Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Consent’

Donald Trump, Anarchism Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on September 27, 2020

“Belief in the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion.” (Google Online Dictionary)
“ANARCHISM is a political philosophy and movement that rejects all involuntary, coercive forms of hierarchy. It calls for the abolition of the state which it holds to be undesirable, unnecessary and harmful.”  (Wikipedia)




Donald Trump seems to think we’re all stupid, or he really is stupid. Then again, maybe we can just chalk this all up to neo-McCarthysim. What, you may ask, am I talking about?

The ‘Dear Fuhrer’ keeps using a word as a fear-inducing pejorative, and I don’t think that it means what he thinks that it means. It’s even more ridiculous than something from ‘The Princess Bride.’

There are a lot of people in the world who identify as an ‘anarchist’ of some sort or another. From some of the world’s most respected intellectuals and political minds, to the factory floors, as well as the culture in music, and even among those who practice law or fight wars; you can find a rich history of anarchists in America. If Bubba from Forrest Gump were here, he might say: “There’s market anarchists, christian anarchists, political anarchists, classical anarchists, individualist anarchists, mutualist anarchists, social anarchists, crypto anarchists,” etc, ad nauseam.

If you’re talking about people who may not always self-identify as ‘anarchists,’ but technically are living a given lifestyle consistent with some traditional vein within anarchism, then even pacifists such as the Amish communities can count as a type of ‘anarchist.’ And, in fact, anarchists are typically not bomb-throwers, but garden-growers. Anarchists may sometimes just include people who tend to have an aversion to being organized in authoritarian and violent hierarchies, and choose rather to surround themselves among people who problem-solve with a countenance towards peaceful resolutions which respect everyone’s natural rights and freedoms.

I’ve been happy to self-identify as an ‘anarchist’ of a stripe for many years now because I find the concept of consent and voluntaryism to be the highest of all the ideals in both morality and law.

For the record:
“Belief in the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion.” (Google Online Dictionary)
“ANARCHISM is a political philosophy and movement that rejects all involuntary, coercive forms of hierarchy. It calls for the abolition of the state which it holds to be undesirable, unnecessary and harmful.”  (Wikipedia)

(In)famous atheist activist Madalyn Murray O’Hair was a self-identified anarchist, and philosopher Ayn Rand has certainly been a historical favorite among those who enjoy reading in the ‘individualist anarchist’ vein of thought (although I don’t know of her ever technically self-identifying as an anarchist). Emma Goldman is probably one of the most well-known historical anarchist names in American labor movements. Leo Tolstoy left an undeniable legacy of anarchism within America’s most widely practiced faith tradition. There are ‘Austrian economists’ who openly call themselves anarchists currently, and who have even testified before the U.S. Congress on economic matters. Noam Chomsky seems to be a celebrity favorite of many anarchists today, and even a President of the United States can sound much like an anarchist when they say things like, “Government isn’t the solution to our problems, government is the problem,” as Ronald Reagan did.

Words actually have definitions. One might think the president would know the definitions of the terms he speaks publicly and would want to use those words correctly.

Or, maybe there’s another agenda afoot.

If someone has awoken the spirit of Eugene McCarthy, I’ve got a few questions for them.

Kru Adam G. “Brick” House is an Afghanistan war veteran and former licensed minister (UPCI), who has become an outspoken skeptic, peace advocate, and libertarian activist. He currently resides in Leander, Texas, where he is a licensed Muay Thai Kru and owner of Peaceful Warrior Muay Thai Academy.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Will ‘Consent’ Prevent the Normalisation of Pedophilia? – Aussie Nationalist Blog

Posted by M. C. on May 25, 2020

Which is worse-the concept of drag queen story time or parents that allow their children to be exposed?

Drag Queen Storytime may be a key step towards the normalisation of pedophilia

I received an interesting critical comment on my last post, ‘WHO Advances the Pedophile Agenda’:

There’s never going to be normalisation of non-consenting relationships.

This individual is not alone: as of 26 May 2020, most leftists probably object to pedophilia on the ground of consent. More or less, their reasoning (if pressed) would go along the following lines:

Two consenting adults can do as they please in the privacy of their own bedroom. But children under the age of 16 or 18 are too young and cannot provide consent. Therefore, sex with underage children should remain illegal and unacceptable.

We on the right, however, should not place any real trust in those who only postulate a ‘consent’ objection to pedophilia. This is because left-wing opposition to pedophilia is more a matter of them being insufficiently warmed up to the prospect; rather than ‘consent’ serving as the immovable foundation of progressive morality and permanently preventing its acceptance.

Children are being sexualised irrespective of consent

Plenty has been said about Drag Queen Storytime; and the recent guidelines of WHO, which recommended that children aged between 0 and 4 be instructed on masturbation.

These developments, beyond a shadow of doubt, aim to sexualise children as soon as they are able to venture from the cradle. Obviously, such children are incapable of consenting to their sexualisation in any meaningful way.

But has this problem of consent posed any bar to Drag Queen Storytime? No, as prior to coronavirus, these events were hosted with ease worldwide.

And have progressives criticised the clear lack of consent involved in these trends? No, not even one.

Promises made by leftists are worthless

Let us revisit that critical comment, “There’s never going to be normalisation of non-consenting relationships.” It is not that acceptance of pedophilia is unlikely or unforeseeable; “never” is the claim being made. Which is, frankly, an assertion that cannot reasonably be accepted.

How many times have we heard assurances that left-wing political ambitions only go this far, only to later find out they go much further? Some issues which reveal the hollow nature of their promises include:

1. Demographic change:

Progressives have had the gall, for years, to insist the ‘Great Replacement’ is a conspiracy theory. Moreover, the marchers at the 2017 Charlottesville rally were universally decried for chanting “You will not replace us!”

But year after year, millions of immigrants from the Global South pour into Western countries; all while the West has a below-replacement birth rate. What is a conclusion of simple arithmetic, the left has vociferously and consistently denied.

And yet there are moments, when they feel emboldened enough, in which progressives openly admit that yes, they absolutely intend on outnumbering and displacing white people.

In reference to the rising tide of non-white voters that threatened to install a Democratic Governor in deep-red Georgia, Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times declared:

In a week, American voters can do to white nationalists what they fear most. Show them they’re being replaced.

2. Gay marriage:

When Australians were being persuaded prior to the 2017 Plebiscite on gay marriage, any concerns over a ‘slippery slope’ were hastily denounced, the ABC describing it as one of “the five worst arguments for voting No.”

Yet the slippery slope, for reasons previously expounded on, is a very real phenomenon. Drag Queen Storytime has proceeded from the legalisation of gay marriage, despite this ghastly trend being scarcely imaginable in 2017.

3. Abortion:

A line used to placate opponents of abortion in the 1990s, was the procedure should be “safe, legal and rare.”

Well, abortion being legal has certainly not made the procedure rare: American women have aborted 50 million fetuses since Roe v Wade; it is estimated that between one quarter and one third of Australian women will have an abortion in their lifetimes.

Whereas abortion was once justified as being a “difficult decision” for women to make, undertaking one is now boasted of and trumpeted as the height of contemporary virtue:

As demonstrated through the above examples, left-wing assurances are nothing more than strategic pretences on the road to advancing their revolutionary agenda. Because of this, their assurances do not warrant any serious consideration.

Nothing limits the logical development of progressivism

It is obviously futile to trust the promises of leftists. But matters seem to go deeper than this, with nothing principally limiting the logical development and application of progressive thought.

Underriding the idea of progress itself, is there being no set limits to what individuals or society can achieve. There is thus no set endpoint to the furtherance of progressive ideas; all we can expect in the future is ceaseless agitation on grounds of equality, acceptance, individual autonomy and social justice. What all of this turbulence will ultimately lead to, no one can fully know.

As Ted Kaczynski wrote in his 1995 manifesto,

Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of ALL the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted EVERY social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about.

So, suppose it is 2030, and the leftist ‘list’ of things that were wrong with society in 2015 has been completely fulfilled. It would certainly not be far-fetched to imagine their 2030 ‘list’ of matters that required correction, to entail the normalisation of pedophilia.

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why An Ideal Society Would be Based on Consent | The Daily Bell

Posted by M. C. on September 16, 2018

What is described here is a form of Panarchism. Search panarchism/michael Rozeff.

It is a good idea but it would require an overhaul of society. Unlikely, too many sheeple.

by Joe Jarvis

Quora is a social media website where people ask and answer all sorts of questions.

I started to write a response to a seemingly simple six-word question. But every point I wanted to make required an in-depth explanation. Since the theme fits, I decided to share my article-length response here.


What is An Ideal Society Like?


Consent is the secret to an ideal society. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »