The Libertarian Party of Chicago defends free speech, affirms non-aggression in wake of UC Berkeley riot

The Libertarian Party strongly supports the Constitutional rights to freedom of speech, religion, expression, and assembly, and furthermore, stands committed to the principle of non-aggression. Indeed, the initiation of force in order to silence one’s political adversaries is directly opposed to the freedoms that America holds dear. It is because of these principles that The Libertarian Party of Chicago officially states our condemnation of the violence and aggression that occurred at UC Berkeley on the night of February 1, 2017. That evening, masked protesters took to the campus grounds of California’s flagship university and violently prevented conservative editorialist Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking. As Libertarians, we recognize the legitimate right to peacefully demonstrate against Mr. Yiannopoulos’ message, but we firmly condemn as illegitimate the violence and intimidation engaged in by some protesters to block Mr. Yiannopoulos’ right to speak.
The Libertarian Party takes an ethical stance against aggression of any kind used to achieve one’s aims, be they political, economic, or to block another individual’s right to speak and express his or herself. Further, we recognize that using violence and intimidation to achieve one’s political aims is the very definition of terrorism. While we do not agree with various aspects of Mr. Yiannopoulos’ message, we do fully support his right to speak at an event to which he was invited.

Reports indicate that some protesters threw bricks and shot fireworks at police and at the building in which Mr. Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak. Police barricades were used as battering rams to break windows and force entry into campus buildings. Video has emerged of masked protesters viciously beating people to the point of unconsciousness, using pepper spray on objectors to the protest, and blocking and attacking passing vehicles. While not all protesters are reported to have engaged in these acts of violence, those that did have lent their illegitimacy to the message that the peaceful protesters were attempting to communicate. Furthermore, we do not hold UC Berkeley responsible for the violent actions taken against Mr. Yiannopoulos, nor do we hold the majority of protesters responsible for the actions of a violent few.

This violence hits close to home for Chicagoans. On March 11th, 2016, protesters disrupted a Donald Trump rally at the University of Illinois Chicago campus, causing the protest to be canceled before Mr. Trump could take the stage. Protesters started fights with rally attendees, rushed the stage and briefly took over the microphone, while outside more protesters gathered, some blocking ambulances from taking the wounded to receive medical treatment.

Two months later, Mr. Yiannopoulos spoke at DePaul University in Chicago, where he was interrupted by hecklers. He was eventually forced to leave prematurely when protesters broke into the event, took over the stage and the microphone, and began hurling insults at the spectators.

We stand for the rights of all individuals to speak, assemble and express themselves freely — and we stand against the use of violence, force, intimidation, and aggression to rob others of these inherent rights. We find this alarming trend of intimidation and violence in the face of opposing opinions to be unacceptable behavior in a civilized society, and as Libertarians, we firmly condemn such methods. We welcome those who feel the same to join our cause as either a member or an ally.

In Liberty,

The Libertarian Party of Chicago
www.LPChicago.org

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party on by .

About Caryn Ann Harlos

Caryn Ann Harlos is a paralegal residing in Castle Rock, Colorado and presently serving as the Communications Director for the Libertarian Party of Colorado, Colorado State Coordinator for the Libertarian Party Radical Caucus, as well as Region 1 Representative on the Libertarian National Committee. Articles posted should NOT be considered the opinions of the LPCO, LPRC, or LNC nor always those of Caryn Ann Harlos personally. Caryn Ann's goal is to provide information on items of interest and (sometimes) controversy about the Libertarian Party and minor parties in general not to necessarily endorse the contents.

112 thoughts on “The Libertarian Party of Chicago defends free speech, affirms non-aggression in wake of UC Berkeley riot

  1. LibertyDave

    There is a theme. It’s the Libertarian Party will defend all your rights, all the time.

  2. Anthony Dlugos

    Oh. come now. If I wanted to get wasted, I could use this press release as a drinking game, knocking a shot back every time aggression/non-aggression was used in connection with “the Libertarian Party.”

  3. Bondurant

    Good press release from the LP of Chicago. A welcome message of reason during the violent rise of the alt-left.

    I can’t imagine Trump will impress the electorate over the next 4 years and the Democrats appear to now be in bed with the alt-left. Perhaps the LP can gain more ground as the electorate is left with no choices Ye Old Establishment.

  4. Andy

    The LP is not going to give the public any choice for President if it keeps up the trend it has been on for the last three elections of nominating establishment shills to be on its ticket.

  5. Bondurant

    That’s where we come in, Andy. Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich are locks to secure the GOP and Democratic nominations. It’s very possible that we will see another attempt by GOP castoffs and may have a fight on our hands. I am, however, optimistic.

    Local interest in my county and state party has gone through the roof since the election. People are fed up and looking for options. Libertarians are coming out of the woodwork. For the most part they are legitimate libertarians. These aren’t folks interested in Bill Weld. My local and state parties both recently had board elections and went hard libertarian in both and that includes newer faces.

    We have a lot to look forward to if we’re willing to stand by our principles.

  6. Anthony Dlugos

    Board elections are a lot different than elections for actual public offices.

    I can assure you that, if the 2020 LP nomination is between an ex-governor and a “principled” (i.e., completely unqualified and inexperienced) libertarian, the ex-governor will win.

  7. Andy

    Since there are no libertarian former Governors, I will do what I can to stop them.

    The 2020 convention ought to be dubbed No More Phonies.

  8. Andy

    Bondurant, the problem was not just Bill Weld. Gary Johnson was a problem too. Do these people recognize that?

  9. Anthony Dlugos

    Since there’s no rule regarding how long a potential nominee has to be a libertarian, you’re observation regarding no libertarian governors is irrelevant.

  10. Bondurant

    @ Andy

    I’m in Arizona. Gary didn’t have it easy from the AZ delegates in ’12 or ’16. He was also on a conference call in which his feathers were ruffled. He expected softball questions and ended up getting flustered and upset. It was the moment I realized he wasn’t ready for prime time. If he can’t handle members of his own party how would he have held up in a real debate.

  11. Carol Moore

    Now writing a press release about the lefty who got shot by a Milo supporter whose Trump hat had been stolen might be a bit more difficult. Have to wait til after and arrest and trial. Self-defense? Aggression?

  12. dL

    Well, I perused the Chicago LP’s website. They have issued exactly one press release since Trump’s inauguration…this one. An “ethical stance against aggression of any kind” in my mind would entail a bit more activity this past month on the press release front than one selective release complaining about the abridgment of Milo Yiannopoulos’ free speech rights. Officially, Yiannopoulos did not have his rights abridged, by the state or the university. In this instance, the provocateurs were the local anarchist set employing black bloc tactics. The cops didn’t put a stop to it, b/c last time they tried back in 2011, they tear gassed the entire protestor population. Of course, in the aftermath, Herr Trump demanded the police crack skulls or he would unilaterally–as self-proclaimed dictator–withhold federal funds from Berkeley(assigning himself the apparent power of the presidential line item veto). No press release from Chicago LP on that statement from the High Chancellor.

    Now, you can say the tactics employed by the anarchists==terrorism. Fine. That’s a debate. But anarchist black bloc tactics are neither an existential threat to liberal free speech nor the primary issue at hand RE: The Trump Administration. Although the Trump administration would certainly like to make that a primary issue.

    A principle libertarian response would use the event as a commentary on why black bloc tactics are being employed by some in response to a performance fascist invite by the Berkeley college republicans instead of merely appearing to be aligned w/ the priorities of the Trump Admin.

    alt-left

    There is no “alt-left.” No one self-identifies by that term. They identify by anarchist, a historical tradition that has been around for a century and a half. The “alt-right” on the other hand is a term that some self-identity by. Historically, it has the AKA==folk nationalism/fascism. Anarchism and fascism are not reflections of one another.

  13. Bondurant

    The bozos in Berkeley are not “anarchists”. At best Marxist goons. At worst goons taking their marching orders from government agencies.

    Alt-right is a cute term I’ve seen used only by Bernie Bros on social media and in MSM. The irony is that the fine folks in Berkeley actually act the way they claim their opponents do. I’ll use Alt-left to describe them from now on.

  14. Andy

    Anthony, LP members should reject any former or current office holders who have “come to Jesus” moments for libertarianism at the same time they announce that they are seeking an LP nomination. This was how we ended up with Bill Weld.

  15. Andy

    I found out today that those protesters in Berkeley were getting paid by George Soros. Surprise, surprise….

  16. paulie

    But anarchist black bloc tactics are neither an existential threat to liberal free speech nor the primary issue at hand RE: The Trump Administration. Although the Trump administration would certainly like to make that a primary issue.

    Correct.

    There is no “alt-left.” No one self-identifies by that term. They identify by anarchist, a historical tradition that has been around for a century and a half. The “alt-right” on the other hand is a term that some self-identity by.

    Also correct. For example, see http://www.altright.com/ . Wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

    The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loose group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in the United States. White nationalist Richard Spencer coined the term in 2010 to define a movement centered on white nationalism, and has been accused of doing so to whitewash overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism.

    The term drew considerable media attention and controversy during the 2016 presidential election, particularly after Trump appointed Breitbart News chair Steven Bannon CEO of the Trump campaign in August. Steve Bannon referred to Breitbart News as “the platform for the alt-right.”

    Media attention grew after the election, particularly during a post-election celebratory meeting near the White House hosted by alt-right advocate Richard Spencer. Spencer used several Nazi propaganda terms during a meeting, and closed with “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory”.

    Etymology

    In November 2008, Paul Gottfried addressed the H. L. Mencken Club about what he called “the alternative right”. In 2009, two more posts at Taki’s Magazine, by Patrick J. Ford and Jack Hunter, further discussed the alternative right. The term, however, is most commonly attributed to Richard B. Spencer, president of the National Policy Institute and founder of Alternative Right (magazine)

    In response to a Washington Post article that portrayed the movement as “offensiveness for the sake of offensiveness”, Anglin said “No it isn’t. The goal is to ethnically cleanse White nations of non-Whites and establish an authoritarian government. Many people also believe that the Jews should be exterminated.”

    Milo Yiannopoulos claims that some “young rebels” are drawn to the alt-right not for deeply political reasons but “because it promises fun, transgression, and a challenge to social norms.”

    ….

    In March 2016, Breitbart News writers Allum Bokhari and Milo Yiannopoulos published a piece on the alt-right, which CNN described as being similar to a manifesto. In that article, they described the alt-right as being derived from the Old Right of the United States as well from various New Right movements of Europe, citing the movement has been influenced by Oswald Spengler, Henry Louis Mencken, Julius Evola and modern influences such as paleoconservatives Patrick J. Buchanan and Samuel T. Francis. Jeet Heer of The New Republic likewise identifies the alt-right as having ideological origins among paleoconservatives, particularly with respect to its positions restricting immigration and supporting an openly nationalistic foreign policy.

    An analysis by The Guardian described the ethno-nationalism of the New Right as the alt-right’s progenitor. Matthew Sheffield, writing in the Washington Post, said the alt-right has also been influenced by anarcho-capitalist and paleolibertarian theorist Murray Rothbard, specifically in regards to his theorizing on race and democracy, and had previously rallied behind Ron Paul in 2008. Tucker, an anarcho-capitalist, has said the alt-right is opposed to libertarianism because the alt-right focuses on group identity and tribalism instead of individual liberty.

    Bokhari and Yiannopoulos describe Jared Taylor, founder of American Renaissance, and Richard B. Spencer, founder of Alternative Right, as representative of intellectuals in the alt-right. Cathy Young, writing in The Federalist, stated that the website Radix Journal had replaced the Alternative Right website, and describes a Radix Journal article on abortion which proclaimed that the pro-life position is “‘dysgenic,’ since it encourages breeding by ‘the least intelligent and responsible’ women.” Kevin B. MacDonald is also mentioned as an alt-right thinker.

    Much more at source.

    Alt-right is a cute term I’ve seen used only by Bernie Bros on social media and in MSM.

    Then you should follow the wikipedia link above and read up.

    The LP should focus on free speech issues. It is the most fundamental right.

    It’s a fundamental right, but the most fundamental right is the right to leave. If you have no right to leave you are in a prison, and the only question remaining is the security level. And there is no right to leave, practically speaking, if there is no place you are allowed to leave to. Free speech is certainly important, but if you have no right to leave and only the right to comment as you get systematically stripped of all your other rights and violated, it won’t necessarily do you much good.

  17. Tony From Long Island

    Andy ” . . . .The LP is not going to give the public any choice for President if it keeps up the trend it has been on for the last three elections of nominating establishment shills to be on its ticket. . . . ”

    Count on Andy to hijack every thread with his whining about the POTUS candidate when the next one is 4 years away.

    How about a comment on the actual thread subject?

    The protesters had every right to protest just as the right wing nut bag had a right to speak. However, no one has the right to start fires or act violent.

    However, without the aforementioned acts, if protesters peacefully stop someone from speaking, they are not denying that person his first amendment rights. They are exercising their own. That person is free to speak over the protesters.

  18. dL

    In 2009, two more posts at Taki’s Magazine, by Patrick J. Ford and Jack Hunter, further discussed the alternative right.

    I’ve been familiar w/ the term “alternate right” for a number of years. There was website called the “alternate right.” I initially became familiar w/ the term from my occasional perusals of “Attack the System,” which got on the early ground floor of pushing that movement. To be fair, however, I don’t recall it being as overtly Volksgemeinschaft as it has become in its more recent “alt-right” incarnation.

  19. Anthony Dlugos

    I’ve edited the release for clarity:

    The Libertarian Party of Chicago…affirms non-aggression

    The Libertarian Party…stands committed to the principle of non-aggression. Indeed, the initiation of force…

    It is because of these principles that The Libertarian Party of Chicago officially states our condemnation of aggression…

    The Libertarian Party takes an ethical stance against aggression of any kind…

    …we stand against the use aggression to rob others of these inherent rights.

    aggression, aggression, aggression, non-aggression, aggression, non-aggression, non-aggression, non-aggression, ethics, principle, aggression, principles, ethics, blah, blah, blah.

  20. Tony From Long Island

    Peaceful protests are not aggression.

    I am not referring to the fires at Berkley. That was unfortunate and (as usual) the work of a small number of agitators.

    I am speaking generally. I consider it a patriotic duty to protest against hate-mongers. If that causes them to not speak . . . oh well.

  21. Andy

    Tony, these protesters were NOT peaceful. They used violence to stop somebody from speaking. This was wrong.

    Also, shouting somebody down so people can’t hear them is wrong too. This is a Heckler’s Veto tactic.

  22. Paul

    ” if protesters peacefully stop someone from speaking, they are not denying that person his first amendment rights. They are exercising their own. That person is free to speak over the protesters.”

    Either they are stopping someone from speaking or they are speaking over them; those are two separate things. And both are different from the speaker undisturbed at a venue and protesters exercising their rights outside, or inside with signs without forcing someone to yell over them.

  23. Paul

    “Peaceful protests are not aggression.

    I am not referring to the fires at Berkley. That was unfortunate and (as usual) the work of a small number of agitators.

    I am speaking generally. I consider it a patriotic duty to protest against hate-mongers. If that causes them to not speak . . . oh well.”

    Why is this so complicated? You are correct that peaceful protests are not aggression. When they stop someone from speaking, that crosses the line into being aggression. Whether the speaker is a hatemonger is a matter of opinion. One in which I agree with you in this case, but it’s not an objective fact and even if it were it’s not a reason to stop someone from speaking. Either everyone has the right to speak, including the right to protest someone else’s speech but not to prevent it, or only those with power do – whether that power comes from a mob or from a government which institutionalizes the force of the mob into a set of formal rules, but is just a more dressed-up version of the same thing. The latter is “might makes right,” the ideology of bullies and tyrants everywhere regardless of proclaimed ideology.

  24. Paul

    “Tony, these protesters were NOT peaceful. They used violence to stop somebody from speaking. This was wrong.”

    It depends on which ones. Usually, and in Berkeley, most of the protesters were peaceful. A small group of violent, intolerant individuals who don’t believe in anyone’s right to openly disagree with them used the protests to prevent opposing views from being expressed, but that was not what most of the protesters were doing. It is possible, but not proven, that the people crossing the line into violence and property damage were actually agents provocateurs whose purpose was to discredit the larger group of peaceful protesters. Regardless of whether they were or not, they should not be confused with the larger group of people who were exercising their own rights to protest peacefully.

    “Also, shouting somebody down so people can’t hear them is wrong too. This is a Heckler’s Veto tactic.”

    Correct. But so is insinuating that all the protesters, or most of them, were using violence or causing property damage. And equally disingenuous to insinuate that all or most protesters were paid to be there just because a few were, or because some organizations that co-sponsored protests received some portion of their funding from a wealthy donor you don’t like.

    The majority of protesters were not paid by anyone, did not cause property damage and did not use force to prevent anyone from speaking. My guess would be the vast majority. And my guess is that this is usually true in the vast majority of protests where such insinuations are made, which does not stop those who disagree with the larger message of such protests from exaggerating vastly how many protesters are paid, use violence, damage property, etc.

  25. Tony From Long Island

    Andy: Tony, these protesters were NOT peaceful. They used violence to stop somebody from speaking. This was wrong. . . . .

    Your desire for vitriol is so strong that you don’t read my entire posts before jumping on your soapbox. I clearly said I was not referring to the Berkley protests where aggression was used. English 101 my deluded friend

  26. Tony From Long Island

    Andy: ” . . . Also, shouting somebody down so people can’t hear them is wrong too. This is a Heckler’s Veto tactic. . . .”

    No. It’s called freedom of speech

    ” . . . Paulie: ” . . . . You are correct that peaceful protests are not aggression. When they stop someone from speaking, that crosses the line into being aggression. . . . “

    Sorry Paulie. I see it differently. I have every right to make your speech inaudible as you do mine.

  27. Andy

    Shouting somebody down so they can’t be heard is not freedom of speech. It is called using noise to silent dissent.

  28. Tony From Long Island

    Andy: ” . . . . .Shouting somebody down so they can’t be heard is not freedom of speech. It is called using noise to silent dissent. . . . ”

    I believe the Supreme Court has carved out only very small exceptions to the First Amendment’s freedom of speech. Shouting down a speaker is not one of them as far as I know.

    You want to be heard? Speak louder!

  29. paulie

    I believe the Supreme Court has carved out only very small exceptions to the First Amendment’s freedom of speech. Shouting down a speaker is not one of them as far as I know.

    Dunno, but not relevant to libertarian principle either way.

    You want to be heard? Speak louder!

    Whoever can afford the most amplification is the only one who gets to be heard? That sounds like another way of saying “might makes right.” That is an idea that is neither libertarian nor liberal.

  30. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Tony From Long Island: if protesters peacefully stop someone from speaking, they are not denying that person his first amendment rights. They are exercising their own. That person is free to speak over the protesters.

    In a free and rational society, everyone is free to speak and be heard by those who wish to hear.

    Free speech belongs to everyone, not only to those with the louder voices or bigger crowds.

  31. Peter

    Without the stupid youtube link which no one (or very, very few people) will click on, please explain exactly what percentage of the protesters in Berkeley engaged in violence or property destruction, what percentage were paid to be there, and how such aid was specifically directed.

    If you don’t know, please stop ignorantly spreading bullshit.

  32. Andy

    “Peter
    February 6, 2017 at 21:21
    Without the stupid youtube link which no one (or very, very few people) will click on, please explain exactly what percentage of the protesters in Berkeley engaged in violence or property destruction, what percentage were paid to be there, and how such aid was specifically directed.

    If you don’t know, please stop ignorantly spreading bullshit.”

    I doubt that there is any way of people knowing how many protesters were paid and how many were unpaid, at least not without doing more investigation than I am able to do. All that is known is that there were paid protesters there. I bet that it was the paid protesters who started the violence.

  33. Pete

    Maybe, or perhaps not. But they way you spread this stuff creates the impression that all, or a large percentage, of the people there engaged in violence, destroyed property, and were paid to do it. I think that is highly unlikely. Most of the protesters were peaceful and came out because they cared about a cause. A few assholes showed up to make trouble, and may have been paid to do it.

  34. Pete

    Yet another example of what we were talking about. Your headline almost certainly vastly overstates what any evidence it discusses actually shows. Also, are we to believe Soros is stupid? The few protesters going overboard and starting violence play into the hands of Milo, Trump et al, create more sympathy for them and more fame and income for Milo and his likeminded friends. Why would Soros want that?

  35. dL

    Maybe, or perhaps not. But they way you spread this stuff creates the impression that all, or a large percentage, of the people there engaged in violence, destroyed property, and were paid to do it.

    Actually, there is a better chance Andy is on the Soros payroll. Guy spends his day and night spamming the forum w/ no visible means of support.

  36. Steven Berson

    The idea that it would take a George Soros in order to fund an-com’s that have been perpetrating the recent “Black Bloc” actions is hilarious. It might be a small lot of people overall – but there are plenty of what demographically are almost all white males from late teens to mid twenties just waiting for an excuse to vandalize shiznit while claiming a moral high ground as anti-capitalists and anti-fascists – and they do in fact for the most part organize on a grass roots level. The fact that neither Andy nor Bondurant seems aware of them seems that have not attended or paid attention to that many anti-war or anti-globalist rallies in the past 15 years – as these guys have a habit of attaching themselves to any larger protest as it allows them to get away with their acts of vandalism easier. Also – to be clear – these folks often hate “liberals” just as much as they hate neo-fascists – their general goal is the destruction of the capitalist system itself – which as much as some of you might claim Dem’s and other status quo “liberals/progressives/left” are for is truly a fiction as R’s and D’s really favor a variant of crony capitalism / mixed economy / corporatism – just they want to tweak it slightly differently.

    BTW – for the umpteenth time – “anarchist” has only been something that some voluntary capitalists have claimed as a term for about 4 decades – where as the use of the term “anarchist” has been used by anti-state/anti-property syndicalists, communists, and some varieties of “left-libertarians” for over 120 hundred years. And generally those that labelled themselves as anarchists prior to the Rothbard attempt at claiming that label for voluntary capitalists did NOT generally adhere to any form of N.A.P. – in fact the use of initiating force was considered by many that labelled themselves as anarchists a reasonable tactic to be used “by any means necessary.” Beyond that – given that directly translating the term “anarchy” from its original Greek means “no rulers” – and it seems that once you dig below the rhetoric many anarcho-capitalists are fine with giving absolute authority to employers and property owners – it seems the term voluntaryist, or voluntary capitalist makes way more sense than anarcho-capitalist ever does.

  37. dL

    Whoever can afford the most amplification is the only one who gets to be heard? That sounds like another way of saying “might makes right.” That is an idea that is neither libertarian nor liberal.

    Actually, that’s not exactly accurate. While there is a NAP tradition that holds people must/should respect the liberty of others, there are traditions within libertarianism that dispense w/ that formality. For example, Max Stirner’s egoist anarchism. Stirner wouldn’t argue that “might makes right.” But he would argue something along the lines of “might precedes right.” Benjamin Tucker is famous for having abandoned “natural rights” for Stirner egoism. So Tucker’s laissez faire social theory begins with humans not having any moral duty to respect the liberty of others. Though I wouldn’t classify myself as a Stirner enthusiast, mine likewise begins with the same presumptions. I treat morality as strategic and arrive at cooperative outcomes through rational choice/game theory.

    The things we are debating now are not new. We can go back to the 1886 Haymarket riots. At or around the time, there were libertarians who defended the imprisonment/executions of the Chicago eight. Tucker was not among them. Indeed, he excoriated those who defended the state prosecutions. For example,

    Henry George, Traitor
    https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015080471702;view=1up;seq=3

    I would concur with Tony. I do not support the state abridgment of Milo Yiannopoulos’ free speech. However, if we he wants to venture down into a known anarchist enclave to exhibit his performance fascism, he can bring his own army down to protect him.

  38. dL

    BTW – for the umpteenth time – “anarchist” has only been something that some voluntary capitalists have claimed as a term for about 4 decades – where as the use of the term “anarchist” has been used by anti-state/anti-property syndicalists, communists, and some varieties of “left-libertarians” for over 120 hundred years. And generally those that labelled themselves as anarchists prior to the Rothbard attempt at claiming that label for voluntary capitalists did NOT generally adhere to any form of N.A.P.

    Individualist anarchism has been an American tradition for 150 years. That tradition certainly ascribed to private property. And many, though not all, subscribed to NAP. So, for the umpteenth time, I suppose, you be wrong. Although you not be wrong in saying individual anarchists were anti-capitalist. They viewed capitalism as an abridgment to laissez faire, which by and large it is. Time has certainly proved them correct.

    RE: social anarchism. It is true that social anarchist s are agitators. In the 19th century, they were primarily organized around labor unions. That’s where the action was at. That was a social epicenter at the time. In the 21st century, the epicenter of life for most young people is the university. So, that’s where the action is at, today. You can them brats, or whatever. But you would have to likewise call anyone who eschews manual labor for the university a “brat.”

  39. dL

    The idea that it would take a George Soros in order to fund an-com’s that have been perpetrating the recent “Black Bloc” actions is hilarious.

    Yep. Very laughable. Soros is the last person I would ever suspect of being a financial contributor to social anarchist agitation. The guy is is a hard-core liberal capitalist.

  40. Richard Stands

    “Actually, there is a better chance Andy is on the Soros payroll. Guy spends his day and night spamming the forum w/ no visible means of support.”

    Yes and he accused everyone else of being troll’s… and kills the board with his endless crazy bullshit.. also, makes libertarians look like nutbag’s with his crazy paranoid shit.., he is truly, like a one man blac bloc wrecking a demonstration and turning it to absolut crap like the “antifa’s” in Berkley, to this forum. It is all coming together now Andy is a government plant and racist troll! LOL makes perfect sense now that I think about it.

  41. Andy

    Richard Stands
    February 7, 2017 at 00:45
    ‘Actually, there is a better chance Andy is on the Soros payroll. Guy spends his day and night spamming the forum w/ no visible means of support.’

    Yes and he accused everyone else of being troll’s… and kills the board with his endless crazy bullshit.. also, makes libertarians look like nutbag’s with his crazy paranoid shit.., he is truly, like a one man blac bloc wrecking a demonstration and turning it to absolut crap like the “antifa’s” in Berkley, to this forum. It is all coming together now Andy is a government plant and racist troll! LOL makes perfect sense now that I think about it.”

    So says some poster we have never heard from before, who is likely trolling under a fake name.

  42. Richard Stands

    Your so obvious. Caught red handed yet still pointing with the accusatory finger even though all the evidence is adding up more and more and everyone can see, your other 4 finger’s guess which way they point?! So I can see, you provide no explanation, nope, not even bother to try to deny the more and more undeniable truth. Projection or transferance, is what its called. A self hating trollophobic troll U R Andy, LOL LOL LOL. Keep talking shit the more you talk the more you make yourself look crazy and now also guilty. Everyone is “trolling” except you it seems and your friend’s you personally know. But deep down inside… you know that we know and we know that you know… U R the biggest troll of them all! Its time you come out of that closet and finally let yourself be yourself …. Mr. Jacobs, tear down that wall!

  43. Steven Berson

    dL – excellent point about individualist anarchism being an American tradition for over 150 years! But I see the views expressed by people like Lysander Spooner, Benjamin Tucker, Josiah Warren and Thoreau certainly diverging from what is usually advocated for in current “anarcho-capitalism”, So I will grant you the point that people like Tucker were fine with the idea of private property gained via voluntary exchange – but he often labeled himself as a “socialist” even though he strongly opposed State socialism – but rather in the context that he agreed at least in part with the Proudhon “property is theft, property is liberty, property is impossible” koan.

  44. Tony From Long Island

    DL: ” . . . . .“Actually, there is a better chance Andy is on the Soros payroll. Guy spends his day and night spamming the forum w/ no visible means of support.” . . . . . ”

    Hmm interesting theory. Does the guy have a job? Posts here all day and night – and the same old tired garbage.

  45. Andy

    Tony From Long Island
    February 7, 2017 at 08:45
    DL: ” . . . . .’Actually, there is a better chance Andy is on the Soros payroll. Guy spends his day and night spamming the forum w/ no visible means of support.’ . . . . . ‘

    Hmm interesting theory. Does the guy have a job? Posts here all day and night – and the same old tired garbage.”

    Idiotic statements. First of all, I’m not posting on forums all day. Second of all, you all do know that in this day and age you can get internet on cell phones. Sometimes I may check in from a phone and post a comment and then go back to whatever I was doing.

  46. dL

    just checking out the website you have linked to in your signature and really enjoying the content! Some very good essays up there!

    Thanx!

    Btw, not a happy ending for August Landmesser. His family was intercepted at the border trying to flee Germany. His jewish wife ended up being gassed in a concentration camp. He was imprisoned and then coercively conscripted into a penal battalion. KIA in Croatia.

  47. Andy

    “Richard Stands
    February 7, 2017 at 02:16
    Your so obvious. Caught red handed yet still pointing with the accusatory finger even though all the evidence is adding up more and more and everyone can see, your other 4 finger’s guess which way they point?! So I can see, you provide no explanation, nope, not even bother to try to deny the more and more undeniable truth. Projection or transferance, is what its called. A self hating trollophobic troll U R Andy, LOL LOL LOL. Keep talking shit the more you talk the more you make yourself look crazy and now also guilty.”

    I’ve followed IPR since it was founded in 2008, and I don’t recall ever hearing of you before, yet you seem to know a lot and have a lot of interest in attacking me. So how about this, why don’t you show yourself in public and we can get together sometime (preferably at an LP meeting or convention somewhere) and have a debate in person and have it put on video and posted to YouTube? If you are unwilling to debate me in person, how about this, just show up at an LP meeting or convention anywhere in the country, and have you appearance there put on video and posted to YouTube? Let us know which LP meeting or convention you will be appearing at so we can contact the local chairman or some other LP members in that area so they can be prepared in advance and bring a video camera to whatever meeting or convention you attend?

  48. Tony From Long Island

    Andy: ” . . . . Idiotic statements. First of all, I’m not posting on forums all day. Second of all, you all do know that in this day and age you can get internet on cell phones. Sometimes I may check in from a phone and post a comment and then go back to whatever I was doing. . . . . ”

    I wouldn’t know. . . . I only have a flip phone. . . . seriously! 🙂

  49. Tony From Long Island

    Andrew: ” . . . . .Interesting article. . . . . . GEORGE SOROS, BLACK LIVES MATTER, AND MANUFACTURED CIVIL UNREST: LEAKED DOCS PROVE THE REAL GOAL IS FEDERALIZING AMERICA’S POLICE . . ”

    Fake News . . . sad!

    🙂

  50. dL

    LEAKED DOCS PROVE THE REAL GOAL IS FEDERALIZING AMERICA’S POLICE

    Public transcripts of conservative talk radio openly demonstrate that conservatives through border control want to federalize the police beyond the already current levels of federalization.

  51. Richard Stands

    “Hmm interesting theory. Does the guy have a job? Posts here all day and night – and the same old tired garbage.”

    More people’s starting to notice.

    “Idiotic statements. First of all, I’m not posting on forums all day. ”

    It sure does seem like it tho. Mostly idiotic statements is what you post all day and all night, yes.

    “Sometimes I may check in from a phone and post a comment and then go back to whatever I was doing.”

    I bet ur phone is in a government troll center. You sure seem to know a lot about those!

    “yet you seem to know a lot and have a lot of interest in attacking me.”

    Not really no. I just happen to notice someone else noticed the obvious. Now other people are speaking up and noticing it too its becoming a movement LOL! I usually don’t comment mostly because u r such an endless fountain of bullshit and who has time for all that? And really I wouldn’t have followed up but of course you felt compelled to spin your wheels with ur usual bullshit.

    “Fake News . . . sad!”

    Agent Andy’s MO. That and accusing just about everyone else, of what he does. Someone tell Agent Andy his covers been blown!

  52. Richard Stands

    ““yet you seem to know a lot”

    Really how so? Please tell everybody more… If I seem to know a lot to Agent Andy he must be saying there is a lot of truth in what I say. He know’s his covers been blown just having a hard time with it I guess LOL…

  53. Tony From Long Island

    I don’t care if Andy is a Troll and I doubt he’s a government troll. He’s too paranoid for that.

    Honestly, this small forum that around 20 or so people regularly post is not important enough to have government trolls (if those actually exist).

    I just care that he’s a conspiracy theorist and thinks mass shootings are “false flag” nonsense (among other garbage he spews).

    I will call him out on his crap every chance I get. Every other regular on here I have a lot of respect for even though we often disagree politically.

    He hijacks every thread with the same rambling.

  54. Marsha

    I don’t know if Andy is a paid troll. If he is, he is probably being paid to post at several different forums, not just here. The thing that is most obvious is that he is always pissing in everyone’s soup around here and it’s hard to imagine he is not someone who gets a thrill from doing so. His behavior in accusing literally every single new person that shows up of being a government troll, along with quite a few that have been here a long time, is highly suspicious, as it is something professional trolls are known to do.

    If it is true like someone said above, that he has no job, at best we can conclude that he is probably some shut in 40 year old guy who lives in his parents basement in nasty tighty whitey underwear with stains and holes who has never had a girlfriend or a sex partner other than his own hand. My guess is he spends almost all of his time watching Alex Jones, youtube videos, posting to internet forums and looking at half-clothed men wrestling each other, muscles gleaming with sweat. He probably has not even realized he’s gay yet, much less actually had sex or come out of the closet, and is probably homophobic.
    Maybe he thinks he is straight, and spends a bunch of time reading “pick up artist” materials but never ever actually even tries picking up actual women much less succeed at it. He may also be getting more and more into the “white nationalist” stuff but is not quite ready to come out of the closet on that either.

    Since a bunch of y’all allegedly know Andy maybe you can tell me if I am close to the mark…

  55. Tony From Long Island

    Hmm Marsha . . . . Lemmy See . . . I live with my father. . . . love wrestling but those are the only two that apply to me. . . . whew. . . . I was worried for a second..

    I’ll criticize Andy at every turn, but I could care less about his sexuality. He’s a paranoid, delusional conspiracy theorist who gives Libertarians a bad name

  56. Anthony Dlugos

    I was reading a Foreign Policy article regarding Rosa Brooks who had wrote an article for the Washington Post theorizing about a military coup in the USA if upper military leaders openly refused to follow a lunatic order from President Cheeto.

    Well, she describe how the alt right went after her relentlessly and viciously, and she linked to some to the neo-nazi/white supremacist blogs that went after her. Here’s one of those, and an excerpt. Who does this remind you of?

    http://www.dailystormer.com/sedition-jewish-ex-pentagon-official-calls-on-military-to-overthrow-trump/

    “Brooks has scores of contacts with the US government and military: high-level work at Soros and Neo-Con (Council on Foreign Relations) think-tanks influential on the American deep state, functioned as an important advisor in the Obama Pentagon, and currently is married to Army Special Forces Colonel Joseph Mauer.”

  57. Tony From Long Island

    Anthony, I got shudders just clicking on that. I can’t believe shit like that exists. Truly disgusting garbage. Shit web sites like that maks Andy look like Mother Teresa

  58. Anthony Dlugos

    So you can imagine my concern when so-called Libertarians start talking about global cabals, the CFR, globalists, Soros, etc. etc. etc.

  59. Andy

    So now Anthony is resorting to guilt-by-association smears, and a rather loose one at that. Pathetic.

    I stick to the actual principles of liberty, something of which your boys Johnson & Weld do not adhere. I find that to be alarming.

  60. Richard Stands

    Wow. That is crazy eerie! The article by Eric Striker at the Daily Stormer that Anthony Dlugos posted a link to, sounds just like Andy. I wonder if Andy is Eric Striker? That would certainly not be surprising. Also I don’t know either Andy or Marsha but just judging from Andy’s style here I would not be surprised, if Marsha is close to the mark about Andy.

  61. Tony From Long Island

    Andy ” . . . . So now Anthony is resorting to guilt-by-association smears, . . . . ”

    So you admit an association with such garbage?? wow. In the words of Darth Trump . . . Sad!

  62. Andy

    I have no association with any of those people, and i have never even heard of the names you mentioned above.

    You could take snippets of things that anyone said and then find somebody else that said something similar, who may have other views which are not similar.

    Years ago somebody took something I said about corporatate influence in government and war, and then tried to link me with some leftist group that said something similar.

    This is nothing more than a smear tactic that is designed to steer people away from the truth.

  63. Tony From Long Island

    the only name I mentioned was Mother Teresa . . .

    time to leave work for today . . .

  64. Anthony Dlugos

    Andy, your constant haranguing on the CFR, globalists, Soros, and your xenophobia tells me that stuff is pretty central to your philosophy.

    Just like the Supremacists.

  65. paulie

    What’s all this stuff about Andy not having a job? Like myself, he travels around the country petitioning. Sometimes we also manage teams of petitioners. Some of that work involves alt parties and independent candidates, which is why a lot of people who live in many different parts of the country on here have met us in person at various times. Petitioning can be pretty lucrative at times, where making several hundred or even a few thousand dollars a day is pretty common. There are other times when it sucks or when nothing worth traveling to that we know about is going on. There are lots of ways to get jerked around or for deals to go bad. Unlike me, Andy has a car and a drivers license so he has some more flexibility in where and when he goes.

    Unlike most petitioners, Andy is pretty good about saving money. Personally, I have a problem with spending a lot of money on food and drink, eating out at fairly expensive places quite a bit. Andy usually eats quick and cheap relatively speaking, and is not big on ordering alcoholic beverages with his meals. Unlike a lot of petitioners he does not have expensive bad habits – drugs, heavy boozing, gambling, hookers, strippers and so on. He saves money by splitting motel rooms on the road (something I used to do a lot but got tired of) or sleeping in his car, and by splitting the cost of gas.

    It’s true that we do both also save money by staying with friends and relatives when we are not petitioning. I’ve had an apartment for a few years where I was rarely ever there, so I don’t do that anymore. For the first few years I knew Andy he was doing something similar with renting a room in California, which made more sense because there is a lot of initiative petition work out there but later we were mostly working in other states so the situation with the room turned into the same thing as the apartment I used to have in Alabama, paying for a place he was rarely at, so he got rid of it. Staying with relatives in between petition gigs is a lot different from being a shut-in. We’ve been all over the country and have talked to literally millions of people over the years, even though with most of them it was very short conversations.

    I have disagreed with Andy for some of the same reasons other people here have, but I’ve never heard him use any racial slurs in years of going around the country with him. I don’t believe Andy is doing anything other than stating his honest opinions that he feels strongly about here. I don’t believe anyone pays him to do so. Sometimes he’s right, sometimes he’s wrong, and sometimes he beats some things to death and beyond regardless of whether he is right or wrong, but he stands up for what he believes in either way and has dedicated his life to it. Even though we both do get paid to petition, we also both engage in a lot of political activism that we are not paid for.

    I can’t say that for the myriad of fly-by posters using IP anonymizers to talk shit.

  66. Andy

    People who post under fake names and use IP anonymizers should be taken with a grain of salt.

  67. Andy

    There is a difference between stating facts and stating opinions, or speculating.

    It is a fact that Bill Weld is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (which was founded by the Rockafellers, who also played a role in the creation of the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and the United Nations).

    It is a fact that George Soros is funding leftist groups that have been creating disturbances and engaging in acts of violence and property destruction at protests lately.

    It is speculation as to whether or not any undercover government agents have acted as provocateurs at any of these protests, but given that the government has been caught doing this in the past, it would not surprise me if they were.

    I have heard that there are currently bills being put forth in several state legislatures to crack down on protesters, which I am sure means cracking down on the first amendment. I have heard that the federal government may get in on this.

    We can speculate as to whether or not Donald Trump or any member of his administration are in on this, but it would not surprise me if they were.

  68. Richard Stands

    Anthony: “Andy, your constant haranguing on the CFR, globalists, Soros, and your xenophobia tells me that stuff is pretty central to your philosophy.

    Just like the Supremacists.”

    Good point.

    paulie: If u and Andy have not admitted ur homosexual feelings for each other yet won’t u both be a lot happier once u do?

    Andy: “It is a fact that Bill Weld is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (which was founded by the Rockafellers, who also played a role in the creation of the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and the United Nations).”

    LOL u were saying something, about guilt by association??

    “We can speculate as to whether or not Donald Trump or any member of his administration are in on this, but it would not surprise me if they were.”

    So Soros and Trump are in on it together? Any other wild conspiracy yarn’s u would like to entertain us with crazy uncle Andy?

  69. Andy

    Anthony, you make some pretty stupid statements. Philosophy has little to do with the CFR, Soros, etc… Those are not philosophical issues. They are people and organizations who happen to be working against my philosophy, which is the philosophy of liberty, and I think that it is important to know who the enemies are, but naming a particular individual, or a group, or a tactic being used by, or against, said person or group, is not the same thing as philosophy.

  70. Anthony Dlugos

    Your misguided notions about the CFR…as if it’s some omnipotent, pure evil organization…and your conspiracy theory nuttery color your judgement to the point where your analysis ends up way out in left field, unhinged from reality.

    Just like white supremacists.

    I’m not saying you ARE a white supremacist, I’m saying that just like them, your worldview prevents an objective analysis. You’re incapable of seeing Bill Weld as anything other than the antichrist, simply because of his membership in a group that hardly “runs the world.”

  71. dL

    People who post under fake names and use IP anonymizers should be taken with a grain of salt.

    The use of pseudonyms has a long tradition. For example, most of the founding fathers used them. Most of the libertarian literary luminaries of the past used them. Though I use one, mine links to a blog w/ 6 years+ of writings to peruse. The pseudonym in one form or another has been around since 2005.

    In terms of IP anonymizers, VPN…in the age of Snowden and mass surveillance/tracking, you are a bit foolish if you are not using one.

  72. dL

    What’s all this stuff about Andy not having a job?

    I brought up him being on the Soros payroll as a facetious retort to his nonsense about the black bloc being on the Soros payroll. Facetious or not, I absolutely stick by that.There is absolutely a better chance he is on the Soros payroll than the Berkeley anarchists. I will amend my remarks that by noting there is better chance that everyone here is on the Soros payroll than the Berkeley anarchists being on said payroll.

  73. Jill Pyeatt

    George Soros is absolutely funding the anti-Trump protests and has pledged to do the whole time Trump is in office. It’s also well known that he’s donated millions of dollars to the Black Lives Matters movement.

    This is very easy to confirm by doing only a little bit of research. I can’t believe so many people on here don’t know this.

  74. Andy

    Better watch out Jill, if you point out anymore facts like that you’ll end up getting labeled as some kind of nasty conspiracy kook.

  75. Anthony Dlugos

    “George Soros is absolutely funding the anti-Trump protests and has pledged to do the whole time Trump is in office. It’s also well known that he’s donated millions of dollars to the Black Lives Matters movement.”

    So? So what? If I was as rich as Soros and still a Libertarian, I would be funding anti-Trump events. BlackLivesMatter may not be my favorite charity, but I’m not going to raise a stink about private donations either. Its his money.

    I can’t believe that people don’t know that complaints about Soros donations to anti-Trump groups or BlackLivesMatters frequently come from anti-semitic alt-right racists.

    Why do I have this uneasy feeling that donations from right-wing wealth to anti-President Hillary Clinton forces would raise such a stink with some…”Libertarians?”

  76. George Phillies

    Black Lives Matter is a fundamental civil right movement — the right not to be shot dead at random — that all Libertarians should support. If Mr. Soros is supporting it, good for him.

  77. Andy

    That is a pretty stupid comment, dL. The last time anyone accused me of working for George Soros was when i was speaking out against the George W. Bush administration for its wars of aggression in the Middle East, and for increasing the domestic police state.

  78. paulie

    Millions of people are protesting against Trump. How many of them are getting anything from Soros? Almost certainly a trivially small percentage. Even Soros would go broke trying to pay that many people, and why would he need to? Plenty of people want to protest against Trump all on their own. I am among them, even though I haven’t done anything yet.

    Black Bloc is a small but very attention-grabbing element within the protests. Kind of like the flea that hitches a ride on the dog. I don’t see how their interests coincide with Soros. In reality they are actually helping Trump, although that’s probably not their motive either.

    BLM is likewise a wide-ranging movement addressing a very real problem. A few organizations have jumped in front of the parade, and they receive some – probably small – part of their funding from Soros. That’s not the same thing as Soros funding the entire BLM movement and protests, just as with the anti-Trump protests in general. Likewise there is a small group of extremists at BLM protests who cause violence and property damage. They are not representative of the larger movement, and it’s unlikely that this particular activity is funded by Soros, but people who don’t like Soros falsely insinuate that he is involved with funding tiny groups that cause violence at BLM and anti-Trump mass demonstrations, that he funds those entire demonstrations, and that the violence is representative of those entire demonstrations/movements. None of those things are true.

    One thing that I do agree with Andy on is that I would not find it surprising, based on past history, if there are government-funded agents provocateurs involved with the violence at the rallies.

  79. Andy

    George, that is what Black Lives Matter is on the surface, and sure, that part of it is a good thing, however, when you peel back the layers, you will find that it has been co-opted into being a Marxist agitator group, and this is not a good thing.

  80. LibertyDave

    There is a big difference between supporting anti-Trump protests and hiring criminals to commit criminal acts.

    In every large group there will be people who will commit criminal acts, that doesn’t mean the the organizers of these large groups are supporting these criminals.

    For all the news about anti-Trump thugs, I have also seen news of pro-Trump thugs.

    Exaggerating the truth doesn’t prove you’re right. It just proves that you jump to conclusions that aren’t based on facts.

  81. paulie

    George, that is what Black Lives Matter is on the surface, and sure, that part of it is a good thing, however, when you peel back the layers, you will find that it has been co-opted into being a Marxist agitator group, and this is not a good thing.

    It’s not a “group” at all. Most of it is a leaderless movement which is exactly what George said. There are some relatively small groups jumping in front of a parade and claiming to be “leaders” of the movement. They are not. Some of them may well be Marxists. Some of them may well actually hate other “races” and believe that only black lives matter. Some small portion of the funding of those small groups comes from Soros. It’s ridiculous to extrapolate that the entire Black Lives Matter movement is Marxist, or racist, or funded by Soros. That is a deliberate lie by people who actually do not believe black lives should matter, and those who parrot such lies hurt their own credibility by doing so.

  82. Jill Pyeatt

    “One thing that I do agree with Andy on is that I would not find it surprising, based on past history, if there are government-funded agents provocateurs involved with the violence at the rallies.”

    This is most certainly the case. I’m sure it is a minority of people at the protests, and I know there are regular people who protest against Trump, and , yes, I know there are pro-Trump thugs. I just found it astonishing that people here didn’t know that Soros was paying people to protest, and decided to chime in on it.

    And I agree with George that the BLM movement is based on basic civil rights.

    There are some very, very serious things going on in this country that are definitely not business as usual, not the least of which is Trump seemingly hell-bent on starting war with Iran. This really has become a matter of picking the battles I have the energy to deal with. Going to war unnecessarily is one of them. Finding out if there really is an enormous pedophilia ring in Washington DC is another. In the meantime, the three biggest problems I’ve had in my entire life are happening now, all at the same time. I really am hoping my head doesn’t explode.

    If anyone hears of any anti-Hillary protests in the LA area, please let me know so I can go.

  83. Andy

    Soros would not have to fund every protester, and neither would anyone else, including the government. All that would be needed would be to fund say the organizers, and maybe a few more people to whip people up into a frenzy, and to incite violence.

    I do not know how many protesters were getting paid and how many were not, but I suspect that a higher percentage of them were getting paid than some people realize, but of course this does not mean that all of them were being paid.

  84. paulie

    There are some very, very serious things going on in this country that are definitely not business as usual, not the least of which is Trump seemingly hell-bent on starting war with Iran

    And China, and Mexico, and Iraq (“go back in and take their oil”) and…Australia?! Yet some people keep insisting that this belligerent creepy clown is non-interventionist somehow. Things that make you go hmmmm…

    If anyone hears of any anti-Hillary protests in the LA area, please let me know so I can go.

    Well, she would have certainly deserved them had she been elected, but as it stands she is pretty irrelevant right now so it would seem kind of misdirected to protest against her.

  85. paulie

    All that would be needed would be to fund say the organizers

    Fund the organizers is another frequently exaggerated term. In reality there are many groups which claim to be organizers and in many cases they are really just people who jump in front of a crowd that would be there with or without them. And fund…what percentage of their funding? It’s easy to claim “Soros funds” when what that really means is that he provides some small portion of the funding for some small groups that claim to be leading large movements they don’t actually lead.

    I also don’t believe that Soros is interested in inciting violence, is paying anyone to incite violence, or that the main organizers of any large demonstrations want violence at their events. In reality, mass gatherings draw attention-seeking assholes and government-directed provocateurs, and Soros provides some small portion of the funding of relatively small organizations that see fundraising and attention-getting opportunities in large movements (and are not the same organizations as those inciting violence). Racist slimeballs who love Trump, and have some influence with some libertarians because they previously joined forces with many libertarians to support Ron Paul, are trying to discredit the larger BLM and anti-Trump movements by distorting and exaggerating the involvement of Soros and violent elements in those larger movements. Some libertarians have been tricked into parroting those distortions.

  86. Andy

    I have not been tricked into anything. I do my own research and my opinions are my own.

    Soros and the Ford Foundation have given lots of money ro these leftist groups. I do not know if they are paying people to engage in violence or not, but I would not be surprised if they, or the government, or both, were paying people to engage in violence.

    Black Lives Matter is a Marxist front group, and they are creating more racial strife. It may or may not have started out that way, but this is what it is now. I think it would be great if it was just an anti-police state group (although I’d prefer if it was for all lives mattering), but this is just not the full story.

  87. George Phillies

    Jill,

    It seems unlikely that you are going to fins any anti-Hillary protests anywhere in the world. She lost. She politely appeared at the inauguration. She is perhaps retired from public life. Emulating WIlliam F Buckkley Jr by running for Mayor of New York is not reentering public life.

    If you meant anti-Trump protests go to Meetup.com and look for #Resist.

    George

  88. paulie

    I have not been tricked into anything.

    Yes, you have. You just don’t realize it.

    I do my own research and my opinions are my own.

    They are based on trusting sources that you should not trust. They are spinning lies.

    And again it makes no sense that Soros would support activity that he would be smart enough to know is helping Trump.

    Black Lives Matter is a Marxist front group,

    No. It’s. Not.

    It’s not a group at all. There are several groups which claim to represent Black Lives Matter. They don’t. BLM is not Marxist and not creating racial strife. It’s also not a group. It’s a large, unorganized movement which is a natural response to police brutality and racism. The groups which claim to lead BLM are just opportunists, the same as latch on to any movement about anything at all that gains any traction. They see it as a business opportunity to raise money and get attention. How is this hard to understand?

    “this is just not the full story.”

    The full story is actually not complicated. Any time that any cause on the left exists, there will be opportunists who will create organizations claiming to lead that cause and making a living off donations, as well as satisfying their egos by jumping in front of cameras. Some of their funding will come from Soros because he supports the general cause they are latching themselves onto and donors need concrete groups to give money to.

    Also, any time there is such a cause, there will be other groups of individuals who get their jollies by hurting people and breaking stuff, that will also latch on to those same movements and events. It’s not likely that they would be funded by Soros, but they don’t need much funding, really they just need a crowd to give them cover.

    There will be provocateurs that infiltrate these demonstrations, and will contribute to the violence.

    There will be tiny Marxist sects that will use them as opportunities to recruit new members for their cults.

    And there will be political opponents who will use the entirely predictable presence of Marxist cults, Soros funding and violent criminals – freelance or not – to make false claims that all of those are one and the same and representative of the larger movements they latch on to. Those insinuations are, of course, false, and it’s stupid to parrot them as if you have made some kind of discovery.

