Are self proclaimed Anarcho-Libertarians communist plants?

[The2ndAmendment]

Ive always been practical:


Law and Order, then Constitutionalist...then Libertarian, in that sequence of priority.

The ideals of Libertarianism and the constraints of a constitution are meaningless if a viscous horde of Marxist insurrectionists dismantle and devour our institutions that fulfill the basic function of government: Order.

Yet I notice a lot of my PREVIOUS libertarian friends are mad that Trump has fulfilled the Article IV, Section 4 Guarantee clause of the US Constitution, which is to protect them from foreign invasion (our border) and insurrection...and to "secure a republican form of government" which the Marxists seek to eliminate.

These libertarians think we can just ignore the communists and vote our way to victory.

Not so, the Marxists are rioting, looting, burning, injuring and murdering cops. And history hath shown that no elected Marxist government (whether the elections are fair or rigged) has ever been peacefully removed or voted out.

The only nation to successfully resist radical leftism and communism in world history were the People of Chile...Pinochet didnt fight fire with fire...he fought fire with magma, and quickly crushed the communist scum underfoot.

Today the United States stands at the precipice of communist downfall, but most Libertarians cling to their IDEALs of limited government in leui of impending destruction and constitutional annhilation...only when crimson flag drapes forcibly from their hearths, the hammer and sickle upon the horizon, will these Libertarians realized they should have fought...

Or will they? Some of them are too intelligent and well versed in true non revisionist history to actually believe we can ignore the communists burning our institutions, keep us from work and our children from school and censoring our voice...Nay, I say such people are in fact: Communist Plants.

 

[kyzr]

I'll let you and PC argue this one out.

 

[Picaro]

They've been compared to Marxists in their politics, yes. The 'end results' they predict are very similar to what Marxists claim their theories will lead to, and they are both 'rational constructionists', according to F.A. Hayek in his book The Fatal Conceit. Of course. 'Libertarianism', having never existed in real life, can't be fairly criticized as ever having failed, according to those who peddle it; they can just make up whatever they want, and that's exactly what they do in discussions, demand that 'everybody else' nail Jello to the wall while they quote Ann Landers, oops I mean whats-her-name, Rand, the crazy anti-social neurotic sociopath who wrote Atlas Shrugged, a paean to Social Darwinism on steroids. Like Marxism its roots are firmly in Pagan materialism, and human value is to be judged by its economic value, as determined by the Libertarians themselves, of course.

Marxism of the Right

Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that ind

www.theamericanconservative.com

"Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that individual freedom should be the sole rule of ethics and government. Libertarianism offers its believers a clear conscience to do things society presently restrains, like make more money, have more sex, or take more drugs. It promises a consistent formula for ethics, a rigorous framework for policy analysis, a foundation in American history, and the application of capitalist efficiencies to the whole of society. But while it contains substantial grains of truth, as a whole it is a seductive mistake.

There are many varieties of libertarianism, from natural-law libertarianism (the least crazy) to anarcho-capitalism (the most), and some varieties avoid some of the criticisms below. But many are still subject to most of them, and some of the more successful varieties—I recently heard a respected pundit insist that classical liberalism is libertarianism—enter a gray area where it is not really clear that they are libertarians at all. But because 95 percent of the libertarianism one encounters at cocktail parties, on editorial pages, and on Capitol Hill is a kind of commonplace “street” libertarianism, I decline to allow libertarians the sophistical trick of using a vulgar libertarianism to agitate for what they want by defending a refined version of their doctrine when challenged philosophically. We’ve seen Marxists pull that before.


This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society."


...


"Empirically, most people don’t actually want absolute freedom, which is why democracies don’t elect libertarian governments. Irony of ironies, people don’t choose absolute freedom. But this refutes libertarianism by its own premise, as libertarianism defines the good as the freely chosen, yet people do not choose it. Paradoxically, people exercise their freedom not to be libertarians.

The political corollary of this is that since no electorate will support libertarianism, a libertarian government could never be achieved democratically but would have to be imposed by some kind of authoritarian state, which rather puts the lie to libertarians’ claim that under any other philosophy, busybodies who claim to know what’s best for other people impose their values on the rest of us. Libertarianism itself is based on the conviction that it is the one true political philosophy and all others are false. It entails imposing a certain kind of society, with all its attendant pluses and minuses, which the inhabitants thereof will not be free to opt out of except by leaving."



... and more at the link. The majority of them are also cop haters, but then they demand government provide them with legal protections from their slaves.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I left libertarianism as a movement. It's a magnet for too many people who simply do not understand the woes of government-over-man. It's consistently misrepresented. I see it misrepresented here quite often.

 

[Doc7505]

Black Lives Matter co-founder describes herself as ‘trained Marxist’

Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors said in a newly surfaced video from 2015 that she and her fellow organizers are “trained Marxists” – making clear their movement’s ideological f…

nypost.com

​

Antifa Tied to Communist Revolutionary Groups, Shows Documentary

www.theepochtimes.com

XXXXXXXXXXXX

News Flash to Media: Antifa is Communist! - AMAC - The Association of Mature American Citizens

No matter how many communist hammers & sickles or images of Marx, Mao, and other communists the violent Antifa radicals display, the Fake News media

min.amac.us

 

[justinacolmena]

These libertarians think we can just ignore the communists and vote our way to victory.

Not so, the Marxists are rioting, looting, burning, injuring and murdering cops. And history hath shown that no elected Marxist government (whether the elections are fair or rigged) has ever been peacefully removed or voted out.

Guns are banned, and the rioters, looters, arsonists, thugs, and killers all have the law on their side.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

They've been compared to Marxists in their politics, yes. The 'end results' they predict are very similar to what Marxists claim their theories will lead to, and they are both 'rational constructionists', according to F.A. Hayek in his book The Fatal Conceit. Of course. 'Libertarianism', having never existed in real life, can't be fairly criticized as ever having failed, according to those who peddle it; they can just make up whatever they want, and that's exactly what they do in discussions, demand that 'everybody else' nail Jello to the wall while they quote Ann Landers, oops I mean whats-her-name, Rand, the crazy anti-social neurotic sociopath who wrote Atlas Shrugged, a paean to Social Darwinism on steroids. Like Marxism its roots are firmly in Pagan materialism, and human value is to be judged by its economic value, as determined by the Libertarians themselves, of course.

Marxism of the Right

Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that ind

www.theamericanconservative.com

"Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that individual freedom should be the sole rule of ethics and government. Libertarianism offers its believers a clear conscience to do things society presently restrains, like make more money, have more sex, or take more drugs. It promises a consistent formula for ethics, a rigorous framework for policy analysis, a foundation in American history, and the application of capitalist efficiencies to the whole of society. But while it contains substantial grains of truth, as a whole it is a seductive mistake.

There are many varieties of libertarianism, from natural-law libertarianism (the least crazy) to anarcho-capitalism (the most), and some varieties avoid some of the criticisms below. But many are still subject to most of them, and some of the more successful varieties—I recently heard a respected pundit insist that classical liberalism is libertarianism—enter a gray area where it is not really clear that they are libertarians at all. But because 95 percent of the libertarianism one encounters at cocktail parties, on editorial pages, and on Capitol Hill is a kind of commonplace “street” libertarianism, I decline to allow libertarians the sophistical trick of using a vulgar libertarianism to agitate for what they want by defending a refined version of their doctrine when challenged philosophically. We’ve seen Marxists pull that before.


This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society."


...


"Empirically, most people don’t actually want absolute freedom, which is why democracies don’t elect libertarian governments. Irony of ironies, people don’t choose absolute freedom. But this refutes libertarianism by its own premise, as libertarianism defines the good as the freely chosen, yet people do not choose it. Paradoxically, people exercise their freedom not to be libertarians.

The political corollary of this is that since no electorate will support libertarianism, a libertarian government could never be achieved democratically but would have to be imposed by some kind of authoritarian state, which rather puts the lie to libertarians’ claim that under any other philosophy, busybodies who claim to know what’s best for other people impose their values on the rest of us. Libertarianism itself is based on the conviction that it is the one true political philosophy and all others are false. It entails imposing a certain kind of society, with all its attendant pluses and minuses, which the inhabitants thereof will not be free to opt out of except by leaving."



... and more at the link. The majority of them are also cop haters, but then they demand government provide them with legal protections from their slaves.

This pretty much said everything I was thinking, I just didn't know how to word it. Thank you this link.

 

[Picaro]

They've been compared to Marxists in their politics, yes. The 'end results' they predict are very similar to what Marxists claim their theories will lead to, and they are both 'rational constructionists', according to F.A. Hayek in his book The Fatal Conceit. Of course. 'Libertarianism', having never existed in real life, can't be fairly criticized as ever having failed, according to those who peddle it; they can just make up whatever they want, and that's exactly what they do in discussions, demand that 'everybody else' nail Jello to the wall while they quote Ann Landers, oops I mean whats-her-name, Rand, the crazy anti-social neurotic sociopath who wrote Atlas Shrugged, a paean to Social Darwinism on steroids. Like Marxism its roots are firmly in Pagan materialism, and human value is to be judged by its economic value, as determined by the Libertarians themselves, of course.

Marxism of the Right

Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that ind

www.theamericanconservative.com

"Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics often find an attractive political philosophy in libertarianism, the idea that individual freedom should be the sole rule of ethics and government. Libertarianism offers its believers a clear conscience to do things society presently restrains, like make more money, have more sex, or take more drugs. It promises a consistent formula for ethics, a rigorous framework for policy analysis, a foundation in American history, and the application of capitalist efficiencies to the whole of society. But while it contains substantial grains of truth, as a whole it is a seductive mistake.

There are many varieties of libertarianism, from natural-law libertarianism (the least crazy) to anarcho-capitalism (the most), and some varieties avoid some of the criticisms below. But many are still subject to most of them, and some of the more successful varieties—I recently heard a respected pundit insist that classical liberalism is libertarianism—enter a gray area where it is not really clear that they are libertarians at all. But because 95 percent of the libertarianism one encounters at cocktail parties, on editorial pages, and on Capitol Hill is a kind of commonplace “street” libertarianism, I decline to allow libertarians the sophistical trick of using a vulgar libertarianism to agitate for what they want by defending a refined version of their doctrine when challenged philosophically. We’ve seen Marxists pull that before.


This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society."


...


"Empirically, most people don’t actually want absolute freedom, which is why democracies don’t elect libertarian governments. Irony of ironies, people don’t choose absolute freedom. But this refutes libertarianism by its own premise, as libertarianism defines the good as the freely chosen, yet people do not choose it. Paradoxically, people exercise their freedom not to be libertarians.

The political corollary of this is that since no electorate will support libertarianism, a libertarian government could never be achieved democratically but would have to be imposed by some kind of authoritarian state, which rather puts the lie to libertarians’ claim that under any other philosophy, busybodies who claim to know what’s best for other people impose their values on the rest of us. Libertarianism itself is based on the conviction that it is the one true political philosophy and all others are false. It entails imposing a certain kind of society, with all its attendant pluses and minuses, which the inhabitants thereof will not be free to opt out of except by leaving."



... and more at the link. The majority of them are also cop haters, but then they demand government provide them with legal protections from their slaves.

This pretty much said everything I was thinking, I just didn't know how to word it. Thank you this link.

Thank the article's author; he pretty much touches every talking point effectively and in far fewer words than I could.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

What say you gipper ?

You harbor great hatred for America, our police, Republic and the Great Patriot President Donald Trump.

 

[gipper]

What say you gipper ?

You harbor great hatred for America, our police, Republic and the Great Patriot President Donald Trump.

Damn that’s dumb.

 

[BigDave]

Hell yes they are!

 

[JWBooth]

Ive always been practical:


Law and Order, then Constitutionalist...then Libertarian, in that sequence of priority.

The ideals of Libertarianism and the constraints of a constitution are meaningless if a viscous horde of Marxist insurrectionists dismantle and devour our institutions that fulfill the basic function of government: Order.

Yet I notice a lot of my PREVIOUS libertarian friends are mad that Trump has fulfilled the Article IV, Section 4 Guarantee clause of the US Constitution, which is to protect them from foreign invasion (our border) and insurrection...and to "secure a republican form of government" which the Marxists seek to eliminate.

These libertarians think we can just ignore the communists and vote our way to victory.

Not so, the Marxists are rioting, looting, burning, injuring and murdering cops. And history hath shown that no elected Marxist government (whether the elections are fair or rigged) has ever been peacefully removed or voted out.

The only nation to successfully resist radical leftism and communism in world history were the People of Chile...Pinochet didnt fight fire with fire...he fought fire with magma, and quickly crushed the communist scum underfoot.

Today the United States stands at the precipice of communist downfall, but most Libertarians cling to their IDEALs of limited government in leui of impending destruction and constitutional annhilation...only when crimson flag drapes forcibly from their hearths, the hammer and sickle upon the horizon, will these Libertarians realized they should have fought...

Or will they? Some of them are too intelligent and well versed in true non revisionist history to actually believe we can ignore the communists burning our institutions, keep us from work and our children from school and censoring our voice...Nay, I say such people are in fact: Communist Plants.

Don’t be silly.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The radical capitalists are really communists. What a smort argument.

P.S. Nay is for horses.