Edwin Lyngar: Why I Fled Libertarianism — And Became A Liberal

Pic: Jacopo Werther (PD)

Pic: Jacopo Werther (PD)

via Salon

The night before the 2008 Nevada Republican convention, the Ron Paul delegates all met at a Reno high school. Although I’d called myself a libertarian for almost my entire adult life, it was my first exposure to the wider movement.

And boy, was it a circus. Many members of the group were obsessed with the gold standard, the Kennedy assassination and the Fed. Although Libertarians believe government is incompetent, many of them subscribe to the most fringe conspiracy theories imaginable. Airplanes are poisoning America with chemicals (chemtrails) or the moon landings were faked. Nothing was too far out. A great many of them really think that 9-11 was an inside job. Even while basking in the electoral mainstream, the movement was overflowing with obvious hokum.

During the meeting, a Ron Paul staffer, a smart and charismatic young woman, gave a tip to the group for the upcoming convention.

“Dress normal,” she said. “Wear suits, and don’t bring signs or flags. Don’t talk about conspiracy theories. Just fit in.” Her advice was the kind you might hear given to an insane uncle at Thanksgiving.

Then next day, I ran into that same operative at the convention, and I complimented her because Ron Paul delegates were being accepted into the crowd. I added, “We‘re going to win this thing.”

“Bring in the clowns,” she said, and smiled before I lost her in the mass of people.

I will never forget that moment: Bring in the clowns. At the time, I considered myself a thoughtful person, yet I could hardly claim to be one if you judged me by the company I kept. The young lady knew something I had not yet learned: most of our supporters were totally fucking nuts.

CONTINUE READING

, , , ,

  • doodahman

    idiot is uncomfortable with his head out of the sand, so of course he becomes a liberal and shoves it right back in. Liberals will ignore drone assassinations, unending global war, a massive surveillance society, taxation to the point of impoverishment, but tell them that the gov’t might be doing some chemtrailing, they can’t handle it. His response to ideas or theories that make him uncomfortable is to shut them down and ridicule them as if somehow, the truth has been radioed directly into his head, requiring no investigation, and rendering the tin foil hat a nuisance.

    The fact is that the centrists– the neoliberals, the neoconservatives, are morally and intellectually bankrupt. They are out of ideas, have no principles, no vision and are going nowhere. They are just clinging to power through rent seeking and bureaucracy, gerrymandering themselves safe congressional seats and handing the White House back and forth.

    This guy laughs at people fed up with that? He’s an ass, a part of the very problem both the anarchists and the libertarians are trying to get rid of. And someday, rid of he will be.

    • Jin The Ninja

      whether you’re anarchist-left or libertarian-right, i completely agree with every single word you’ve said here.

      • Jin The Ninja

        instead of downvotes, i’d appreciate some critical feedback.
        disagree? cool, but WHY? yes, not my most well-written post, but certainly not offensive (unless of course you’re invested in the bankrupt system)…

        • ÿ

          I think echar’s comment above was probably the most apt post so far. Or maybe Buzz’s comment about ismz.

          Andrew posted a link below in response to me that may be relevant here as well.

          Your commentary is certainly reasonable, and in context of the post you replied to, sensible. But perhaps two individuals did not like it that you continued to take the topic “seriously” and continued to play in a sandbox that doesn’t exist.

          I am not one of those two individuals, nor do I tend to use the down vote in the manner mentioned. But bitches be cray cray up in here.

          My own $0.02 on the matter is that Libertarian is an Anarchist word. I do not accept any left/right schism within Anarchy from a philosophical/ideological/book-smart/google-savvy standpoint.

          The only even-vaguely Anarchy-inspired political platform that has any “relevance” in Amerika is the Green Party. “Libertarianism” in Amerika is a fantasy for people who think Ayn Rand wrote something more than children’s stories. Or maybe I’ve just been reading Disinfo too long and can see it as the naked abuse of word magic that it is.

          From this standpoint, the author of the article and the op you replied to are trolls, and should not be fed or encouraged.

    • echar

      Perhaps your brand of sand is breathable and opaque, and the currency to buy it is concepts that are laughable to others?

    • Andrew

      Liberals are centrists? I thought conservatives were centrists.

      • BuzzCoastin

        aMerkin libz, conz & neonazi cons & teasers
        all are in the center of the scam
        anchors to make the show look real

  • fizmath

    Edwin, how can one support a gold standard without being guilty of being “obsessed” with the issue? Can you get more biased than this drivel? What is nuts about using honest money like the rest of humanity has done for thousands of years? What kind of imbecile can support paper money with such a horrible track record?

