-size-fits-all approach to addressing homelessness will not be effective.

Homelessness has multiple root causes, including lack of affordable housing, job insecurity, mental illness, and the failure of social safety net programs. Additionally, excessive zoning regulations can limit the availability of affordable housing, contributing to the homelessness problem.

So what can be done to address homelessness? Rather than relying on targeted government intervention, we should focus on strategies that lower time prices and make resources more affordable. This can include policies that reduce the cost of living, such as lowering taxes and regulatory burdens, and that increase access to credit and capital, making it easier for individuals to help themselves and others. By empowering individuals to take control of their own lives and overcome homelessness, we can create a more prosperous and self-sufficient society.

It is important to recognize the complexity of homelessness and to approach it with a nuanced and multifaceted approach. Only by understanding the root causes and implementing targeted solutions can we hope to make a lasting impact and reduce homelessness in our communities. This means moving beyond simplistic explanations that pin the blame on a single factor such as meth addiction, and instead considering the multiple root causes of homelessness. It also means focusing on strategies that lower time prices and make resources more affordable, rather than relying solely on targeted government intervention that may function more as a jobs program for those who claim to help the homeless rather than actually helping the homeless. By empowering individuals to take control of their own lives and overcome homelessness, we can create a more prosperous and self-sufficient society.

[morlibertarianism]

Market Nimbility -

1. Refers to a state where individuals' collective decisions via the private buying and selling of goods is responsive, versatile, and easily adaptable.

2. A state in which people's collective decision-making via the private purchase and sale of goods is responsive, versatile, and easily adaptable to changing circumstances.

[morlibertarianism]

"Optimizing Governance through Psychographic Diversity: A Manifesto for The Forkers"

The Forkers is a cross-ideological political movement dedicated to defending individuals' right to fork governance projects. We believe that individuals should have the freedom to take a copy of a constitution, bill of rights, or other governance project, and secede from their current government to start an independent development process. This allows for the creation of distinct and separate governments, fostering competition and innovation in the realm of governance.

We recognize that different psychographic profiles may be drawn to different governance systems, and that the diversity of governance systems allows for individuals to choose the one that best fits their values and needs. The right to fork enables individuals to self-determine their governance and creates a more diverse and vibrant democracy.

We stand for the protection of individual rights, transparency in government, and the power of the people to shape their own destiny. We seek to promote a world where individuals have the freedom to govern themselves and to choose the governance systems that best meet their needs.

Join us in the fight for the right to fork and the creation of a more open and democratic world.

[morlibertarianism]

The "Liberty Penguin" typifies libertarianism with a gold color scheme & a torch symbolizing enlightenment. The symbolism alludes to the claim that libertarianism is well adapted to human nature just as penguins are to their environments.

"A Nubivagant Penguin Seeks Enlightenment" by MorLibertarianism

[politicsmoribund]

Do Libertarians eschew most partisan traps?

Is the US Libertarian party the only political party with staunch supporters who are aptly ready to call out the party when it does something dumb? Republicans & Democrats seldom seem to be able to call out their party. As of late, I've seen the Democrats who have this Micheal Sandal guy willing to say that the Democrats haven't put up a decent candidate to oppose Trump in 2020, but a lot of Democrats say that and sort of religiously endorse Biden anywho. Aside - ROFL the presidential race is between these two old, out of touch, Keynesians. Aside 2 - To be honest the Democrats had some ludicrous presidential nominees this year too like some new-age mystic lady [See: DnD]. Continuation - Yet, for this 2020 election, the Democrats had a promising rising star (a sort of Keynesian superhero) Andrew Yang who seemed willing to call out the democratic party for their bosh – for while at least. Sadly methinks he's given way to pragmatism; because of the putative Trump threat. Along with every other Democratic nominee, Andrew Yang endorsed Biden #Disapointing. Which in my mind twas somewhat sketch that all the Democratic nominees were willing to endorse someone like Biden. Someone with a lousy track record on immigration (very harsh), drugs (war on drugs leader), and worst of all a Keynesian. In regards to the Republicans and their people who would be willing to call out their party for its humbug. Would prolly be this Justin Amash guy who calls out the poor incentive structure within the US government all the time [See: Justin Amash on "Yang Speaks" juxtapositing how laws get passed in the statehouse versus how laws get passed in congress]. Plus, these Republicans have this Rand Paul guy who calls out the dumb nature of making it super impossible for most of the congress-people to have time to read the bills & whatnot. With the result of such having it so only the party leaders supposedly know what's in the bills. These main congress folk ends up whipping the rest of their partisan side into voting whichever way their part leaders, please. Finally, upon reflection, this Libertarian party is seemingly chockful of these highly individualized people – who (to be honest) are a bit too oppositional to everything. There was one VP candidate who stripped on stage apparently – I'd say that's very oppositional to societies tacit norms. I say the US's Libertarian party may have a superfluity of these disputatious folk. Yet the confounding variable to this situation may be the fact that tis a small 3rd party which draws the highly ideologically motivated or attention-seeking wacky-folk to run as candidates. Also, to that, I hear the Libertarian presidential race is pretty open and easy to join in comparison to the other parties – so that may give way to less established to join the race. In regards, to calling out political parties for doing dumb stuff. Methinks the Libertarian party shouldn't have picked Spike Cohen as it's 2020 VP pick –albeit I do understand that a podcaster may be good for marketing. I'd prefer to put up a qualified front for a presidential race. With Jo Jorgensen as the presidential pick (something which I approved of wholeheartedly) and Judge Jim Gray as the VP pick. – Murdoch Harris's 2020 Self Who is Leaning Libertarian & Interested In Ricardian Socialism & Anarchic Marxism Whatever Those Are Iteration

Written By Sydney Barbour (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Voluntaryist perspective/bias)