Everything below this update was written 3 years ago or so. And my views have changed a lot. The wojak compass image below has been my political journey:
Below is what the old bio said that was written in late 2016:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I’m sure you’ll argue that I’m not a true libertarian, and you’re probably right. I just struggle between trying to avoid the baggage that comes with a label, but also not wanting to just cop out of admitting my biases by saying I’m a “centrist.” So read my rambles and decide what you want to call me…
For the record, I’m registered as an independent with the State. But labeling yourself as “an independent” is kind of like saying you like “all kinds of music” just to avoid confrontation. We all have our leanings and I generally agree with libertarians the most… “minarchist” libertarians, to be exact.
So, I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012 before I really delved into politics and discovered what a numbskull he is. So for 2016 I voted Trump. As far as the Non-Aggression Principle goes, I don’t really care about it but understand that it is the foundation of most libertarian philosophies. I just don’t think it’s practical and I’m not a fan of being dogmatic about anything. Which is why I don’t really agree with the hardcore Anarcho-Capitalist types. These pics may be false ultimatums, but they actually sum up my sympathy for Alt Right fashy politics quite well. If current demographic trends continue, there will be no more people who vote for limited government. I know it’s uncomfortable to admit, but just look at the numbers:
Keyword is “if.” Usually these hysterical projections are proven wrong by some unforeseeable invention or world event. That’s why I am waiting to go up in arms. But if the time comes, I’m all for noble violence; it seems to be the only thing marxist scum understand. And perhaps only then can the libertarian utopia be achieved. (Oof. Sounds a bit Bolshevik, doesn’t it? That’s why I’m weary of such revolutionary ideologies.) Maybe we’re just caught in the r/K cycle and the only way to move forward is to speed up our Empire’s collapse? Who knows?
Let’s wait a bit though, shall we? Not only because we may usher in an even worse regime as violent revolutions tend to do, but also because our principles do matter. It’s okay to flirt with “ends justify the means” tactics, but we can’t forget what makes “our side” the righteous one. And as 1791L points out, the optics of rationality and kindness have converted so many to the right. The more SJW’s and Antifa chimp out, the more middle of the road folks get redpilled.
As for the latter half of my pseudonym, I’m an agnostic/atheist (depending on your definition), but recognize the superiority of WASP values, and the crucial role they play in a healthy country. Yeah, you’re welcome, Hong Kong.
Well, actually it seems like Protestant countries may have spawned capitalism but as of late I’m starting to think that those countries burn the candle at both ends. So they tend to be more advanced and less corrupt in comparison to Catholic/Eastern Orthodox countries, but without the emphasis on family values it seems they devolve into ethnomasochistic self-destruction (E.g. Sweden, London‘s mayor). Perhaps nepotism and a propensity towards communism are worth still existing as Poland does. Or maybe, the combination of Asian respect for elders/community combined with capitalism and Christian morality is the ideal to strive for?
Who knows? It’s apples and oranges, because it’s like saying we should immitate Singapore’s benevolent dictatorship that happens to work well for their tiny peninsula, or apply socialized health care on a a giant, multiethnic empire like America because it worked well in Sweden. Tough to say… Though, one thing that has been tested time and time again, all around the world, is that The State tends to unleash unspeakable horror and oppression onto its people if unchecked.
Which is why I lean towards the bottom two quadrants of the political compass. I think all drugs should be decriminalized, and the gov’t should stay out of almost everything. IMHO, the gov’t should only intervene to prevent the most severe monopolies, most dire human rights violations, and most toxic pollution. Problem is, how do you agree on where to draw the line? I’d argue that more often than not their good intentions just make things worse. Speaking of which, I vehemently oppose the idealistic naive libertarians who think a nation can exist with open borders and minimal military expenses. Personally, the only people I know who support open borders are either champagne socialists who live a sheltered life, or willfully ignorant folks who don’t feel comfortable talking about genetics and culture.
Like many libertarians, I have found myself becoming a bit more radical thanks to the recent “““refugee””” crisis and demographic shifts happening globally. We need to have an honest conversation about what makes a nation if we are to continue our way of life. But as I stated above, I think most of the Alt Right folks who are willing to have this convo, go a bit too extreme, and are naive in their own right. Absolute power, corrupts absolute. Revolution and/or martial law should be a last resort; a gamble you take to keep your freedoms, not an ideal to strive for. But if it comes to it, you better believe I will fight and die for my people. As a defender. We really oughta’ stop meddling in international affairs as much…
I get it. We can’t be 100% isolationist. Whether we like it or not, our action or inaction determines the state of the globe. But our track record since WW2 has been atrocious. Wikileaks has confirmed (yet again) that the military industrial complex, neocons, and uniparty have been pushing for endless wars in the Middle East.
Granted, this is behind closed doors and American citizens are being manipulated, but voters wouldn’t support the “liberation” excuse if they had a better understanding of the world. Maybe it’s foolish to try and force a country made up of tribal pedophiles living in the stone age to accept Jeffersonian democracy. Maybe Syrians are better off with Assad and maybe the Russians are like the Klingons which require a strong pseudo-fascist dictator to rule them.
Whatever the truth may be, it’s NONE. OF. OUR. BUSINESS. Why don’t we focus on our own backyard first? Maybe there wouldn’t be a 9/11 or Orlando attack or the need for 1984 style surveillance if we just didn’t let them in in the first place.
Gosh. But if we did that, we might be like Japan. We wouldn’t want increased social cohesion and market efficiency would we? I mean, what about their shrinking population? Who’s gonna’ take care of their elderly? Robots? Pshh. Third World Migrants sound much better, thank you very much. Remember: “diversity is our strength.“
My opinions on the following issues are a bit more nuanced and I’m on the fence for most:
This is where my free market principles fall short. I am a bit of a protectionist in some cases. Not everyone is playing by the same rules in this ever increasing global economy. China manipulates their currency and lies about their GDP. Their blatant disregard for international copyrights is so absurd it’s laughable. In one case, they had the gall to use profits from a bootleg, to buy out the original company suing them for bootlegging:
Which is why I am hopeful and open to Trump’s tariffs. How can we compete in the “international free market” unless we are willing to stoop down to the level of immoral regimes? Typically, tariffs have shown to be a horrible practice, but maybe he can balance it out with his massive regulation cuts? Maybe if trade is determined on an individual 1:1 basis instead of bureaucratic clusterf❏❏ks like TPP, then tariffs and currency manipulation will be like a new form of meta capitalism.
Each country will be incentivized to minimize regulation and sparingly use tariffs until an equilibrium is met. For example, the “4-D Chess” of cutting domestic coal regulations, while simultaneously establishing further coal trade with China, just as they are encouraged to put a coal embargo on their troublesome little brother, Kim Jong-un. Maybe this is the future of globalism when done right and with realistic approaches to human nature. Nationalism is natural, and doesn’t automatically lead to imperialism. This isn’t a zero sum game. Anyway, perhaps I’m too idealistic, let’s wait and see…
I fully support eugenics/euthanasia if done humanely and voluntarily. The authors of “Freakonomics” largely attribute the 1990’s decrease in crime to the 1970’s Roe v. Wade decision. Sounds like a good thing for the greater good if you don’t believe in souls. Nevermind the subjective arguments that point out how “human” a fetus looks at certain stages. I want to know at what point do we value its consciousness? But to be honest, I’m glad there is a push to make abortion a states’ rights decision, because so many people are torn on this issue. Besides, the Supreme Court has gained too much power; who keeps ’em in check? And I imagine, late term abortion is gonna’ be something we look back on with disgust in the same way we do towards slavery and child labor.
But as with the moral debate of being vegan, I don’t think society will change until the free market produces synthetic meat that is cheaper and more delicious than the real deal. Regardless of how many animal cruelty PETA videos or ultrasounds you see, it comes down to convenience, groupthink, and out-of-sight out-of-mind. “That life isn’t important because X.” C’est la vie. Morons will continue to use abortion as a form of birth control until someone invents a safe, insensible, WiFi controlled, semen zapper.
Which is why I really appreciate religion. It makes these issues a lot simpler. And it really pisses me off to see the Christian portrayed as the bad guy over and over again. In my life, the people I trust the most and who do the most good, tend to be brought up as Christians. It’s no longer brave to depict a WestBoro Baptist Church cliché. I love Dogma, but how ’bout they make a sequel about Islam? Think Ben Afflack would have the chutzpah to do it?
Yeah, me neither…
The pseudo-intellectual, militant atheists of Hollywood only pick on easy targets. I’m sick of it! I’m all for getting “In God We Trust” off our bills in support of separation of church and state, but why the cultural push to pressure private businesses like Starbucks? Grrrr. That’s why, even as an unbeliever, I eagerly point out and try to combat Hollywood bullying Christians. “Politics is downstream from culture.” And dagnabbit, Secularism & Protestantism in harmony are what made America great!
Ricky Gervais’ “The Invention of Lying” encapsulates my views towards Christianity pretty well, and Regina Spektor’s song “Laughing With” beautifully illustrates my annoyance with those privileged snobs who look down on religion.
Enjoy!
(Too bad she’s a typical “Trump is like literally Hitler” entertainer who sees the world through childish and emotional analogies.)
Don’t think simple questionnaires accurately represent people but they’re fun and give an idea, I guess. These were my results from two different political compass sites, so maybe I’m between the 2 dots?
Also here are my 8 values test results:
(I would never describe myself as a neo-liberal, but the percentages seem about right.)
Hope you enjoy my reviews, and if you have any concerns please leave a comment below or send an email to our editor.
Thank you!
Reviews by Libertarian Agnostic:
Search all Staff Reviews from STFU Hollywood:
