The Libertarian Party?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A reader asks about “voting Libertarian” – and my thoughts about Libertarianism as a political movement: 

In reading your articles, it’s clear you advocate libertarian principles, but I’m curious what you think of the Libertarian Party as an organization? Especially during the “Corona crisis,” it’s become increasingly clear to me that Democratic or Republican, the “lesser of two evils” is well, still an evil.  However, I also believe just voting Libertarian (or any “third party”) as a “protest candidate” every four years isn’t going to do much good; the only way to make any headway through the political system would be to support Libertarians (or independents who support the same basic principles) all the time and from the ground up — for city councils, county/township trustees, school boards, etc. (even running ourselves if we have the political acumen to do so) — in order build momentum and a national following. What is your thought on “voting Libertarian”?  Is this a viable method of political and social change, or should we try to “work with the system” and try to influence the major parties?

I support a Libertarian movement rather than a party. It’s the ideas – and changing them – that will determine things more so than who gets elected. We suffer from too many (and tyrannical) laws and are under the thumb of those who impose them and enforce them largely because so many people want them. If a critical mass of people no longer wanted to be herded and micromanaged, they’d automatically be in favor of not herding and micromanaging others. The difficulty lies in making them conscious of this duality – and that is the job of a Libertarian movement.

But I am also a practical man and understand that it is sometimes necessary to accept the good rather than insist upon the perfect; that the perfect will likely never exist. Because humans are imperfect.

Still, we can try. And we ought never to give up.

Accordingly, I will support political movements that are favorably inclined toward more respect for the rights of the individual; the more articulate and consciously so the better. Republicans are terrible in this respect as they – generally – have no defined principles beyond “less government” (means what, exactly?) and (worse) accept most if not all the principles of the supposed opposition. An obvious example being “repeal . . . and replace” Obamacare. No opposition to the idea of mandated/government-enforced health care. Just a “better plan” than the other side’s.

How about leaving people free to “plan” (and decide) for themselves? What a concept!

A Libertarian Party is almost as oxymoronic as Marx’s idea of the “withering away of the state.”

Emphasis on almost.

Libertarians could and arguably should get behind a platform which echoes what Jefferson meant when he wrote the Declaration – but bollixed up when he allowed poetry to mar clear elucidation of principle. What I mean is the babble about “all men are created equal,” which is evil nonsense. That one flowery but incandescently dangerous line is the ultimate reason for the rotting of the tree of liberty, which is now about ready to topple over on account of it.

Any imbecile can see that men are not equal. Is it really necessary to elaborate? Is AOC the intellectual equal of  Stephen Hawking? Is an NBA forward the physical equal of a sumo wrestler? We are all wildly unequal – in every way that can be measured, from our physical attributes to our mental attributes; even the congeniality of our personalities and the attractiveness of our faces and bodies differs from individual to individual.

As does our individual drive and determination to make the most of the gifts bestowed on us by nature and circumstances. Some work hard. Others don’t.

Some are just lucky.

Life is sometimes unfair.  The smarter and stronger and better-looking do start out with more advantages than the average person. But it is no guarantee of success, wealth and happiness – either way.

It is up to us, as individuals. The smart and attractive are sometimes lazy and unpleasant. Average intelligence can be made up for by hard work. Average looks can be made up for by a winning personality.

We all get dealt a certain hand – but it is up to us how it is played. Unless we permit others to play that hand for us.

The results of the quest for equality – of condition, of outcome –  can be read about; see Kurt Vonnegut’s short story, Harrison Bergeron. And if not read about, will be experienced.


The French experienced it in 1789. The Russians in 1917. We will experience it, soon – if Jefferson’s mistake isn’t redacted.

All men are not created equal. They can never be made equal, except in death. But they do have equal rights.

Not just before the law – though that’s part of it. No person should ever be treated more harshly – or more leniently – by the law. All people should be held accountable to the same extent for the same harms caused.

But it goes deeper than that.

Each of us has the same equal and inalienable right to self-ownership, a proposition infinitely more “self-evident” (because who can deny it without defending slavery?) than the beautifully dangerous nonsense penned by Jefferson.

Self-ownership means just what the words mean. You own yourself exclusively – and no one else even fractionally.

No masters. No slaves – even a little bit.

It means you have the right to make use of the gifts nature and circumstances bestowed upon you. That no one else has a rightful claim to any part of you – or any part of the fruits of your labor, the work of your body or your mind.

It means you have an absolute right to live – and an absolute obligation to let live. To not harm others – and to expect that others refrain from harming you. To be held accountable for any harm you cause – but never for any harm you haven’t caused.

These are the ideas – the principles – a Libertarian movement ought to espouse. And which are worthy of being supported, to the extent they are espoused.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

If you’d like an ear tag – custom made! – just ask and it will be delivered.  

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at and I will send you a copy directly!




  1. “Everyone has a plan, ‘till they get punched in the mouth.” Mike Tyson. Non aggression, free trade, open borders, no regulations, self ownership, it all sounds so good until the thugs, thieves and scum steal and burn everything you’ve worked for and knock your teeth out. The fact is that loners get trampled by the herd. Human beings organize in to tribes, clans, movements, nationalities and religions for a reason. Survival.

    The Republicans suck, Trump sucks, but the godless, communist leftists will destroy the political system that gives Libertarians the opportunity to dream of a better world. Right now it’s all about the power that resides in the central government. It’s not good, it’s not right, it’s reality. Maintain your lofty philosophies and be swept aside in the Marxist wave. Don’t stand on the sidelines, choose the lessor of two evils. Live to fight for your utopia another day.

    • Principles matter. So do the principles of warfare. Don’t play the enemies game, by the enemies rules. Attrition is a fools game. Let the fools play it.

      “Lofty philosophies” are worth fighting for. Bumper stickers are worth dying for. Know the difference.

    • Hi Griff,

      I agree with much of what you say, except: “Utopia”

      This is a common way to attack Libertarians but it’s based on something Libertarians don’t advocate – utopia. Libertarians are many things; stupid isn’t one of them. We know utopia does not exist and never will. But that doesn’t mean we don’t respect principles, without which liberty is without defense.

      Non-aggression doesn’t mean pacifism. It means self-defense.
      Self-ownership is morally self-evident; who else owns you if you do not?
      If people won’t “regulate” themselves in a generally sound manner how is it that government – more people – will?
      Open borders is chiefly a problem because of open pockets (ours) with gun in our backs to force us to “stand and deliver.”

      I doubt many of us here want Mad Max. But we also don’t want Hitler – or Stalin. Or armed government workers, anymore.

      The premise that they “keep us safe” is false. Note that it is axiomatic that where you find the most AGWs you find the most crime, the least civility. Where there are very few AGWs – but lots of legally armed citizens – there is very little need for AGWs.

      • Exactly Eric! Humans will always be humans- good and bad. Being free to defend oneself, and not having to deal with a humongous gang of organized criminals known as “government” would certainly improve the lives of good people- and worse case scenario, wouldn’t make things any worse, as we have all of the negative things anyway, which they supposedly exist to protect us from- so we would suffer no detriment if government went away, but stand to gain an awful lot!

        • Morning, Nunz!

          I think it’s a key “awakening point” for people to understand this – i.e., that the institutions of government are a facade. That civilization exists where men are civilized – and that does not require government. If anything, it runs counter to civilization because government is always corrupt, arbitrary and – inevitably, becomes the fountainhead of de-civilizing us.

          In my area, it is not the police (AGWs) that “keep us safe.” We keep us safe. By not stealing things; by looking out for our neighbors. By being heavily armed and everyone knowing it – including those who might think about stealing things.

          • ‘Zactly, Eric!

            Government- of any variety- can only exist by the exercising of violence and theft and coercion- they very things which are counter to civilization.

            Same here, as far as the pigs “keeping us safe”. We are much safer because of the fact that one rarely sees one out here. That there are at least 5 guns in every house here is the best deterrent to crime that one can have.

            Conversely, in NY where the streets were crawling with pigs….crime prospers, and it is much more likely that you as an honest man will be robbed or deprived of your rights or otherwise abused by the ones who are supposed to be “protecting” us.

            • Amen, my wop amigo!

              It’s literally axiomatic that the fewer cops in a given area, the safer that area is. It is axiomatic because in such areas, the people are generally civilized – and armed. Whereas in the other areas, the people are not – and the AGWs are armed.

              • Look at the COMPLEXION of “civilians” (Gawd, how I HATE that term applied to CITIZENS that militarized cops supposedly “protect and serve”) in those places (big cities and urban unincorporated county areas, such as in LA County) with a large amounts of cops…

                Cops aren’t needed all that much among folks that are generally law-abiding and that occupy themselves in a productive manner.

                • Hi Douglas

                  I like the idea (if we must have AGWs) that they operate on the same principle as firemen; i.e., they remain at the station until a need arises – are summoned by those who want them. As opposed to this business of wandering around looking for something to do.

    • I prefer being swept aside to being a party to the destruction of liberty and life that is the product of the current political process. As Patrick Henry so famously said.

    • A verbose way of saying “If you vote Libertarian, you’ve thrown your vote away”. Hell, I wrote in Ron Paul more than once, only went to vote to do that and now our ballots have no way of a write-in.

      • Hello Eightsouthman, I lived in Ron Paul’s district in Texas, voted for him for Congress and supported both his Congressional and Presidential campaigns. Ron made a national impact as a Republican, not a Libertarian. Like it or not, the Republican Party is the best vehicle Libertarians have to make an impact in national politics.

        I supported Rand Paul in 2016 and will again in 2024. I think it best to work to change the system from within the system as long as that is possible. Right now, the Republican Party is the lesser of two evils, but that is good as it’s going to get in 2020.

        • Griff, why would one wish to have an impact on national politics? What does a principled person have to gain, from taking part in a illegitimate system?

          Power over others lives? Thats hardly principled. Power over the system?
          You do know there are reasons, that it doesn’t matter who wears the Funny Hat™?

          I trust you are also aware, that it is those who own the politicians (the Oligarchs) who actually run the country? That being the case, why would a principled person, wish to be part of such a corrupt and corrupting system?

          • Hi BJ,

            I agree with all you’ve written, as a matter of principle. But we also find ourselves, I think, in largely the same position as Russian “whites” back in 1917. We’re not monarchists, obviously. But we strenuously oppose the other thing. What to do in such a situation, when the choice thrust on you is to do whatever you have to do to avoid a total systemic collapse and its replacement by an evil of almost unimaginable degree . . . or put the proverbial clothespin on your nose and “support” the other (in today’s context, the Orange Man)?

            • Good examples. You you do know that the Usual Suspects backed both sides? (as they often do). They are very fond of letting both (or all) sides destroy each other, and then take control of those who survive. Its been the same pattern for a very long time.

              I suspect it will be the same this time. Total systemic collapse wouldn’t suit their interests. Controlled collapse would.

              Much like demolition serves a purpose. It takes skill and preparation, to drop a building into its own foot print.

              The same applies to societies and civilizations. But that takes generations, infiltration and undermining of the basic fabric of civic belief. Anyone who has watched as cultural Marxism has advanced, knows what is involved.

              At this point, no matter which side wins in November, the other will not accept it. But lesser immediate evil comes from Trump winning. But the Usual Suspects already have their hooks deeply into him. It will be a short respite.

          • Very true, BJ. That’s the absurdity of a “Libertarian Party”- If one doesn’t believe in “democracy” [Even if such a thing really existed]; That some men have special rights, privileges and immunities to do things to other men which would be crimes if we did them, why would they want to be the figurehead and maintainer of a system which exists to do those very things?

            “We don’t believe in kings, so make me king!”

            • Hey Nunz,

              There has always been tension in the Libertarian Party between the “purists” and the self described “pragmatists”. The purists consider the Party to be another tool for education, and thus think watering down the message due to concerns about electability is counter productive and stupid. The “pragmatists” are delusional and convince themselves that they can actually win. This explains the perversity of nominating Johnson, Barr and Weld.

              If the LP would stick to education, rather than delusional dreams of getting elected, it could do some good. At the national level, the LP should focus all of its’ energy on exposing the debate fraud, the collusion of D’s and R’s to prevent any other voice on the stage. Johnson had a chance to do this and should have made it his signature issue. Instead, he chose to signal his virtue and tolerance (except for anyone sympathetic to Trump).


              • Well-said [as usual] Jeremy!

                For a Libertarian to be “elected”, they would have to accommodate the views and desires of a major segment of society- and since no major segment of society is Libertarian, a Libertarian seeking to court them would either have to cease being a Libertarian…or lie. In either case, such would preclude a suitable person the participation of a suitable candidate- even assuming that a suitable candidate could do anything if he were the head of a political system such as we have- which of course is also absurd.

                • Hey Nunz,

                  Yeah, the original platform is pretty radical. I wish they’d just stick to using politics as a tool for education.


                  • Jeremy, I’ve had this conversation so many times I really don’t have anything to add but the obvious, and taht would be ‘cue the Fugs’, voting for the lesser of 3 evils.

                    If there were anything I could do to change things to a libertarian society I would have done it by now.

                    I continued to write in Ron Paul even when he wasn’t trying to get elected. Now we’re getting these ballots where you can’t write in.

                    I don’t know for a fact if I’ll bother to vote since I didn’t last time. I was working long hours and couldn’t get to the polls before they closed(7pm, ridiculous). I could have taken off early and two people would have suffered financially from that.

                    If I do go vote, I’ll vote for a libertarian as I did once before. Between two elections libertarian votes increased 10 fold, from .7% to 7%. Just think what another 10 fold increase would be like.

                    Last election independents gained a huge amount in Texas. This is just another subject that depresses me.

                    • Eight, you make a good point! You’ve even got ME tempted to go down and register as a Libertarian, although I’ve never been registered to vote before and have never voted.

                      But damn! After Gary Johnson, and now seeing the current turd they’re running…I STILL wouldn’t vote…..

                      Hell, if anything, these jerks are giving Libertarians a bad name. I’ve had to defend myself on numerous occasions, when people learnt that I was a Libertarian, and would start imagining that I shared Johnson’s views; or that I supported him!

                    • Nunz, I’ll probably go vote for an independent…..if I need anything from town.

                      The fact that Trump signed the CARES act in Jan 2019 tells me everything I didn’t know about him. The dems are simply out of their minds with Nancy having all the Confederate portraits removed from the WH today.

                      So really, how far wrong can I go voting independent?

                      Trump has already sold 800,000 tickets to his rally on the 20th. I keep hearing people who’ve always voted democrat say they’re changing over. Even Matt Taibbi is changing over. When the editor of Rolling Stone makes the change you know the Dems are really off the rails.

                    • Dayum, Eight! Removing the portraits from the WH? And Mr. Bad Rug didn’t even grab her by the pussy?!

                      It’s scary when all we see is evil and tyranny from both “sides”[of the same coin].

                      Why would the Dumbocraps advocate things they know are abhorrent to 95% of the people?(And run a senile creepy candidate that no one in their right mind would vote for?) They are the ying to the yang of the pretend other side who offers the “solution”- that being more “law and order”[tyranny]…and how can any of the voters complain, since that will be what they voted for?

                      The rules do what they want…but this is how they manufacture consent and good will- “We’re giving you what you want- the solution to your problems[which we created and foisted upon you so that you’d want this solution”.

                      Trump has already so further militarized the country…imagine what he will do in a 2nd term (Not that it would be different than what creepy Joe would do- remember, Obama ran with what Bush did, too)- only more people will now be cheering: “Give us more tyranny!”.

                      No reform is possible amongst 300 million brainwashed people.

                      I’ll take a big dump on election day, and signal by choice by seeing which candidate’s likeness appears before it gets flushed down! (If that is any predictor, Obabma must be running again! He seems to be on the campaign trail…and keeps reappearing, no matter how many times I flush!)

  2. Who are the people that can work from home? If they weren’t already working from home, why is it so easy to do so now??? The only thing I can think of is computer programmers, but even then it’s hard to collaborate / coordinate with other programmers, or have any meetings. What kind of other profession could possibly work from home???? And how do the managers know people aren’t just goofing off at home and just saying they were working? “Yeah boss, that project took three weeks to complete!” — even though it really only took 3 days LOL.

    [I honestly don’t have a clue what’s going on with this whole thing LOL… and IDK who else to ask.]

    • I know several people who work from home. It’s just the little tyrants that always wanted them to come in to work. They obviously have tech jobs, mostly working with computers and doing all sorts of jobs that are done by computers.

      Finally, against the advice of the mini-tyrants, companies realized production was much better from home. Making your own hours, working as long as you want and taking breaks when you want or need them makes a lot of sense. I have worked from home, if you call a truck a home(I did), or call working in the pasture or plowing fields or fabricated things at home. I much prefer it most of the time.

      While I don’t consider trucking working from home, it can get pretty close to it. Before I was laid off, I’d come home when I needed, if it was only to service the rig. It often made my productivity better than being on the road and calling for a mechanic and sitting on my ass. I didn’t often have mechanical surprises and commonly had what I needed to fix one at the house. My SIL retired after working close to 20 years at a really good job…..from home. She didn’t have all those distractions you often have at work.

    • Many, MANY people, can and do work from home. Just about any of the information/knowledge trades do. My daughter does data analysis, for a business intelligence group. They use various communication apps for their meetings. Telepresence is changing the face of business across the world.

      How do managers rule their fiefs? Who says they need to? Its obvious if the work is getting done, or not. All it takes is people who are actually willing to work, and managers who are more focused on getting work done, than playing power games.

      Not to mention the obvious advantages, of not having to have major investments in large office space, and parking lots and commute times. All sides win.

      Of course, thats not possible for everyone, but over time, it will more and more of an option.

    • Those who are loafing and lying about it are the same ones that were doing so as much as possible at the office. If anything, working from home weeds them out. Transportation is a HUGE cost for workers. It’s been a long time since I claimed transportation on my Armed Theft Tax form, but the last time I did, the IRS allowed a $0.50 per mile standard deduction in lieu of actual expense records. Which means it actually costs more than that. Which means that fuel costs are minor compared to the total cost. When I retired, I was driving 250 miles per week commuting. Which comes to $6500 per year. A pretty fat raise from working at home.

  3. IMO, the whole govt & parties concept doesn’t work, it’s just another name for a dictatorship, and giving few people absolute power always becomes corrupt. The people need to communicate in an organized fashion to run their communities, and to vote on everything — that way corrupt laws/etc never happen because the people will vote no on them. Shame on us people for letting so few crooks run everything, when we could just get together in an organized fashion… maybe call it “community groups”… and then we’d all get to have a say in everything and all the criminality would be shut down instantly & forever.

    The problem is that you can’t physically fit everyone in a building to have a meeting anymore, because our population is so large. Back in the 1700’s etc it was easy to have a “town hall” meeting. But now it’s literally impossible, … so that means we have to use a newsletter and/or website to communicate… so it just needs to be organized so that there’s a section for proposals, projects going on, problems going on & solution suggestions, etc., and everyone can contribute their ideas and vote on everyone elses’ ideas. Then when there’s a consensus and plan of action for something, everyone will vote on it. And voting should be done via a website since it’s so easy & convenient… and also voting could be fraudproof & anonymous too (there’s simple ways to accomplish that via serial numbered ballots and crowd-verification of the legality of voters).

    • Sounds good harry, but how do you compete with federal law simply written and signed by a tyrant president. Want to know who’s a tyrant? Just look at DC and state leges and county tyrants.

      Just as I suspected, Trump is one of the billionaires who wrote and claimed all this shit. He doesn’t know anything about the covid till his advisors started screaming but he signed the CARES act January of 2019. How does that work again?

        • Hi Eight,,, The lady is correct,,, as is everyone that speaks the same but, until we can somehow organize hundreds / thousands / millions to march on the mayors office,,, the governors office or the Capitol in DC to demand they stop the rioting, the looting, the destruction of property, the killing, and restore law and order, the efforts to destroy the infrastructure, social cohesion and the desire to exterminate us and our country will continue unabated.
          Sadly I admit I have no clue on how to or where to begin but it has to be done or a shooting war is likely. That I surely do not want as my first choice. But clearly, sitting back hoping it will all blow over and everything will be peachy isn’t working. This will require a younger person with charisma, the ability to rouse people to an idea and a love for the country. Somehow it will have to be done quickly as I don’t think there is much time left.

          • ken, Does that mean I wasted my time organizing marches and chanting Hey Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today? To start with, we had every MSM dead against us.

    • What you describe Harry is democracy. Which is clearly defined by gang rape. The failure of the American experiment is that enough of the founders were corrupt and self serving to put in place a Constitution without external enforcement. Leaving the fox in charge of the hen house. It was not an accident. Which is why Aaron Burr is my favorite, since he shot dead the most egregious of the bunch, Alexander Hamilton.

  4. Both the Democrats and Republicans do everything in their illegitimate power to prevent the Libertarian Party, or any third party, from appearing on the ballot. They have been quite successful in their goal – third parties have to expend much of their limited funds to obtain “ballot access”.

    Give choice a chance…

    Ballot Access News:

    • Yes, its just about having the “right” people in power… Or perhaps, the system itself is corrupt and evil? That no matter how many of the “right” people are sent to fill those slots, the results are unlikely to change?

      Perhaps the entire idea of majority rule, is illegitimate on its face? Unless one considers force/power to be
      the most important part of human interaction?

      Let me get this straight. Because some one has won a popularity contest (which is all an election actually is). They then get to wear the Funny Hat™. Which means that the big men with (clubs/spears/swords/guns) follow their orders? Which is what their “authority”, is based up?…

      I give you government explained.

  5. As a “Republi-Tarian,” my major beefs with the Libertarian platform are:

    1. Immigration. We cannot allow uncontrolled immigration — a country without secure borders is no country at all. Uncontrolled immigration is a threat to our nation for many reasons, not least of which is public health and safety.

    2. Free trade. Free trade is how we lost so much of our manufacturing base and the well-paying jobs that go with it. It’s also how so much of our intellectual property has been stolen, and how we’ve become economically dependent on China.

    3. Laissez-Faire. Although I’m not a fan of regulation, I’m not a fan of a totally laissez-faire country either. After all, we aren’t saints, and Big Business is just as great a threat, if not greater, threat to our freedom and livelihood as Big Government. We need some level of regulation to keep them in check.

    But I agree that the USA should get out of the global empire world police business in favor of the Swiss model of armed neutrality, be reasonable economically self-reliant, not be in the business of corporate welfare, nor try to legislate morality, among other things.

    Trouble is, that used to be the majority view of most Americans, and the government once reflected that. It no longer does. I am confident, though, that what can’t go on forever won’t.

    • Immigration would be a no-brainer if the congress-critters didn’t pass laws to enable illegals to have things not available to legal citizens. It’s not a border problem, it’s a corporation problem.

      Laissez-Faire hasn’t existed except on underground levels for many decades. Think about it. And when govt. thinks some bidness is Laissez-Faire, it does it’s best to destroy it. Free trade is great, just take govt’s. out of the equation. It works against us more than it does for us because of govt.

      A woman I know has a bad case of some symptom like TMJ but severe. So she and her husband bought expensive insurance they couldn’t afford so she could get the really expensive treatment she needs to be fixed. After going to the doc that figured it out and told her he could fix it but it turned out to be(controlled govt. rates via AMA)too expensive even with insurance. So he asks her “You wouldn’t happen to be an illegal would you?” She says “no, I’m born and raised Texan”. He says “Too bad about that. If you were an illegal it wouldnt’ cost you a penny”.

      And people wonder why illegals want to come to the US. I broke my leg in a really bad way. I had to sit in line, sweating bullets, behind a huge amount of illegals. This was the day after I broke it. Once the doc looked at it he complimented me for using an air cast and setting it so well. Then he said “What took so long, didn’t think it was gonna heal?”. And that’s another story.

    • Bryce , immigration would be a non issue in a sane (libertarian) system. Why? Because all property would be private.

      It was much less of an issue, before that bastard Teddy Kennedy. pushed a law through in 1965, that changed what had worked for so long.

      Open borders in the current system, are not only unwise, but actually insane.

      Free trade is an ideal. It doesn’t exist in the real world. In a real free trade system, governments on any side, wouldn’t have ANYTHING to do with it. Thats obviously not what happens now.

      Governments on all sides, are corrupted by the influence of special interests. That is why we see all of the nonsense that we do in terms of trade.

      As for the loss of jobs, thats what happens when government (on all levels) makes doing business in the US, with American citizens, so expensive, that its much cheaper to send those jobs out of the country. Once again, thank the globalists and their corruption of government for this.

      Are you starting to see a pattern here? In the VAST number of cases, government is at the root of the serious problems we face.

      As for Laissez-Faire, again its an ideal. Do you know what makes the Big (agro/pharma/insurance/banking) mafia’s possible? Government. Without governments sanction and protection, NONE of those would exist in anything like their current form. You do know that corporations themselves (as legal entities), wouldn’t (couldn’t) exist without government sanctions?

      In a real private enterprise system, any business would be subject to full market forces. That includes competition on price and quality. Those that provide the best customer experience would thrive. Those that didn’t, would go out of business. Which is why the Big’s HATE real private enterprise. Absent government, the market itself would provide all the regulation that is required.

      You are quite correct, in that what can’t go on, will not. We are very likely approaching what I call End Game.
      Look for major dislocations, and chaotic reactions in the not too distant future.

      • I have tried to argue order of operations with many who call themselves libertarians (including at least one major libertarian website owner) on immigration. They just don’t get it. They don’t understand that we will never get to liberty without minding a proper order. Open borders is something for a libertarian world. It’s one of the end goals, one of the benefits of successfully spreading liberty. Until then, those who oppose liberty will use immigration to make sure they hold on to power, to engineer society. Libertarianism doesn’t work in random pieces.

        • Hi Brent,

          It’d be interesting to see what the effect would be on migration if the entitlement spigot were turned off. Welcome to come and work. Unwelcome to come and leech. This used to be the general practice; i.e., immigrants were required to demonstrate they were capable of supporting themselves, that they were not coming to collect their “free” (paid by us) lunch.

          This is what I wish Trump or some other national level politician would advocate. Doing so would eliminate the “nativist” and “racist” charges invariably leveled. No, amigo – we just can’t afford to give the world a “free” lunch. Or health care and schools for their kids, either.

          • Until recently, instead of supporting immigrants, a multitude of roadblocks were put in their path. A great many of them were despicably bigoted. Never the less, what that accomplished was that immigrants had to be industrious to survive. Now the most difficult obstruction to immigration is getting here. Once they do, they are “entitled” to a bonanza of stolen wealth. Compared to the native economy many of them left, the poorest among us are living on easy street.

            • Very true. I can’t really blame the people involved. Its in their and their families best interests. But we simply can not afford them coming here.

              Neither economically, nor politically. Make no mistake, demographics IS destiny. Which is why those behind this insanity, are flooding western civilization with foreign invaders.

              Its all part of their plan to destroy the very foundation of western civilization. Its similar to the Maoist attacks on the Four Olds.

  6. Confiscating the property of one at gun point and giving it to another is not charity at all. Its armed robbery for the purpose of enslavement. Of course that doesn’t stop those who are on the receiving end from claiming it is “charity”, noble and just. If one realizes the origin of coercive government, it becomes much more clear. It is nothing more nor less than a marauding gang that instead of raping all the women, enslaving what they could support, stealing all they could carry, and burning and killing the rest, they settled down in place and bled their victims in perpetuity. Politics is the art of convincing the victims that its good for them.

    • Hi JWK,

      Yup. Government is literally a mind fuck. Decrypt it. Govern – obvious… then ment … the mind. Control of the mind. And thereby, of the body.

      That which would be obviously immoral if performed by any individual becomes “moral” (gaslighting inversion) when it is “the law.” I can’t (and would not, even if I could) steal your money without being recognized as a thief and deserving of punishment. But by a process of psychological enslavement, other people can legally steal and you aren’t allowed to defend yourself against it.

      That is quite something.

      • Politician: One who is the most often successful getting the most people to believe the most preposterous lies. Nearly always a psychopath of one sort or another.
        Government: A gang of politicians.

      • eric, Regardless of position, all govt. jobs are performed by or at least created by psychopaths. There are ways to fund many things without putting a gun to people’s head.

        Now we have so many words that have been turned upside down. Just read an article where these young athletes(football players)who I can guarantee have no idea of working for a living since it was that way even when I was young, are protesting ‘The Eyes of Texas’, UT’s theme song. Not that a give a shit since I have never liked the song even as a child. But they’re wanting UT to give up their “official song”, and yep, because it is racist. Seems the tune is originally from a black minstrel as if anyone knew that, even if it is true, or gives a shit.

        It always hit me wrong since it’s a threatening song. The eyes of Texas are upon you, all the livelong day. The eyes of Texas are upon you, you cannot get away. Do not think you can escape them from night till early in the morn. Then they throw in some Bapdiss stuff, The eyes of Texas are upon you til Gabriel blows his horn.

        I have always hated the song but all the alumni are bent out of shape. I’d be bent out of shape just because a bunch of little shits tell me anything that isn’t overtly racist is racist and they DEMAND it go be dropped. I’m so disgusted with the idiots in this country I can’t begin to say how much.

  7. Lincoln said it most succinctly, ”… dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

    Not all men are created equal, it is easy to see what really is when you work with mentally and physically handicapped individuals. People who are scarred for life simply because they were abused as children by parents is what you see, it hurts to see it too. The damage done is irreparable, the person needs to be a ward of the state for his or hers entire lifetime. It is sad to see and even more difficult to deal with the circumstances, hard to handle the truth.

    Cognitive dissonance becomes apparent when you realize that in places around the world, Christian lives hardly matter.

    Not at all. So why should anyone’s life matter if a Christian is persecuted by all those who would impose their will or dominate them politically and physically?

    If a Christian who was once an devout Muslim, an apostate, they can be put to death, then no one’s life matters.

    Never mind.

    All of those rioters in every city across the fruited plain got there somehow, a mode of transportation, trains, planes, automobiles, so it is a pertinent issue on an auto blog. har

    Lew Rockwell’s site brought me here.

    You can burn it down and suffer the consequences. It don’t get no better.

    Is this a great country or what?

  8. Thomas Jefferson was no dummy, but he probably should have employed an editor to clarify his statement “that all men are created equal “ to reflect its true meaning – “All men are born equally free and independent and have certain inherent natural [inalienable] rights of which they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; among which are the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

  9. I tore up my LP membership card back around 2004 when I realized that they were morphing into Republicans Lite. I also came to realize that electoral politics and libertarian principles are incompatible polar opposites of one another.

    • I too once held such a card. Not for long. Not after it occurred to me that it matters not what any particular party may espouse, if they agree to participate in a system that denies liberty as its basic premise. Not once I got over the delusion that this pile of male bovine fecal matter would work just fine if we had the “right” people in charge. Not once I realized that anyone who joined in its criminal activity would be either ineffectual, or would transform into just another criminal. The state does not pay people to be noble, virtuous, just, or any other positive characteristic. It pays them to be psychopathic tyrants. So psychopathic tyrants are what its composed of.

      • Hi JWK,

        I have difficulty understanding what is Libertarian about the Libertarian Party. It seems to me – based on the positions it espouses – to be a variant of conservative Republicanism when it comes to fiscal and foreign policy matters and a variant of liberal Democratic-ism when it comes to certain (but not all and never in principle) civil liberties issues.

        Ron Paul was the exception. Paul Ryan has been egregious

        • Oh NO! Don’t tell me you are another member of the “Paulian cult”?? Excuse me, while I wipe off my keyboard… ^^ Believe it or not, there are some who claim to be “libertarians”, that take a VERY dim view of people like Ron Paul, Rothbard, Lew Rockwell, and Mises.

          I consider Ron Paul, to be one of the VERY few examples, of someone who retained their personal principles, after being in the sewer that is Mordor on the Potomac, for decades. In my mind, he is a national treasure.

          He has brought the message of liberty, and principles to millions upon millions of people.

          As for “plotting to take over the world” while its no doubt a joke, it would likely violate the ZAP/NAP. Ends, do not justify the means used to achieve them.

          • The LP types want to go to the cocktail parties and be socially acceptable so they compromise. They don’t like those who refuse to compromise and don’t care about the social implications there of.

          • BJ, I dug out an old Ron Paul sign. I’m tempted to glue it to the back of the pickup or put it inside the gate where somebody would have to trespass to touch it. I won’t worry about it too much. This is the part of the country people wouldn’t take offense and don’t jack with someone else’s property.

            Back in 08, I was on the road quite a bit with my RV trailer. I had lots of young-uns pass me and honk like crazy and wave to me. I wrote his name in on the ballot. As far as I’m concerned, he’s the real deal. His name is THE ONLY ONE I have never considered the lesser of two evils. He gave the Republican party holy hell.

            • Indeed, the last time he ran for president I told my son “This is our last chance”. And the speed of the handcart to hell we are riding on has accelerated rapidly ever since.

    • I’m a pretty regular listener to Tom Wood’s podcast. He recently had Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen on separate episodes to introduce themselves. They’re going to be completely ignored by just about everyone else in politics, and I guess there was a lot of palace intrigue getting them the nomination, but it seems like the Mises caucus might have gotten who they wanted. For certain Jorgensen is much more interesting than the milquetoast Johnson was (“I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” -Revelation 3:15-16), and Cohen isn’t a Republican who doesn’t like Trump.

      While I still think Trump is the best nominee to keep the gears of government seized up, I will at least attempt to get non-libertarians to listen to her message.

    • Indeed. Politics is the art of governing others, and libertarianism is all about NOT governing others. Politics also self-selects for the sociopath, just for this reason, and too often the ultimate winner is the candidate with the fewest scruples.

      “…support Libertarians (or independents who support the same basic principles) all the time and from the ground up — for city councils, county/township trustees, school boards, etc.”

      The reason this doesn’t work is that (not all, but) most of the small committees in which the average politician first “makes his bones” (and I use that phrase in its original context) — school boards, zoning commissions, welfare departments, public university trustees, library boards, etc. — are entities which a principled libertarian believes should never exist in the first place. I have seen firsthand what happens to “principled” libertarians who get their feet wet in such circumstances — a man cannot serve two masters.

      A real-life example:

      “I did not campaign on the platform of dismantling the institution,” [the Libertarian community college director] said. “I campaigned on a simple platform of keeping the college effective, affordable for students and taxpayers and, more substantially, exporting some of the things that the college does well to other institutions that don’t do them as well.” More than once now, he’s had to choose between supporting or opposing a tax increase, the beneficiary of which is the very college he swore (by taking the job) to protect and serve. As a result, he has had to make choices, between doing the job he was elected to do, and upholding his Libertarian principle of no new taxes … which would mean NOT performing the duties as defined in the job description. (Most libertarians I know would consider that “committing fraud” against the voters who elected him!) And, in at least one instance, he has voted for the tax increase — because his job basically demanded that he do so!

      The personal qualities necessary for attaining office are practically the
      opposite of those demanded by the office itself. The trouble with the damn
      system is that it selects for the skills needed to get elected, and nothing
      else. A test that you can only pass by cheating can’t possibly select
      honest people.

      • Wow, sorry for the giant text — I just used a simple blockquote tag to set off the quote. I didn’t realize it would call out the National Guard! :-/

        • Henry, welcome to the wonderful world of format/command codes. ^^

          You are quite correct, in regards to serving two masters. That is what makes Ron Paul such an exception. He never lost sight of his personal principles. Even when in the sewer, that is Mordor on the Potomac.

          The entire system of illusions/delusions involved with government, is what allows that gang of thieves and murderers writ large, to continue to Rule.

          • And I stay in touch with Ron. He is exceptional. He never tried to serve anyone but the people in his district.
            He didn’t raise taxes, didn’t jack with the people who wanted to keep their guns and was glad to see them going to church as he did.

            Nobody like that these days except Massie and he gets a lot of shit from many for being regular and having common sense and not looting the people he served.

      • Hi Henry,

        Yup; this is the dilemma. Or rather, the false choice – as I see it, anyhow. Those of us who believe in free association, live and let live, etc. can pursue that in our own lives and articulate the ideas to others, such that perhaps they will take root and – over time – become popular and even dominant ideas. In other words, a moral/philosophical movement rather than a political one.

        At the same time, I think it’s acceptable to support the more freedom-leaning alternatives when the only other alternative is against freedom (or passivity in the face of the latter, which amounts to supporting it).

        Lenin was perhaps the most evil human being to ever live, yet that doesn’t mean one can’t take useful advice from him. He pursued his goal using both tactical and strategic methods. He allied himself with useful (his word) people. Thus, if Orange Man can be useful in terms of preventing the country from descending into outright socialism – and the horrors that portends – I won’t hesitate to vote “for” him, which is really to say I will against the alternative.

        • eric, cue the Fugs again. If it looks as though Trump is going to hopefully slaughter the dems, I’ll vote for Justin Amash. Trump keeps pissing me off but those who don’t know the history of what he’s done in the last 3.5 years.

          I wonder how many know he signed the CARES act in Jan. 2019. Signing that bill guarantees he knew, along with all the other billionaires, what was about to happen. It’s the very reason the wife and I spent a year trying to keep our bank account with just enough money(easy for us)to pay the bills and stuck the rest away in cash. I knew the Fed was going to crash. I had no idea how they’d cover it up until Covid hit and I knew immediately what was going to happen. We doubled down. Ok, we don’t have anything but SS so we can’t double down on anything but we thought having some fairly worthless fiat bills would be better than the chance of having the ones and zeroes disappear from our bank account.

          It sorta chaps my ass that everyone was unaware the Fed was going to rip us off again. I give little hope for this country to turn around with the Brawndo crowd being the people who vote and cheer for the red, white and blue. The antifa idiots are obviously children no matter how old or skinny-fat they are. They had lots of food in the CHOP but had to order pizza since no one knew how to cook. And that sums up the country, a bunch of overfed, over-pampered fools and that includes people my age.

  10. Albert Jay Nock’s “Our Enemy the State” includes some brilliant and informative insight as to the motivations of the “founding fathers”. They were all in the very lucrative land grabbing business (through many different competing companies of the time), and when the crown told them they can’t do that any more in 1763, that’s when they decided they would declare their independence. For business reasons.

    Nock says, “It is interesting to observe the names of persons concerned in these undertakings (land grabbing); one cannot escape the significance of this connection in view of their attitude towards the revolution, and their subsequent career as statesmen and patriots.”

    The motivations of politicians are ALWAYS to transfer your resources into their and their friends’ pockets using the force of the state. This is why I will NEVER participate in politics in any form. Morality won’t allow it.

    I would sooner murder a politician than vote for it. There could be soothing moral justifications made for political action of that sort.

  11. Kurt Vonnegut’s scenario in Harrison Bergeron, of ballet dancers selected for LACK of grace and dancing ability, sticks in my mind to this day.

    Contemporary examples abound. Barely literate, innumerate journalists write authoritatively on topics about which they know nothing. Herd instinct dictates that they gravitate toward an uninformed consensus, which may be wildly wrong but at least signals virtuous, approved thinking.

    In Jefferson’s day, contrarian antifederalists bravely asserted that the proposed Constitution would nullify state sovereignty. They proved to be correct, while Madison’s blue-sky promises in the Federalist Papers read today as airy b.s.: wrong across the board, and perhaps even insincere.

    Every revolution is followed by counter-revolution within a generation or so. US independence coincided with a brief high tide of natural rights philosophy; the Declaration of Independence is a snapshot of that enlightened moment.

    Unfortunately, instead of guaranteeing the Bill of Rights, the counterrevolutionary US fedgov uses it as a HIT LIST. Likewise with the core document: the Article I stipulation that Congress stick to coining money from gold and silver was fatally subverted by thieving crony banksters in 1913, with the ‘Federal’ [sic] Reserve Act.

    Now the digital printing presses ominously rumble day and night, vainly seeking to paper over unfunded, idle promises of social benefits which cannot possibly be delivered as real goods and services.

    Like the former British global empire, as well as the former Soviet regional empire, the US “sole superpower” is visibly crumbling, even as its empty macho posturing reaches caricaturish World Wide Wrestling Federation levels.

    Two roads diverge in a graying future: either government checks flat-out bounce, or they are paid in inflated, worthless currency. And not one DemonRat or Repugnican will do a g.d. thing about it. Their role is to flog the horses to run harder, as our wagon plunges over the cliff.

    Sic transit imperium, MFers.

      • That is not entirely statistically accurate. A number of extraordinarily intelligent people can raise the average to the point that MORE than half the people are below average intelligence, and vice versa. Half the population is below the MEAN intelligence is more accurate. It is however, a quite effective statement none the less.

        • Oh I know. But Carlin was a comic, not an accountant. It used to drive me nuts when higher-ups ran reports that used average numbers instead of median, especially because it was so simple to change one function in Excel and completely change the accuracy of the worksheet. Of course I’m sure they did what they did for office politics, since one big sale could make or break a manager’s month.

        • Intelligence over a very large population should a perfect bell curve and as such the median and the average will be the same value or so close as to be not worthy of arguing about.

    • I did, using several syntaxes. I can’t find any mention of it. Can you post an obfuscated URL if that’s what it takes?

  12. Why am I reading this on a car blog?

    Thank you Eric. You’ve explained the problem perfectly. If you assume unequal outcome is due to unequal opportunity, not just that humans are physically unequal, then of course the proper response is to apply various handicaps to those who might be at an evolutionary advantage. And those who would impose those handicaps on others would surly exempt themselves, if only to “better determine the proper type and amount of handicaps administered.” It’s a dirty job but someone’s got to do it, right?

    I’ve been thinking about the Soviet Union over the past few weeks, as I’m sure many here are. Rand might have been an obtuse jerk but she did have a point about selfishness as a driver of humans. I donate freely to many charities. I do it because I believe that is the best way to undermine government overreach, but also because it does give me a sense of well being. We’re preprogrammed to want to help other members of the group, at least if you buy into the theories of Jung. But there are people who are able to take that evolutionary trait and manipulate it for their own gain, and they’re able to find willing accomplices in the state. But using the blunt force of the state is not in any way charitable. That’s why most humans have a visceral disgust and anger when it comes to seeing the waste in government charities, and why we all hate paying taxes (except those who have accepted the Orwellian concept of the state). And why these programs never seem to eliminate the problems for which they were designed.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here