#fuck libertarians

[dontmean2bepoliticalbut]

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky called for the repeal of the Espionage Act after it was revealed that the Justice Department is investigating if former President Donald Trump potentially violated the Act.

"The Espionage Act was abused from the beginning to jail dissenters of WWI," tweeted Paul. "It is long past time to repeal this egregious affront to the 1st Amendment."

Paul shared a link to a 2019 article by Jacob Hornberger, a former Libertarian presidential candidate and founder of the Future of Freedom Foundation, which called the Espionage Act a "tyrannical law."

The Espionage Act of 1917 dates back to World War I. Insider reported it was introduced to prohibit sharing information that could harm the US or advantage foreign adversaries.

A key facet of the act — Section 793 — is concerned with "gathering, transmitting or losing defense information," which relates to any document relating to national defense that "through gross negligence" was "illegally removed from its proper place of custody ... to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed."

Earlier this week, federal investigators took away numerous boxes of documents from Trump's Mar-a-Lago home in Florida. According to an unsealed search warrant and an accompanying property receipt, the FBI seized 11 classified documents, including some marked top secret.

In a statement released Friday, Trump didn't deny a report by The Washington Post that said he took nuclear documents to Mar-a-Lago.

The DOJ is now investigating if Trump violated Section 793 of the Espionage Act and potentially broke two other laws, according to the warrant unsealed by the Department on Friday.

A conviction under the Espionage Act carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison.

Charles Booker, a Democrat Senate candidate who will face Paul in the general election, described the call for the repeal of the act as "shameful."

"Rand Paul is now calling to repeal the Espionage Act after the world learned Donald Trump is under investigation for violating it," Booker tweeted on Saturday night. "When I am elected to the Senate, you will never have to question my loyalty to our country."

[popcornpieispissedoff]

By the way, liberals or libertarians, whatever the fuck they call themselves, are now permanently on my shitlist.

I will still tolerate anarchists on a case-by-case.

[poorlyselfmademan69]

everything is so fucking scary right now lol

[spacedoutsheepy]

This is gonna be hard to say but honestly the worst part of Ayn Rand is how good an author she is. Like her books are morally reprehensible disgusting filth, but there is a reason she's resonated with so many annoying young white dudes. She is a good writer in the sense that her ideology and philosophy, twisted as it is, is baked into every single facet of every sentence she writes. Not only the themes of the story itself, but the dialogue, the descriptions of the landscapes, even the character's names, are reflective of her own values and her own associations of right and wrong. It's simple, but effective as art intended to carry a clear message.

This feels fuckin perverse, but I would almost compare it with Tolkien. His stories are not "morally complex" in that they leave you with questions about the grayness of right and wrong, but rather in that they give clear answers, dripping from every word of the text, of what the author believes that right and wrong are, what they look like, how they act, and how they fit into the world. The worldview and system of values that he wishes to impart into his text are richly woven into every description, every character, and every element of the story. Ayn Rand also does just that, but, ya know, straight-up evil.

[whereserpentswalk]

Made this political cartoon. Feel free to share it around just don't remove the watermark.

[ivymarquis]

How am I supposed to go out into the world and attempt to date, knowing that John Price is a figment of our imaginations and not real. What is even the point

[queerism1969]

[dontmean2bepoliticalbut]

[apostate00]

Every character from Centricide and Realicide drawn purely from memory (pt. 1)

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Wait, I thought y'all lolbertarians told us that the mere existence of a "free market" would magically prevent companies from profiteering off of society's hardships (like dead/sick infants) and protect us consumers?? 🤔🙄

[popcornpieispissedoff]

Since he still has his account somehow, friendly reminder that @/Newplayingsmash is a transphobe conservative, probably off reddit somewhere, probably racist, and should be reported. He is either a libertarian or a conservative, and frankly I don't care because he's a shit person either way. Cheers.

[asteroidtroglodyte]

Mocking Libertarian Crypto-Bros is not a particularly high bar to vault.

That said, the tale of the Cruise Ship Satoshi is truly a masterpiece of Libertarian delusion running itself aground against the rocks of cold hard Reality.

[some excerpts: link to full story at bottom]

Except that Government and Industry already have definitions that reference each other; they can’t be the same thing. It’s. You don’t really understand what either of those words really mean, do you?

“Why isn’t everyone living this way” says man with wealth and privilege that would humble a medieval European prince.

(Pinches Brow) oh my god

A for-profit restaurant, I might add. Not a cafeteria or a mess hall; full service restaurant. Who they intended to bus the tables is anyone’s guess; hypothetical imagined table-bussing drones, probably, given the amount of pragmatism in play.

“We want entrepreneurs to come up with solutions and try them out” you could perhaps peruse 5,000 years of naval tradition for solutions. If you were so inclined. No? Pity.

Priorities in order, I see

AIRLINES, NUCLEAR POWER, AND PASSENGER SHIPS ARE HEAVILY REGULATED!? NO WAY!? I WONDER IF THERE HAVE EVER BEEN ANY LARGE DISASTERS IN THESE INDUSTRIES THAT MAY HAVE SPURRED THOSE REGULATIONS!?!?!?!?

“Working”

Completely detached. No grasp on reality.

Anyway if you want to read the whole story here ya go:

Eat The Rich

[whereserpentswalk]

Didn't realize this was a controversial opinion for those who consider themselves anticapitalist, but "destroying capitalism is delusional" is an opinion that you are by definition pro-capitalism if you hold.

[cock-holliday]

I think that individualist theorists are important to learn from in the areas where collectivist theory fails (or sets itself up to fail), while still maintaining my sense of striving for betterment FOR a collective. Where individualism fails is in thinking “I got mine, fuck you,” but where collectivism fails is in creating a sense of duty and obligation that makes it easier to force people to fall in line—the crux of the fucking issue to begin with, right?

I WANT people to think for themselves and to act independent of a sense of duty…for the overall betterment of everyone. Of course I want the liberation of everyone—an injury to one is an injury to all, your struggle is my struggle and our paths are intertwined etc etc but forfeiting individual roles both speeds up burnout and makes group dissent impossible.

“You should care about x struggle because you should just care naturally” sure, but this strategy isolates each struggle from each other and isolates YOU from the struggle. “I am not x but I’ll care because I’m nice” survives as long as the fight doesn’t destroy you. You cannot martyr for every individual cause one at a time out of obligation.

“This hurts YOU, which is connected to what hurts ME, so together we are fighting for each other” is a much more sustainable practice.

Without personal connection, it is difficult to keep going, it is difficult to not feel split between struggles, and guilt becomes a tool you either self-destruct with, or it can be used to manipulate your actions. We cannot oust abusers because it would “harm the collective.” When one leader is removed, it’s over because my obligation was to that group above my own individual action. I cannot question the authority leadership of our group because it will undermine the Collective.

Self-preservation becomes ‘selfishness,’ all efforts not going to the cause become ‘unimportant,’ and dissent from within will be crushed unceremoniously. A new state is born, a new leader is chosen. The cycle repeats. What are we even fighting for if not to better all of our own lives together?

I don’t want to trade one lord for another, I don’t want my neighbors to be content with submission, I don’t want complacency.

I will fight for my neighbor any day, but I am not their savior. I am not their lord. They should be the arbiter of their future, like I should be mine. Rejecting a total melting into a collective is essential to resist tyranny from outside and within, not for the sake of “rugged individualism” but to actually ensure we all are really free.

Autonomy above all else, for the good of us all.