    It doesn’t matter what the movement is – immigrants rights, black lives, antiwar, anti-globally managed trade, environmental… these same exact patterns reveal themselves. It’s ludicrous to believe that the movements aren’t genuine just because these smaller groups attach themselves. It’s falling for propaganda tactics of those who oppose the movements as a whole, even those tactics should be transparent. And yet, it’s disturbing how many people fall for this same old shit.

  89. dL

    That is a pretty stupid comment, dL. The last time anyone accused me of working for George Soros was when i was speaking out against the George W. Bush administration for its wars of aggression in the Middle East, and for increasing the domestic police state.

    You have a reading comprehension problem, brah

  90. dL

    George Soros is absolutely funding the anti-Trump protests and has pledged to do the whole time Trump is in office. It’s also well known that he’s donated millions of dollars to the Black Lives Matters movement.

    I’m sure he has long standing contributory ties to many groups that marched in the inauguration day protests. I have no doubt about that, particularly given that quite of that march seemed about abortion rights, and Soros has always been a major contributor to pro-abortion rights groups. But that’s a long away from the Alex Jones conspiracy tripe that AnComs are a George Soros front. Which is absurd. About as absurd as the proggie 2008 conspiracy tripe that every libertarian was on the Koch payroll.

  91. dL

    I can’t believe that people don’t know that complaints about Soros donations to anti-Trump groups or BlackLivesMatters frequently come from anti-semitic alt-right racists.

    Most , if not all, of these groups existed long before Trump ran for president. For example, it is a bit silly to call Planned Parenthood an anti-Trump group. Anti-conservative, Anti-GOP would be fair. Likewise, it would be more accurate to generalize opposition complaints about Soros as conservative, given that these complaints have been around since 2004, long before anyone had ever heard of the alt-right.

  92. Tony From Long Island

    Jill: ” . . . . It’s also well known that he’s donated millions of dollars to the Black Lives Matters movement. . . . . ”

    That’s a GOOD thing! Groups that are fighting against being shot at by police without justification SHOULD be funded! Now, if they could only get a good coherent message and a strong messenger . . . .

  93. Tony From Long Island

    Jill: ” . . . . If anyone hears of any anti-Hillary protests in the LA area, please let me know so I can go. . . . ”

    Why would there be any? She is a civilian. Her political career is over. Were there anti Dukakis protests in 1989?

  94. Andy

    Some knucklehead above brought up me talking about the CFR and globalists and etc…, and then tried to link me to some person whom I have never even heard of who is apparently a racist or some kind of Nazi who made a similar comment, as a way to try to smear me, as if I have some kind of connection to this person whom I do not even know. Well, below is a link to a video of Aaron Russo, WHO WAS JEWISH, talking about the same type of stuff. I never met Aaron Russo in person, but I did speak to him on the phone one time, and I would have voted for him to be the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee had I attended the national convention in Atlanta, GA in 2004. I enjoyed his film, “America: From Freedom to Fascism” and I handed out DVD’s of it to lots of people, and I posted links to it online on multiple occasions. He intended to make a part 2 of “America: From Freedom to Fascism”, but unfortunately, he passed away before he had a chance to do this. Here is an interview he did that was conducted by Alex Jones not too long before he died.

    Reflections And Warnings – An Interview With Aaron Russo {Full Film}

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGAaPjqdbgQ

  95. Marc Montoni

    However, if we he wants to venture down into a known anarchist enclave to exhibit his performance fascism, he can bring his own army down to protect him.

    First off, an “enclave” it isn’t. The “anarchists” who weren’t anarchists do not own the property. It is property to which people of varying interests and political persuasions have been invited.

    Second, “anarchists” they are not. I was one of those people in 1979, and I got to know dozens like them. They use the word “anarchists” mainly because they think it’s cool, and secondarily because they think it means “chaos”.

    Thus the violation of the right of others to speak, and forcibly preventing others who wanted to hear the speaker from being able to. In essence, they became a government because they instituted wholesale coercion against the rights of others.

    I believe if someone is booked to speak, and people show up who want to hear what he has to say, to forcibly interfere with that is a clear violation of the rights of individuals, and those who do so must make their victims whole.

    I was a product of a government forced indoctrination center, like most of those so-called ‘protesters’, and I remember quite clearly my teachers at various times conflating “anarchy” with “chaos”.

    As with just about every other problem in society, thank government for institutionalizing such a fundamental lack of comprehension about the relationships between individuals.

  96. dL

    First off, an “enclave” it isn’t. The “anarchists” who weren’t anarchists do not own the property. It is property to which people of varying interests and political persuasions have been invited.

    The question of who owned the property is a red herring re: definition of a true anarchist, particularly given that anarchism traditionally is a rejection of private property. It also behooves one to point out that the inviters, the college republicans, don’t own the property either. This really isn’t much of a property rights issue. if it was, I might come to a different conclusion.

    In terms of speakers being regularly invited. Yes, absolutely true. And 99% of the cases, there are no protests. In this one instance, you did have one. The speaker is performance fascist acting as a propagandist for an explicit fascist currently in power.

    Second, “anarchists” they are not. I was one of those people in 1979, and I got to know dozens like them. They use the word “anarchists” mainly because they think it’s cool, and secondarily because they think it means “chaos”.

    Well, you’re only describing your former self. You obviously never were an anarchist by your own admission. However, if one reads the writings of those who do identify as anarchist today(social or otherwise) and who do not conflate chaos/destruction w/ anarchy, then one has an immediate counterfactual to your own anecdotal experience.

    In essence, they became a government because they instituted wholesale coercion against the rights of others.

    Uh, no they don’t. That’s an absurd analogy. A government is a territorial monopoly on violence. There is no territorial monopoly of violence being exercised here.

    I believe if someone is booked to speak, and people show up who want to hear what he has to say, to forcibly interfere with that is a clear violation of the rights of individuals, and those who do so must make their victims whole.

    Generally speaking, sure, However, if the booked speaker is an advocate of institutional violence currently being exercised, you can’t really expect everyone to passively sit around and do nothing. I would hope you would have a line somewhere you would draw against absolute freedom from opposition. If, say, Trump started rounding up people into internment camps, I would hope you draw the line against freedom from opposition, even violent opposition, if Milos went around promoting that policy.

    I was a product of a government forced indoctrination center, like most of those so-called ‘protesters’, and I remember quite clearly my teachers at various times conflating “anarchy” with “chaos”.

    Well, so was I. However, I don’t recall teachers conflating anarchy with chaos. I particularly don’t recall the public school system being a fount of anarchist indoctrination, whether a correct indoctrination or a conflated one. Or even an indoctrination against it. Even if it were to be so, I do recall being able to think for myself.

  97. From Der Sidelines

    So does the Chicago LP also advocate for Chicago-style voting: early, often, and past death?

    After all, it’s just free speech, exercised repeatedly…

    #sarcasm

  98. paulie

    Kudos to dL and LibertyDave for hanging in there. Personally, refuting the same exact BS talking points from the migrant bashers over and over endlessly in multiple threads has become way too old. It’s just like talking to brick walls, which they want to encase us all in (talk about a prison planet). OpenBorders.info has all the answers and it’s really too bad more people have not taken the time to explore that site, there’s a lot there.

  99. paulie

    Her political career is over.

    Not necessarily, as I have seen discussion of her running for NYC mayor and possibly even President yet again (although Democrats will probably not be that dumb a second time… but who knows).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *