Author: Heroic Mulatto

  • Blud is Thicker than Boden

    Libertarians discussing anything.

    Recently, within the Liberty-o-sphere, much hay was made over a speech by Jeff Deist, president of the Mises Institute, titled “For a New Libertarian.” Steve Horowitz, Professor of Economics at St. Lawrence University took issue with Deist’s employment of the phrase “blood and soil,” calling it a “clearly racist and anti-Semitic Nazi-era phrase.” Reaction to Horowitz ranged from pointing at him and hissing ‘Jew!’ to more measured responses. From my reading of the speech, I find claiming Deist’s employment of the phrase to be “clearly racist and anti-Semitic” to be uncharitable. However, I do find the defense of “Blut und Boden” being first coined by 19th century German romantic nationalists to be a bit odd in this context, as I wonder why the president of an ostensibly anarcho-capitalist think tank would choose as his cri du coeur a phrase that was the very center of the ideological foundations of the modern nation-state. Indeed, lost in all the back-and-forth over whether or not “For a New Libertarian” is Mein Kampf redux is the larger question: Is thin libertarianism dead?

    Horowitz, as a self-styled “Bleeding Heart Libertarian,” is a proponent of what is known as thick libertarianism. That is, the belief that libertarianism entails certain social and political beliefs, namely a lukewarm 20th century humanist liberalism. Thickists argue that a society (or an individual) is not truly libertarian unless there is a general belief in egalitarianism, tolerance, democracy, etc.. On the other hand, Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists argue for thin libertarianism, which is defined as the belief that libertarianism equals the non-aggression principle – nothing more, nothing less. At least they did until Deist’s speech two and a half weeks ago. When Deist argued that “[i]n other words, blood and soil and God and nation still matter to people. Libertarians ignore this at the risk of irrelevance,” it is an explicit rejection of thin libertarianism; he is saying that there is more to libertarianism than the NAP. However, contrary to the Bleeding Heart Libertarians, Deist and others now argue that it entails some flavor of traditionalist social conservatism.

    As an anarcho-capitalist, I’m quite used to completely execrable human beings advocating for positions I share, which is why I believe Deist’s recent gambit to be wrong-headed. In the name of attempting to make liberty more appealing to people, Deist is, in fact, limiting and delimiting the movement extremely narrowly. Deist claimed “Mecca is not Paris, an Irishman is not an Aboriginal, a Buddhist is not a Rastafarian, a soccer mom is not a Russian,” yet here I am, the son of a Rastafarian and a Jew who converted to Buddhism at the age of 24. Thin libertarianism is what allows me to stand ranks with Deist against ever-encroaching statism. I need not agree with Deist’s new penchant for romantic nationalism, but as long as he respects the NAP, we can co-exist in the liberty sphere. It’s a shame the moonshine is so good that Deist keeps wanting to be invited to all those yokeltarian hootenannys down in Auburn, for with the death of thin libertarianism, the liberty movement may have suffer a self-inflicted dolorous blow from which it will not recover. Contra Deist, what will, in actuality, doom libertarianism to irrelevancy is fracturing the movement along 1,000 little stupid country mouse/city mouse pissing matches.

    Thicc Libertarianism on the other hand…
  • Entertainment, red in tooth and claw

    Before the abject pussification of the world through animal welfare regulation, there was a time when a man could bring his wife and children out on the town for an exciting evening of the finest blood sport. Perhaps as ritualistic payback for the all the millenia Homo sapiens sapiens and to spend huddling in caves, naked and afraid, hiding from roaming beasts,  from at least the time of the Roman venatio, for much of human history, entertainment meant seeing some animal get crushed or disemboweled, because fuck animals. This article recounts four such bad-ass entertainments, now lost to us, that could return in a more (g)libertarian world.

    Cock Throwing

    “Cock Throwing” is currently just what jesse.in.mb calls “Tuesday”; however, cock throwing was once also a popular British pastime until the early 19th century. The game was brilliant in its simplicity: a rooster is tied to a pole and then people throw sticks at it until it dies. A variation of cock throwing was basically “hit the piñata,” but with a live chicken instead of papier-mâché and blood and viscera instead of candy. Regardless of this, according to historians cock throwing was quite popular with children. Cock throwing was also a hallowed ritual associated with Shrove Tuesday, because Jesus Christ demands the blood of chickens offered in sacrifice.

    Goose Pulling

    While originating in Spain, until about 150 years ago, goose pulling was the favorite sport of the Dixie. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson most likely participated in goose pulling. Indeed, contemporary reports detail that a goose pulling was one of the few social events in which the entire spectrum of society, from slave to plantation aristocracy, could be found participating together.

    “A Gander-Pull” by Fredric Remington (1894)

    So, just what is goose pulling? As further evidence that Christianity is actually a demonic cult focused on blood sacrifice and cannibalism, as part of Easter celebrations, a live goose with its neck greased was tied to a pole so that it hung head-first over a road. Competitors on horseback rode through the road at full gallop while attempting to pull the head off the goose’s body. Sometimes, obstacles would be placed on the path. According to one account, riders had to ride through a gauntlet of whips on their way to the pole. Spectators would bet on the proceedings and drinking copious amounts of whisky was expected.

    In the United States, goose pulling would fade into obscurity after the Civil War. Thanks, Lincoln!

    Fuchsprellen

    A pic from the last Glibertarians meet-up

    As evidenced by their pornography, the Germans are fucking lunatics. As it turns out, such lunacy has a long and storied tradition. Fuchsprellen, or fox tossing, was a popular sport among the aristocracy of Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries. Fox tossing involved using a giant slingshot to launch foxes and other animals into the air. Whoever tossed the animal the furthest won. Of course, you can imagine it wouldn’t be easy to keep a snarling, scratching and biting fox in place for long so that you could send it flying to its doom. Despite that, expert fox tossers could launch an animal 24 feet into the air. According to Wikipedia’s article on the sport, “Augustus II the Strong, the King of Poland and Elector of Saxony, held a famous tossing contest in Dresden at which 647 foxes, 533 hares, 34 badgers and 21 wildcats were tossed and killed. Augustus himself participated, reportedly demonstrating his strength by holding the end of his sling by just one finger, with two of the strongest men in his court on the other end.” Whereas goose pulling was seen as a test of one’s manliness, fox tossing was considered a fun party game where couples paired off to compete with one another.

    As if death by slingshot wasn’t indignity enough, sometimes the animals would be decorated with “bits of cardboard, gaudy cloth and tinsel” as part of a masquerade.

    Good ol’ boys and their punkin’ chunkin’ ain’t nothing but pussies.

    Human-Baiting

    If goose pulling was the national sport of Dixie, then baiting was the sport of Victorian Britain. Baiting involves pitting a pack of dogs against a chained animal in a fight to the death while spectators bet on the outcome. Pretty much every combination could be found, bear-baiting, bull-baiting, duck-baiting, etc.. And since we’ve all wondered who would win in a fight, 10 toddlers or 1 pit bull, it wasn’t long before someone had the idea to pit a human versus a dog to find out. In 1807, The Sporting Times reported on one such human-baiting match:

    A fight between a man and Bull Dog took place some time ago to settle a bet. With its first charge the Bull Dog already succeeded in throwing and pinning its opponent. Although the dog’s jaws were nearly closed by a muzzle, it succeeded in sinking its teeth into the man’s body. Had the dog not been pulled away immediately, it would have disemboweled the man.

    If this depiction is to scale, the outcome is understandable:

    Not content to let the collective honor of our species be forever sullied, other human vs. dog deathmatches were organized. In 1874, a dwarf who went by the name of Brummy, agreed to fight a bulldog named Physic on account of a bet to prove Brummy’s claim that “no dog could lick a man.” The fight went 11 rounds, in which Brummy suffered several deep bite wounds to his arms, and the dog received so many blows to the head that it lost 2 of its teeth and one eye was swollen shut. Brummy won by knockout.

    Another account of human-baiting comes from 1892, where a man by the name of James Oxley went 22 minutes against a dog named Crib. As one of the many previous lives of Mike Tyson, in this incarnation, Crib won the match by jumping over Oxley’s left shoulder, clamping on to his right ear, and slamming him to the ground. Oxley forced the dog to release his grip through a choke-hold, but at the cost of the upper part of his ear.

  • Ellsworth Toohey on How to Rule All of Mankind (A Selection from “The Fountainhead”)

    As Jerome Tuccille once observed, it usually starts with Ayn Rand. In this section from The Fountainhead, she clearly outlines the master plan of all tyrants throughout history, and the parallels to our present situation are ominous, indeed.

    “What do you want Ellsworth ?”

    “Power, Petey. I want to rule. Like my spiritual predecessors. But I’m luckier than they were. I inherited the fruit of their efforts and I shall be the one who’ll see the great dream made real. I see it all around me today. I recognize it. I don’t like it. I didn’t expect to like it. Enjoyment is not my destiny. I shall find such satisfaction as my capacity permits. I shall rule.”

    “Whom…?”

    “You. The world. It’s only a matter of discovering the lever. If you learn how to rule one single man’s soul, you can get the rest of mankind. It’s the soul, Peter, the soul. Not whips or swords or fire or guns. That’s why the Caesars, the Attilas, the Napoleons were fools and did not last. We will. The soul, Peter, is that which can’t be ruled. It must be broken. Drive a wedge in, get your fingers on it – and the man is yours. You won’t need a whip – he’ll bring it to you and ask to be whipped. Set him in reverse – and his own mechanism will do your work for you. Use him against himself. Want to know how it’s done? See if I ever lied to you. See if you haven’t heard all this for years, but didn’t want to hear, and the fault is yours, not mine.

    There are many ways. Here’s one. Make man feel small. Make him feel guilty. Kill his aspiration and his integrity. That’s difficult. The worst among you gropes for an idol in his own twisted way. Kill integrity by internal corruption. Use it against himself. Direct it towards a goal destructive of all integrity. Preach selflessness. Tell man that altruism is the ideal. Not a single one has ever reached it and not a single one ever will. His every living instinct screams against it. But don’t you see what you accomplish ? Man realizes that he’s incapable of what he’s accepted as the noblest virtue – and it gives him a sense of guilt, of sin, of his own basic unworthiness. Since the supreme ideal is beyond his grasp, he gives up eventually all ideals, all aspiration, all sense of his personal value. He feels himself obliged to preach what he can’t practice. But one can’t be good halfway or honest approximately. To preserve one’s integrity is a hard battle. Why preserve that which one knows to be corrupt already? His soul gives up its self respect. You’ve got him. He’ll obey. He’ll be glad to obey – because he can’t trust himself, he feels uncertain, he feels unclean. That’s one way.

    Here’s another. Kill man’s sense of values. Kill his capacity to recognize greatness or to achieve it. Great men can’t be ruled. We don’t want any great men. Don’t deny conception of greatness. Destroy it from within. The great is the rare, the difficult, the exceptional. Set up standards of achievement open to all, to the least, to the most inept – and you stop the impetus to effort in men, great or small. You stop all incentive to improvement, to excellence, to perfection. Laugh at Roark and hold Peter Keating as a great architect. You’ve destroyed architecture. Build Lois Cook and you’ve destroyed literature. Hail Ike and you’ve destroyed the theater. Glorify Lancelot Clankey and you’ve destroyed the press. Don’t set out to raze all shrines – you’ll frighten men, Enshrine mediocrity – and the shrines are razed.

    Then there’s another way. Kill by laughter. Laughter is an instrument of human joy. Learn to use it as a weapon of destruction. Turn it into a sneer. It’s simple. Tell them to laugh at everything. Tell them that a sense of humor is an unlimited virtue. Don’t let anything remain sacred in a man’s soul – and his soul won’t be sacred to him. Kill reverence and you’ve killed the hero in man. One doesn’t reverence with a giggle. He’ll obey and he’ll set no limits to obedience – anything goes – nothing is too serious.

    Here’s another way. This is most important. Don’t allow men to be happy. Happiness is self-contained and self-sufficient. Happy men have no time and no use for you. Happy men are free men. So kill their joy in living. Take away from them what they want. Make them think that the mere thought of a personal desire is evil. Bring them to a state where saying ‘I want’ is no longer a natural right, but a shameful admission. Altruism is of great help in this. Unhappy men will come to you. They’ll need you. They’ll come for consolation, for support, for escape. Nature allows no vacuum. Empty man’s soul – and the space is yours to fill.

    I don’t see why you should look so shocked, Peter. This is the oldest one of all. Look back at history. Look at any great system of ethics, from the Orient up. Didn’t they all preach the sacrifice of personal joy ? Under all the complications of verbiage, haven’t they all had a single leitmotif: sacrifice, renunciation, self-denial ? Haven’t you been able to catch their theme song – ‘Give up, give up, give up, give up’ ? Look at the moral atmosphere of today. Everything enjoyable, from cigarettes to sex to ambition to the profit motive, is considered depraved or sinful. Just prove that a thing makes men happy and you’ve damned it. That’s how far we’ve come. We’ve tied happiness to guilt. And we’ve got mankind by the throat.

    Throw your first born into a sacrificial furnace – lie on a bed of nails – go into the desert to mortify the flesh – don’t dance – don’t go to the movies on Sunday – don’t try to get rich – don’t smoke – don’t drink. It’s all the same line. The great line. Fools don’t think that taboos of this nature are just nonsense. Something left over, old-fashioned. But there’s always a purpose in nonsense. Don’t bother to examine a folly – ask yourself only what it accomplishes. Every system of ethics that preached sacrifice grew into a world power and ruled millions of men.

    Of course, you must dress them up. You must tell people they’ll achieve a superior kind of happiness by giving up everything that makes them happy. You don’t have to be too clear about it. Use big vague words. ‘Universal Harmony’ – ‘Eternal Spirit’ – ‘Divine Purpose’ – ‘Nirvana’ – ‘Paradise’ – ‘Racial Supremacy’ – ‘the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.’ Internal corruption, Peter. That’s the oldest one of all. The farce has been going on for centuries and men still fall for it.

    Yet the test should be so simple: just listen to any prophet and if you hear him speak of sacrifice – run. Run faster than from a plague. It stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there’s someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master. But if you ever hear a man telling you that you must be happy, that it’s your natural right, that your first duty is to yourself – that will be the man who has nothing to gain from you. But let him come and you’ll scream your empty heads off, howling that he’s a selfish monster. So the racket is safe for many, many centuries.

    But here you might have noticed something. I said, ‘It stands to reason’. Do you see ? Men have a weapon against you. Reason. So you must be very sure to take it away from them. Cut the props from under it. But be careful. Don’t deny outright. Never deny anything outright, you give your hand away. Don’t say reason is evil – though some have gone that far and with astonishing success. Just say that reason is limited. That there’s something above it. What ? You don’t have to be too clear about it either. The field’s inexhaustible. ‘Instinct’ – ‘Feeling’ – ‘Revelation’ – ‘Divine Intuition’ – ‘Dialectic Materialism’. If you get caught at some crucial point and somebody tells you that your doctrine doesn’t make sense – you’re ready for him. You tell him there’s something above sense. That here he must not try to think, he must feel. He must believe. Suspend reason and you play it deuces wild. Anything goes in any manner you wish whenever you need it. You’ve got him. Can you rule a thinking man ? We don’t want any thinking men.”

    Keating had sat down on the floor, by the side of the dresser. He did not want to abandon the dresser; he felt safer, leaning against it.

    “Peter, you’ve heard all this. You’ve seen me practicing it for ten years. You see it being practiced all over the world. Why are you disgusted ? You have no right to sit there and stare at me with the virtuous superiority of being shocked. You’re in on it. You’ve taken your share and you’ve got to go along. You’re afraid to see where it’s leading. I’m not. I’ll tell you.

    The world of the future. The world I want. A world of obedience and of unity. A world where the thought of each man will not be his own, but an attempt to guess the thought of the next neighbor who’ll have no thought – and so on, Peter, around the globe. Since all must agree with all. A world where no man will hold a desire for himself, but will direct all his efforts to satisfy the desires of his neighbor who’ll have no desires except to satisfy the desires of the next neighbor, who’ll have no desires – around the globe, Peter. Since all must serve all. A world in which man will not work for so innocent an incentive as money, but for that headless monster – prestige. The approval of his fellows – their good opinion – the opinion of men who’ll be allowed to hold no opinion. An octopus, all tentacles and no brain.

    Judgement, Peter ! Not judgement, but public polls. An average drawn upon zeroes – since no individuality will be permitted. A world with its motor cut off and a single heart, pumped by hand. My hand – and the hands of a few, a very few other men like me. Those who know what makes you tick – you great, wonderful average, you who have not risen in fury when we called you the average, the little, the common, you who’ve liked and accepted these names. You’ll sit enthroned and enshrined, you, the little people, the absolute ruler to make all past rulers squirm with envy, the absolute, the unlimited, God and Prophet and King combined. Vox populi. The average, the common, the general.

    Do you know the proper antonym for Ego ? Bromide, Peter. The rule of the bromide. But even the trite has to be organized by someone at some time. We’ll do the organizing. Vox dei. We’ll enjoy unlimited submission – from men who’ve learned nothing except to submit. We’ll call it ‘to serve’. We’ll give out medals for service. You’ll fall over one another in a scramble to see who can submit better and more. There will be no other distinction to seek. No other form of personal achievement.

    Can you see Howard Roark in this picture ? No ? Then don’t waste time on foolish questions. Everything that can’t be ruled, must go. And if freaks persist in being born occasionally, they will not survive beyond their twelfth year. When their brain begins to function, it will feel the pressure and it will explode. The pressure gauged to a vacuum. Do you know the fate of deep-sea creatures brought out to sunlight? So much for future Roarks. The rest of you will smile and obey. Have you noticed that the imbecile always smiles ? Man’s first frown is the first touch of God on his forehead. The touch of thought. But we’ll have neither God nor thought. Only voting by smiles. Automatic levers – all saying yes…

    Now if you were a little more intelligent, you’d ask: What of us, the rulers ? What of me, Ellsworth Monkton Toohey ? And I’d say, Yes, you’re right. I’ll achieve no more than you will. I’ll have no purpose save to keep you contended. To lie, to flatter you, to praise you, to inflate your vanity. To make speeches about the people and the common good. Peter, my poor old friend, I’m the most selfless man you’ve ever known. I have less independence than you, whom I just forced to sell your soul. You’ve used people at least for the sake of what you could get from them for yourself. I want nothing for myself. I use people for the sake of what I can do to them. It’s my only function and satisfaction. I have no private purpose. I want power. I want my world of the future. Let all live for all. Let all sacrifice and none profit. Let all suffer and none enjoy. Let progress stop. Let all stagnate. There’s equality in stagnation. All subjugated to the will of all. Universal slavery – without even the dignity of a master. Slavery to slavery. A great circle – and a total equality. The world of the future.”

    “Ellsworth… you’re…”

    “Insane ? Afraid to say it ? There you sit and the world’s written all over you, your last hope. Insane ? Look around you. Pick up any newspaper and read the headlines. Isn’t it coming ? Isn’t it here? Every single thing I told you ? Isn’t Europe swallowed already and we’re stumbling on to follow ? Everything I said is contained in a single word – collectivism. And isn’t that the god of our century. To act together. To think – together. To feel – together. To unite, to agree, to obey. To obey, to serve, to sacrifice. Divide and conquer – first. But then, unite and rule. We’ve discovered that one last. Remember the Roman Emperor who said he wished humanity had a single neck so he could cut it ? People have laughed at him for centuries. But we’ll have the last laugh. We’ve accomplished what he couldn’t accomplish. We’ve taught men to unite. This makes one neck ready for one leash. We found the magic word. Collectivism.

    Look at Europe, you fool. Can’t you see past the guff and recognize the essence ? One country is dedicated to the proposition that man has no rights, that the collective is all. The individual held as evil, the mass – as God. No motive and no virtue permitted – except that of service to the proletariat.

    That’s one version. Here’s another. A country dedicated to the proposition that man has no rights, that the State is all. The individual held as evil, the race – as God. No motive and no virtue permitted – except that of service to the race. Am I raving or is this the harsh reality of two continents already ? If you’re sick of one version, we push you in the other. We’ve fixed the coin. Heads – collectivism. Tails – collectivism. Give up your soul to a council – or give it up to a leader. But give it up, give it up, give it up. Offer poison as food and poison as antidote. Go fancy on the trimmings, but hang on to the main objective. Give the fools a chance, let them have their fun – but don’t forget the only purpose you have to accomplish. Kill the individual. Kill man’s soul. The rest will follow automatically.”

  • Thicc Thursday

    This is Lindsay Capuano:

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BWaowqkBwkC/

    And her booty is thicc:

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BSeGQ_khDBo

     

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BWXgVTAhYVI

     

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BVVUEm4h2s7


    And as the news turns its attention to the ailing John McCain, let us not forget the thiccest member of the McCain clan, Meghan:


    Pictured: Meghan and website contributor Los Doyers at the last Glibertarians.com meet-up

  • Glibertarians After Dark: Internationalization, Localization and My Dick

    We Americans are stuck with this scruffy-looking asshole interrupting Bar Rescue marathons approximately every 15 minutes:

    https://youtu.be/YRmLcUIqCHI

    But the Australians get her:

    The Japanese get her:

    https://youtu.be/_o20TexPZ4Y

    The Malaysians get her:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OAJZMO9Sqg

    Hong Kongers get them:

    And the Brits get full-on lipstick lesbian porn:

    Fuck trivago.