I'm starting to become turned off by the "You're miserable because you're free" and "freedom is for beasts" argumentation style. I'm guilty of doing the same thing too; Freedom isn't a net positive and has become a meaningless sacred cow. Most people that are symbols of freedom are degenerates given a reputable image via victor's justice. The modern, secular martyr's are mediocre at best. It's still bad strategy to prioritize condemning freedom as a means of advancing your main causes.
Libertarian's have a bad track record of taking any rejected cows from standard liberalism and making them sacred. While Liberals are busy turning poopdick into an identitarian cause, Libertarian's may focus on something absurd like polyamory. Instead of "democracy now!" it's "smash the state"! Every ideology comes with it's fair-share of neckbeards. In the libertarian sphere there are people that look at fascism as a good thing; There are racialists that care about whites; There are advocates of patriarchy; There are religious people (I was a religious an-cap). These people may not share our philosophical leanings, yet they care more about The West than most Fascists.
If they're so concerned about police brutality, then tell them to kick out the dalits. If some of them don't like it, then they aren't who we're looking for. If they dislike overly-buracratic institutions, then tell them to get rid of feminism/the subversive class. While you're at it, tell them about The Jewish Question. While frequenters of Mises.Org may not look at your positions properly a Paleo-Libertarian certainly will. Instead of going the esoteric-radical direction, it's important to go the moderate, practical direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment