Category Archives: Political Philosophy

Alex Berenson Gets A Fail For Blackening Joe Rogan For His Impolitic, Impolite Speech

Conservatism, Cultural Marxism, Culture, Etiquette, Free Speech, Intellectualism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Media, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Race, Racism

Serious libertarians and conservatives will study and absorb the following principles articulated about the thought crime that is racism and the attendant impolite and impolitic speech that often accompanies it:

  • “Racism—systemic or other—remains nothing but thought crime: Impolite and impolitic thoughts, spoken, written or preached.”—ILANA Mercer,‘Systemic Racism’ Or Systemic Rubbish?” August 6, 2020.
  • “Thought crimes are nobody’s business in a free society.”—ILANA Mercer,‘Systemic Racism’ Or Systemic Rubbish?” August 6, 2020.
  • “A lot of establishment libertarians and conservatives have joined the neoconservative and neoliberal establishments in the habit of sniffing out racists. Sniffing out racists is an absolute no-no for any and all self-respecting libertarians (and conservatives). True libertarians don’t, or should not, prosecute thought crimes or persecute thought ‘criminals.’ Period.”—ILANA Mercer, Big League Politics, Interview With Ilana Mercer, November 23, 2018.

Consider those fundamentals and, in commitment to liberty, you will shrug off Joe Rogan’s speech of many years back as rude and uncouth, albeit rooted in a realistic stereotype, and leave it at that—no more rude and uncouth than the plethora of “cracker”-hating, anti-white pejoratives emitted approvingly by blacks, who are cheered when they rail against a group that isn’t remotely associated with high crime and social disruption.

Rogan was referencing a video compilation that features him in various contexts using the racial slur. It also includes him comparing being in the presence of Black people with the film Planet of the Apes. The video has gone viral online and was highlighted by musician India Arie in an Instagram Story she posted Thursday.

Thus when Alex Berenson acts as a racism-spotting scold-–an old biddy deploying cliches like, “I don’t know what’s in his heart” (oh, fuck off; it matters not. Rogan is a peaceful, productive human being)—Berenson deserves and earns contempt.

Rogan’s use of the n-word – and that Planet of the Apes story – are indefensible and humiliating and will haunt him for the rest of his career.
Our woke revolution has brought lots of linguistic rules I’ll argue. Not this one. That word has a unique history and power that give it a unique ugliness. The only slur remotely close might be “kike,” though even it doesn’t compare.

Fox News darling Alex Berenson has a pattern—has already proven to be a self-promoting weasel, using a TV segment to try and take out Robert Malone, who shot him down with a smile, no sweat, like the high IQ, classy gentleman and scholar he clearly is. Watch.

For his part, Rogan must get off his knees and quit apologizing. He’s worth $100 Million (it is an intellectually impoverish market place that has resulted in that sorry reality).  Rumble is pleased to pay that sum–as well as reinstate his verboten speech removed by the illiberal scolds.

UPDATED (12/24) On Being A Man*: NEW COLUMN: Extradited! Why Assange Fears Being ‘Epsteined’

Ethics, Free Speech, Globalism, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Law, libertarianism, Liberty, Morality, Political Philosophy, The Establishment, The State, War

NEW COLUMN: It suddenly struck me: Most men are cowards. How many men have the courage and character to step up and honor the highest principles or the best of humanity when they encounter these? Too few. Most live defensively or ignorantly, betraying the good for the bad. That’s why men like Assange are so impressive and important and true. They show us the way. While most men live in-thrall to miserable entities or people and the bonds they impose; Assange has shown us the right way to live within our own orbits; dangerously, if you must, never on your knees; bravely seeking that which is the best and the finest—be they principles or people.

Julian Assange has given his life in the cause of exposing global state and corporate corruption and the collusion betwixt. He should be thanked for his service, for Assange did not enlist to do The State’s bidding in futile, wicked wars in faraway lands. Rather, he went-up against the Administrative, Warfare, Surveillance State for The People.

Therefore, all state agents—media-military-congressional complex; local and global—want this, the greatest libertarian alive (if barely) to disappear. Never mind that First-Amendment jurisprudence is clear-cut with respect to the guerrilla journalism of WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks operators have committed no crime in publishing what is undeniably true, newsworthy information, with probative value. Besides, why has America any jurisdiction over a foreign entity (WikiLeaks) and a foreign national (Julian Assange)?

Well, America has jurisdiction over Assange because it has simply asserted it based on trumped-up charges equating his journalism with espionage. Which is why Assange now fears being “Epsteined.”

THE NEW COLUMN is “Extradited! Why Assange Fears Being ‘Epsteined’”. Read it on WND.COM, Townhall.com and the Unz Review.

UPDATE (12/24): An honest man asks on Twitter how to become courageous. Am I an authority? No! I just try my best, in writing—having never betrayed my first principles for popularity or pelf—and in living, in charity and in loving and helping those who see me.

I have, however,  known people who never step up and are mired in cowardice, wasting their considerable mentation and manhood on being frightened in the quest for equilibrium (personally and politically); or  gulling themselves into believing that when they serve the wrong people and principles—they are ever-so good. Contempt is what they deserve. When encountering good people, fighting the good fight, doing good work—every person can honor that and help, rather than hinder.

My humble reply to Sean: “Within our orbits we can all try to stand up for the principles and people that matter and make a difference and need our energies most. So, I thank YOU for joining me here.”

* The “man” noun here is used in the traditional sense, as mankind. I include myself, a woman, as part of mankind. Your fucking sexual or gender orientation matters not. Quit the pronoun crap. That is another first principle: never dignify nonsense, including linguistic bafflegab. I write and think in English. So should you.

UPDATE (11/16/021): NEW Video: Take Your Medicine, Little Man, Or Lose Your Meal Ticket

COVID-19, Globalism, Healthcare, Individual Rights, Labor, Political Philosophy, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Science, THE ELITES, The State

Working Brits have more COVID liberty than Americans – really! On vax mandates, Pfizer’s ‘new’ pill, and the latest on ‘charmless’ Greta Thunberg

America, wake up! The British, from whom we seceded for freedom’s sake, don’t have vaccine mandates. These particular individual rights are more protected in the UK than in the US.

This week’s Hard Truth with David Vance and yours truly teases out the difference between British and American vaccine-mandate tyranny: The US loses. And, it’s not even close!

The World Health Organization has redefined what vaccines are whilst Pfizer produces a Pill less effective than Ivermectin, costs vastly more, yet works in the same way as a protease inhibitor!

Finally, global warming activist Greta Thunberg goes death metal! To this poor, singularly charmless girl we say, “Growl on Greta!”

Watch: “Take Your Medicine, Little Man, Or Lose Your Meal Ticket

https://rumble.com/embed/vmg837/?pub=fyb9t

Listen via the Hard Truth podcast to “Take Your Medicine, Little Man, Or Lose Your Meal Ticket.

UPDATE (11/16/021): Lose your meal ticket and your freedom of movement:

The Left is Hitlerian! Austria has placed the unvaccinated under house arrest. The Austrian government now deserves to be reminded of its past: Anschluss, its collaboration with Hitler and its virulent, deadly Anti-Semitism.

UPDATE II (12/21/021): NEW COLUMN: Centralize Liberty: The Solution To Wicked, Woke Tech (Part 3)

Free Speech, Individual Rights, Justice, Labor, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Natural Law, Political Philosophy, Private Property, Republicans, Technology, The Courts, THE ELITES

NEW COLUMN: “Centralize Liberty: The Solution To Wicked, Woke Tech,” is now on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews, and The New American.

This column is Part 3 of a 3-part series. Read Part 1, “Big Tech’s Financial Terrorism And Social Excommunication” and Part 2, “Justice Thomas’ Solution to Big Tech’s Social And Financial Excommunication.”

An excerpt:

It is inarguable that by financially crippling and socially segregating, and banishing politically irksome people and enterprises—the Big Tech cartel is flouting the spirit, if not the strict letter, of the Civil Rights Act.

For how do you make a living if your banking options are increasingly curtailed and constantly threatened, and your ability to electronically communicate with clients is likewise circumscribed?

Do you go back to a barter economy (a book for some bread)? Do you go underground? Cultivate home-based industries? Do you keep afloat by word of mouth? Go door-to-door? Return to stamping envelopes? How can you, when your client base is purely electronic?

Telling an individual he can’t open a bank account on account of the beliefs and opinions swirling in his head teeters on informing your innocent victim he might not be able to make a living, as do other, politically more polite Americans, and despite his innocence: Our only “offenses” as dissidents are thought crimes, namely, speaking, or typing or wafting into the air unpopular, impolite words.

“[I]n assessing whether a company exercises substantial market power,” Justice Clarence Thomas has argued, “what matters is whether the alternatives are comparable. For many of today’s digital platforms, nothing is.”

To paraphrase this Supreme Court jurist: Sure, there are alternatives to The Big Tech, but these make a mockery of the outcast. It would hardly be hyperbole, in driving home Justice Thomas’s point about comparability, to put it thus:

With respect to financial de-platforming, barring someone from PayPal is like prohibiting a passenger from crossing the English Channel by high-speed train, via ferry and by means of 90 percent of airplanes. “Have at it sucker.”

By Deep Tech decree, some Americans are worth more than others, based not on their actions, but on the voiced thoughts in their heads. This cannot stand.

The letter of the law needs changing. Do it.

Civil Rights Act

Thus, the preferred remedy to Deep Tech depredations would build upon existing Civil Rights Act jurisprudence.

As a reality-oriented conservative libertarian, I inhabit and theorize in the real world. From the conservative-libertarian’s perspective, Barry Goldwater got it right. Civil Rights law is an ass, for it infringes on property rights. But the onus is on flaccid Republican lawmakers to ensure that that ass can be ridden by all equally (with apologies to adorable, much-abused donkeys for the cruel metaphor).

These are existing laws that are already enforced. I see no reason to reject the application of civil rights solutions to wicked, woke bullies because existing laws that’ll never be repealed go against my core beliefs. What is libertarianism? The art of losing in life because of a slavish devotion to theoretical purity? …

NEW COLUMN, “Centralize Liberty: The Solution To Wicked, Woke Tech,” can be read now on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews, and The New American.

UPDATED (10/26/021) I:

UPDATE II (12/21/021) II: “Berenson v. Twitter“:

Twitter is indisputably a messenger service. A longstanding California law regulates messenger services as “common carriers.” This means that they must accept all messages they receive. Twitter thus must accept all tweets it receives. It has no First Amendment rights to refuse them on the basis that it does not agree with them.
A federal law commonly called Section 230 “preempts” the California law, giving Twitter the right to reject tweets or ban users. (Whether that right is universal or whether Twitter must act in “good faith” in restricting service is a separate question; whether Twitter acted in “good faith” in this case is still another question. But put those issues aside for the moment.)
Section 230 is what enables Twitter to claim a First Amendment privilege that supersedes the California law and restrict my own First Amendment right to speak; thus federal courts have the right to review 230 on First Amendment grounds.

MORE.