    • Jin The Ninja

      in fair assessment to humanity, a great many peoples did not use monies for thousands of years, and those that had ‘complex economic systems’ (sic) had debt-codes that periodically erased all household and bizness debt. some peoples used currencies such as cowrie shells that were of cultural value (where those same people often wore gold, but never held it as having intrinsic monetary or trade value-aesthetic and metaphysical only), but could not be traded to people outside of their cultural sphere.what i’m really saying- is that i can’t see a ‘humane’ system of money -point blank (which is where my issue w/ bitcoin really stems). i’d like to see a altogether different system replace one where either paper or gold is traded for goods and services.

      • echar

        Before currency, people bartered. Currency is a symbol representing potentional goods, items, and services.

      • BuzzCoastin

        the Polyneisians had an economic system
        based on gift giving
        which lasted until white people & their money destroyed them

        • Jin The Ninja

          most cultures had so-called ‘gift’ economies or ‘communal economies.’ even cultures with ‘currency’ held a specific cultural value for the traded object that defies contemporary thinking on the nature of (wo)man and society.

          the iroquois had a communal economy large enough to support thousands of people. as did the cree- who also had a ‘gift’ economy based on need and communal good.
          the haida had a ‘complex’ gift economy based on the potlatch (hence the term ‘indian giver’- which when the veil of racism and colonialism is taken away- simply means to give with the expectation that in the future, either those goods are returned as per need, or later given to others with intent to social value).

          i can name dozens of other pre-columbian n. american examples.

          even the way we think of the history of money is largely false. the rise of the neo-feudal bourgeoisie and the industrial revolution dramatically re-wrote/redacted the value of money and how it is supposed to enable society to function.

          • BuzzCoastin

            money is a technology used to exchange & store value
            which is different from sharing resources

            all technologies have effects on humans
            hence Zhuangzi’s story about irrigation
            Thereupon the gardener flushed up and said, “I have heard from my teacher that those who have cunning implements are cunning in their dealings, and that those who are cunning in their dealings have cunning in their hearts, and that those who have cunning in their hearts cannot be pure and incorrupt, and that those who are not pure and incorrupt are restless in spirit, and that those who are restless in spirit are not fir vehicles for Tao. It is not that I do not know of these things. I should be ashamed to use them.”

    • VaudeVillain

      Well, one could support the idea of a return to the gold standard, but decline to bring it up unprompted at dinner parties.

      That would be a fair place top start, I think.

    • Andrew

      The gold standard is less honest than paper currency, not more. At least paper money admits it’s a fiat currency. I agree that the gold standard would be more sustainable than debtmoney, but paper currency doesn’t have to be debtmoney. And to have a finite amount of currency when the production and needs of the population are in constant flux is stupid

      • gustave courbet

        Well said. The libertarian fixation with hyperinflation forgets the historical precedent of deflationary depressions. I like Bill Still’s alternative assessments about the real problems of fiat currencies, mainly: who controls them to what benefit?

    • Dylan

      Gold is not “honest money”. First, gold has very little inherent value. It’s pretty, sure, and it has some limited applications because it doesn’t tarnish or rust, but it is mostly valuable because we accept that its valuable. Look at current gold prices- there’s been a massive speculative rush on gold recently. The value of gold is tied to the amount of gold in human possession, which is not a set quantity. As more gold is mined, you see inflation, just as if the government printed more money. The discovery of new gold deposits could cause inflation on a grand scale. And if gold stops being mined, you see deflation- and while deflation sounds like a good thing as the opposite of inflation, it’s actually much, much worse.

      If you want an example of how bad the gold standard is, look at Spain when it was mining gold and silver in South America. Many scholars believe that Spain’s fall from grace was primarily due to inflation. As they imported more and more gold, their gold-backed money experienced inflation. They thought their economy was growing quickly, but they really just caused hyperinflation and screwed themselves over.

  • Juan

    I have no use for liberterian ideology. This is mostly because I suspect that what they really want is to take us all back to the 19th century. I imagine Blake’s dark satanic mills, child slave labor, grinding poverty, debtor’s prisons, a majority of starving landless serfs and a small elite controlling everything through various forms of coercion and brutality. Also, rednecks.
    Would also like to point out that this piece dismisses as whacko any counter narrative to the official 9-11 version of events. This is highly suspect and smacks of propaganda.

    • echar

      Would also like to point out that this piece dismisses as whacko any
      counter narrative to the official 9-11 version of events. This is highly
      suspect and smacks of propaganda.

      If this is so, is it also possible that any narrative that is for 9-11 being an inside job equally possible propaganda?

      *edit
      Added the word possible

      • Juan

        If by propaganda you mean a group or groups trying to influence public opinion in a certain way, then yes, of course. It looks to me, that some of what falls under “9-11 truth,” in its various manifestations, certainly falls into that category. It could also be that some of the more outlandish “theories” are deliberate attempts by official sources to discredit all counter-narratives. Alex Jones springs to mind . . .
        Maybe I’ve lost the plot, but it sure looks to me that there is an epic battle of narratives that has been unfolding across our collective idea space for some time now. We see this with various counter-narratives to official versions of events, like 9-11, and also with the recent Hancock, Sheldrake controversy over at TED. These are just two examples, but it is happening a lot.

        • echar

          Well said Juan. As an aside, these narrative battles are nothing new. To the victor the spoils. The internet has proven very effective towards inserting ideas into the global brain.

          Two authors come to mind.

          Orson Scott Card, with his characters from the Ender’s Game series, Locke and Demosthenes.

          You’re just what the world needs. A twelve-year-old to solve
          all our problems.’ ‘It’s not my fault I’m twelve right now. And it’s not
          my fault that right now is when the opportunity is open. Right now is
          the time when I can shape events. The world is always a democracy in times
          of flux, and the man with the best voice will win.

          p. 130 (Valentine
          and Peter, prior to taking on the Demosthenes and Locke identities)

          Neal Stephenson, with his Sammann character from the book Anathem. An Ita (computer expert) who can use programs to weed out the bulshytt.

          “Early in the Reticulum—thousands of years ago—it became almost
          useless because it was cluttered with faulty, obsolete, or downright
          misleading information,” Sammann said. “Crap, you once called it,” I
          reminded him. “Yes—a technical term. So crap filtering became important.
          Businesses were built around it.

        • Rhoid Rager

          Can’t stay neutral on a moving train as the famous Zinn quote goes. Good point, Juan.

    • gustave courbet

      While I appreciate components of libertarianism, I agree that it is an ideology ready to be exploited by the plutocratic class at the expense of most of its believers. There’s a (possibly apocryphal) Steinbeck quote I like that describes some of the cognitive dissonance associated with American blue-collar libertariansim: “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” I would add that anyone who claims an interest in politics and eschews the evidence of political conspiracies has lost considerable credibility and needs to be directed to a library or bookstore to add a factual bases to their world-view. Even NPR admits that the Fed was formed by a secretive meeting of powerful bankers…

      • SomeRandomDude

        It really was, they actually meet on Jeykell Island which is off the
        coast of my State to write the Aldrich Act. It got voted down the first
        time as the Aldrich Act by a Republican Senate. The second time they
        re-branded it the Federal Reserve Act, helped get Woodrow Wilson
        elected, and to officially close the Senate floor so no new bills could
        come up for vote you have to same some Latin or Greek word to close the
        floor and they forgot or didn’t for some reason and went home for the
        Christmas Holidays and 3 Senators passed it without any of the others
        being there with a 3 yea – 0 nay majority to pass. No tin foil hate
        required my friend and in 1919 Woodrow Wilson said “I
        am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial
        nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government
        by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the
        majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of
        dominant men.” Could roughly be off bu think they is it directly.

        • gustave courbet

          That was my understanding of the history of the Fed as well. I might add that the Wilson quote (which I’ve heard before) apparently is a synthesis of a couple quotes with the beginning added, as it can’t be accurately sourced. The quotes are from his 1913 book and aren’t direct references to the creation to the Fed (although they easily could be):

          “A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.” -Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People

          “We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world — no longer a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.” -Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People

          • SomeRandomDude

            Oh nice I always thought it was a direct quote made near the end of his 2nd term. Thanks a lot for actually getting the whole context, where it came from, and posting it, learn some new every day.

            Me and family use to always vacation in Jekyll Island every year, occasionally we would go to St. Simmons Island or Tybee Island. We have a nuke that got drop out somewhere around there after the plane started having troubles and the pilot dumped it in the Ocean. I’ve heard conflicting reports of rather or not it had all the stuff to actually make it explosive. Side Note: Georgia is home to the second highest number of nukes in the USA due to our nuclear Trident Subs being stationed in King’s Bay. And I grew up like 5 miles down the road from a Cold War era Nike Missile base, which I had joked that was what I thought it was growing up because it had an old guard shack, huge fence, and oddly was basically in the countryside just off an Interstate exit. I went past it every day on the way to school and when we studied the Cold War was what made me think that it was. I found out that it was indeed one when they had some kind of reunion a few years back of the people that manned all the sites around Georgia and published it in the paper; it was Site R-28.

      • Rhoid Rager

        That’s a great Steinbeck quote. Thanks for sharing.

    • kowalityjesus

      boooooo!!!

      ANYONE WITH A CONSCIENCE has to admit that Ron Paul was useful AT LEAST for the purpose of pointing out the outrageously contrived nature of the American electoral process.
      Paul-ites: “We have a highly-qualified, highly-intelligent, well-funded candidate who has a large and enthusiastic constituency.”
      Duopoly: “What are you doing here! Don’t you know that the people don’t choose the president anymore?” [palm in face]

      His systematic marginalization and censorship should be sufficient qualification to this crowd….it baffles me.

      • Jin The Ninja

        “His systematic marginalization and censorship should be sufficient qualification to this crowd….it baffles me”

        we’ve been over this: he’s a f*cking republican, with a (still) rapid and voracious fanbase- that consistently perpetuates disinfo. there is no radical quality in belonging to a major party. which is kind of the irony of this article, and also kind of the irony of your comment.

        • kowalityjesus

          “Republican” label throws ya? OK so what are you going to do about the hijacked presidency then? I bet you thought Obama was the Messiah….whadda joke.

          If Paul was so pernicious, why did MSM and Romney et al. hate his guts? He pulled the curtain back on their ghetto war machine! You can point out his flaws all day long, but you have to AT LEAST admit he is the only sane guy on the panel with regards to war policy….Not that I think you or any other voluntary-political-minority would admit Paul’s value; it seems like your type are addicted to being politically marginalized: when someone powerful shows up outside The Cabal, you bow to propaganda and hate on him just like every other war profiteer and Israeli lobbyist. Shouldn’t the “enemy of your enemy” be your friend?

          • mannyfurious

            Personally I agree with both you and Jin. On the one hand it has become fairly obvious that Ron Paul was playing up his “outsider” “reformer” status by emphasizing the aspects of his platform that fit that narrative, all the while holding on to a plethora of poisonous “paleo conservative” ideals.

            Still, while being a probably racist scummy little cretin, he did in fact reveal many of the warped gears of the country’s war machine. And regardless of his more slimy beliefs, he was right on both about this country’s imperialism and its wasteful (for most) war on drugs.

            In short, some people give him too much credit, others give him too little. He was neither this radical, heroic, incorruptible reformer. But he was still more trustworthy and right on many important issues than any other member of the legislative branch not named Bernie Sanders.

          • Jin The Ninja

            this is becoming pathetic and pitiful.
            attempting to forcibly adhere ‘obama as messiah’ to my username, not once, not twice, but now, more than 3 times is laughable and a lame attempt to discredit me. i hold no messiahs or masters. i have never been reserved in my criticism of the system. i have always maintained a clear depiction of my ideologies and sympathies. the point is,and that i made before NO idols, NO messiahs are able to reform, fix,alter, or reverse systemic corruption that is rooted in the historical origins of the nature of the state in question (and perhaps in the state itself). having said that, it continues to be HIGHLY ironic, that you attempt to paint rp as a rebel within the system- and then use obama as a frame of reference for my beliefs, as if disbelief in one, necessitated belief in the alternate. yes, he was an anti-war candidate. there are several of those. the very nature of the country is war-like. the economic and political agenda is imperialism and domination. the ideology is exceptionalism. how to combat foundational rot? build a new foundation based on legitimate concepts of dignity, democracy, and justice- and not just for land-owning, slave-owning aristocrats. reformation is co option.

          • kowalityjesus

            “NO idols, NO messiahs are able to reform, fix,alter, or reverse systemic
            corruption that is rooted in the historical origins of the nature of
            the state in question (and perhaps in the state itself).”

            The gentleman is the wind and the people are the grass. Whichever way the wind blows, the grass will bow in that direction.

            I apologize for implying that you have supported Obama in the past. I was only trying to point out the lack of sane options in the 2012 election, let alone 2008. Obama DID keep us out of war with Iran, (bless his soul!) but RP was the ONLY one on the Rep candidacy NOT espousing war with Iran as part of his platform. And do I need to give you the link where it shows how many times Ron Paul was publicly and illegally marginalized? http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig13/glenn-j1.1.1.html It’s quite a long list, and I would say points to a genuine pariah status among those people you so decry.

          • Jin The Ninja

            i applaud rp for his continued isolationist stance on foreign policy, and i appreciate your apology. however i do not believe in supporting a major party candidate as a means to reform the system. maybe a difference of opinion.

          • kowalityjesus

            at some point, one has to take what one gets imo. I opted to ‘take’ RP a long time ago, and hold his career and ideology on a pedestal as an utter antagonist to that cabal which currently prevails.IMHO

          • Jin The Ninja

            i think i see where the difference lies. i think pedestals are an outdated expectation of which to hold anyone.

          • kowalityjesus

            technology/knowledge changes, but people dont

            go listen to this great song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiUAq4aVTjY

          • Calypso_1

            dehumanizing even

          • Jin The Ninja

            concur.

        • gustave courbet

          In Texas, you can vote in any party’s primary. I voted for Paul in the Re[publican primary because, between him and the other Republican candidates plus Obama, he was the only anti-war candidate. That stands out to me as a pretty stark contrast (even if he is a provincial yahoo)…

          • kowalityjesus

            That is one of the only apt put-downs of Paul that I have heard.

      • Juan

        “Yeah, well, that’s just like your opinion, man.”
        Sure he’s made a few noises I happen to agree with, but I still think he is a racist republican.

        • Eric_D_Read

          Even though his position on ending the drug war would do more to benefit the inner city black population than any other policy position possibly could?

          • Juan

            I am 100% totally on board with ending the fucking racist farce that is the so called “war on drugs” in the US.
            However, just like Barry bamboozled millions of well meaning liberals into “electing” him, and then proceed to out shrub the shrub, I am reasonably certain that a Paul presidency would’ve played out more or less the same. These bastards will spew whatever rhetoric they think they have to to get “elected.” Talk is cheap.
            On a personal level, he is a right wing racist; they make me VERY nervous. Paul is a non-starter with me, no matter what he says or has said.

          • gustave courbet

            Whether you agree with all of Ron’s policy platforms or not (I don’t), he was a incredibly consistent in his beliefs, and if the sound bites you can find of him online are any indication, he was definitely not savvy to the ‘say anything to get elected’ schtick (unlike his duplicitous son). Paul was a genuinely principled radical which is why he was marginalized so energetically. The powers that be have learned that marginalization and exclusion are easier than inviting someone for a slow ride through Dealey Plaza.

          • Eric_D_Read

            The war on some drugs is actually a classist operation rather than a racist one.
            Exhibit A: My white male privilege didn’t immunize me from getting scooped up in the net and branded as a felon for what substances I chose to put in my body.

          • Juan

            I could’ve been more precise in my response, but race and class overlap. I see it very much as a racist class war.
            If you are poor, it doesn’t matter how white you are, unless you are a young pretty girl. If that’s the case, then you can become part of the news cycle for a week or two if you go missing.
            Sorry you got caught up in the bullshit criminal justice system.

          • kowalityjesus

            His positions is solid as the Canadian Shield. Maybe he would change policy if given actual power (besides mostly just a dissenting voice) but 40 years with the same platform out does most of the brine that populate our political map.

  • BuzzCoastin

    all isms are for people who can’t or won’t think for themselves
    ready answers and arbitrary categories
    are the hallmarks of ismz

    • echar

      I think you may have offended a devotee of downvotism.

      • BuzzCoastin

        they thought about what I said
        refected upon their beliefism
        and realized they had to down vote on principle
        in order to be true to their ismz dictates

  • Dingbert

    Libertarians need to learn the history of American Leftism, or they will follow the same path. Strict ideological purity, deafening querulousness, and a lack of interest in winning elections is a recipe for irrelevance and schism. And now we have the misinformed echo chamber of the Internet to amplify and hasten the whole process.
    They will only succeed if they adopt a “big tent” philosophy and attempt to replace one of the major two parties. But two internal LP caucuses already tried that. It was offensive to party dogma and now those caucuses are gone.

    Also, Ron Paul is a paleoconservative, not a libertarian.

  • ÿ

    Damn Euclid and his geometry! Adding a second line to the situation resolves nothing!

    • Calypso_1

      Don’t think we can blame Euclid for x,y axis paradigms.
      This political mindscape doesn’t even explore the dimensions of the1st proposition.

      • ÿ

        I readily agree that the political mindscape has failed to grasp even the most basic proposition of Euclidean geometry, however perhaps there was some misunderstanding about the intensity of my condemnation.

        Euclid’s “Elements” is one of the most profane and vile works ever perpetrated upon this so-called Western Civilization and by extension now, all of humanity. The coyote, roach, pigeon, rat, crow, and raccoon scholars of the post-humanity Earth will no doubt disagree about much, but one thing will be clear: 300BCE was the moment that doomed the human species.

    • Andrew
  • Dingbert

    Ron Paul is a paleoconservative, not a Libertarian.

  • The Design Flaw

    I like how the left/right/authoritarian/libertarian chart has 400
    squares yet this Lyngar character thinks there are only two.
    Oversimplify much?

  • Damien Quinn

    It surprises me how readily politically aware people in the US seem to adopt a party position. Edwin Lyngar seems intelligent enough to hold a set of nuanced opinions of his own making, yet he feels compelled to categorize himself as Democrat or Libertarian and adopt the appropriate colour’s. Of course, he’s a party political guy, goes to conventions and so on, you’d expect him to topee over to a new group when he gets disillusioned. That’s fair enough.

    The thing is, his state of being seems to be ubiquitous to this outside observer. Honestly, the actual government in most countries doesn’t even adopt the party line to the extent that ordinary US people seem to. Is the “I am A, therefore I believe everything A’s believe” impression I get genuine or does it just arise because the hard liners do most of the shouting?

    • gustave courbet

      From my experience, many people who parrot beliefs espoused by the leadership of political parties they identify with feel entitled to opinions that they have neither thought about deeply or researched in any way. I would guess that it stems from a desire to be seen as well-informed and competent without undertaking the often tedious process of research.

      • Damien Quinn

        That’s a pity.

        Particularly since, in my opinion, the tedium is often in the delivery rather than the content. As much as I enjoy getting to grips with important subjects, as much as I find them fascinating, the really rich and interesting information is often delivered in a preachy, half assed, “anyone? anyone?” monotone that has you dozing off or reaching for the razor inside ten minutes.

        If people find Kim Kardashian more interesting than the workings of nature and society, you really have to question the way nature and society is being explained to them.

        • gustave courbet

          Well, as someone who orders obscure policy books from the 70s, I agree with you that the details of real history are fascinating, but it is my impression that I am in the minority and most people prefer dancing cats…

      • SomeRandomDude

        I’ve read several of your posts and must say they all have had most excellent points. And as for this post I will say, if one would at least keep up with and deeply think about their political parties actions and opinions would go a long way in making sound political choices and statements. And if they dared took the great step to do the deep research themselves they could truly find political awakening and begin to lead with their own views, even if similar to the parties, and not just agree with others. For when all seems lost and in despair, your wisdom could be their beacon to prosperity. It’s better to be a voice of guidance than a bobble-head in confusion.

  • Vance Decker

    Awesome. You see. Vulgarity can often be used to express a complex series of concepts not easily understood.

    The young lady knew something I had not yet learned: most of our supporters were totally fucking nuts.

    Pure Gold!

  • wfzlsster

    Yes, let’s all become liberals so we can blindly support Obama and the Democrats, After all, they did stop the wars as promised and drastically reduced military spending, right?

  • Liam_McGonagle

    I like these narratives about personal growth. It takes cajones to take a hard look at your philosophy and retool.

    Too bad it doesn’t matter, though. There are only 50 people in the US whose opinions matter, and unfortunately the subject of this article isn’t one of them. Not that I’m one of them, either.

  • tibby trillz

    i went to a libertarian meeting and there were a bunch of lunatics saying the government was involved in mlk’s death. maniacs.

    • Andrew

      Libertarians aren’t the only lunatics that believe that. I’m one, for example.

      • tibby trillz

        i was being sarcastic in that i believe the government was seen as responsible in a civil lawsuit. id link that, but i dont think my comment would go through as disqus seems to see all links as spam..so yes, blanket denial of all conspiracy theories is just as ridiculous as accepting all conspiracy theories.

  • gustave courbet

    I absolutely agree. Although some ideologies require more double-think than others in order to be useful as exploitative tools.

21
More in 9/11 Truth movement, Clowns, Moon landing conspiracy theories, Ron Paul
What’s the Difference Between a Whistleblower and a Mad Conspiracy Theorist?

Satirist Brendan O'Neill continues the theme of the day – whistleblowers - in this essay for the Telegraph: What's the difference between a whistleblower and a conspiracy theorist? Sometimes it...

Close