Libertarians: Truly, The Snakes In The Grass Save for later Reblogpost

Holyphonic
@Holyphonic

Send Private MessageSubscribe13

This, my friends, is an article I’ve desired to pen for a long time — it just never seemed like the right time.

Until yesterday, when the Gods threw me a bone in form of Daniel Harris, better known as “Raz0rfist” on YouTube. I’ve actually been aware of this guy’s channel since its inception, and I was briefly friends with his Canadian ex-girlfriend.

His latest video is as follows:

You should go watch it, but I will sum it up for you: Dan is here to tell you that them “Nazis” were in fact, “real socialists” and thus the epitome of all evil for one reason: The “threat” — as he says — and their ability to interfere in the market, or “seize the means of production” existed, and they were against the beloved “individualism”.

Does this man, whose entire identity is built on consumer products, and has turned himself into a walking advertisement for outdated and over-rated metal bands from 40 years ago, seem like a paragon of “individuality” to you?

You ever notice that? That all these anti-collectivist, super-individuals seem to have just filled the hole where real culture and relationships are supposed to go and put consumerism in its stead? It’s just manufactured music, movies, video games, and everything else churned out by corporations.

This is what happens when you deprive people of culture and community.

This brings me to my beef with “Libertarians”, such as Dan — his mom was very actively involved with Libertarian party — who I will argue are worse than socialists, for the following reason: Down to brass tacks, the ideology of libertarianism can be explained as thus

“We must never, ever, infringe on corporations’ inalienable rights to abuse the rights of the citizens because capitalism is a religion, and the government basically shouldn’t even exist anyway”.

Before I elucidate on that quote, you must understand that the kind of society Libertarians fantasize about, has never existed. A government, usually an autocratic one, usually a monarchy, has always existed, and will continue existing in the future. It is an ideology that was born of…wait for it…Idealism, and not one that arose completely spontaneously as a response to the environment — and you all know what manufactured ideologies that go against the natural order usually mean.

Also, Dan’s claims in the video are slightly off the mark — everyone with a cursory understanding of Nazism, knows that it arose as a response to communism, but I’ll touch on this more later.

The kind of society that Dan wants isn’t even possible, because of the exact spontaneous order I speak of. If his libertarian dream were to begin coming about, Nationalists like myself, the Marxists, among others, would go to battle, and move to seize power. The libertarians would be powerless to stop any of us from winning, because they would, by necessity, need to stop being libertarians and collectivize in order to do so — and they hate collectivism, remember.

But why are libertarians worse? Because, when you take it to its logical conclusion, libertarianism justifies any kind of atrocity against the citizens at the hands of corporations, because it has religious fervor toward the free market. I’ll give you an example:

It’s safe to say that libertarians would be against state-run healthcare, because it’s best to leave it, like all things, up to the free market, right? What if, as communication platforms like Facebook have done, hospitals began to deny medical attention to anyone who is “racist”?

Would these assholes then say: “Well just learn to do open-heart surgery yourself” or “Just open your own hospital”? Yes, they would — in fact, I have heard libertarians make this exact argument about food and its prices. They suggest to just “grow your own” despite the fact that most of us aren’t farmers, don’t have the resources and space to grow our own, and couldn’t afford to do so thanks to housing and other skyrocketing prices which have also come about as a result of “muh free market”.

What is the libertarian response to this if you CAN’T “do it yourself”, then? The only answer that remains is “I guess you’ll die”, but somehow, libertarians think this is more virtuous than government intervention. Do you ever notice how most of these libertarians don’t practice what they preach? Not one libertarian who has told me “Just grow your own food, then” or “Just build your own house, then” has ever built a house and none of them know the first fucking thing about agriculture. It’s really suspicious how these snakes all seem to be well-off people themselves, not suffering under the status quo, and only ever slither out of the grass when the status quo is being criticized so that they may shift blame from the system onto the critics of the system — that’s extremely dubious.

And note that Gavin is once again, criticizing the critics of the system and not even considering that the critics might have a point.

Despite the tortured wishes of libertarians, this current corporate, anarcho-tyranny is absolutely an organic result of limitless capitalism. If one company does really well, and is able to keep buying up its competitors, and those competitors are willing to sell, that monopoly is perfectly valid if you truly believe that no state-intervention is required, it’s all about contracts between people, and the markets will be fair whilst totally unregulated — if you are truly libertarian.

Some might say “You’re describing Anarcho-Capitalists!” I fail to see, in practice, what the difference actually is, because both ultimately advocate for the same end result. It seems to me that the only difference between “Libertarians” and “Anarcho-Capitalists” is that the latter is honest about what their vision of society is really like.

Remember how we were told to “Just make our own” Patreon, Paypal, etc. after we got banned from all those platforms for wrong think? I seem to recall some people tried, but it never came to pass because the banks and backbone internet services, all the resources and means of production, all with the same ideology, generally owned by (((the same people))), said “No”. Hell, even Jews aren’t safe from this. The only thing that could defeat this, is a more powerful collective entity with a military, and legal structure to uphold the law, like say…a government.

The only reason you can’t be denied a phone number in the west, based on your politics today, is because governments passed communication acts that prevent these companies from denying you service.

It seems that libertarians are in favor of us “making our own” of everything but our own government.

Onto Dan’s kvetching about the “socialism” of National Socialism in terms of economic efficiency, something you’ll note that Dan cleverly glosses over, and merely points out a food shortage in ’35, which, I’d expect a shortage of some things for a bit when you’re no longer sucking at the tit of global markets. Despite Dan’s rage at socialism and libertarians “make your own” philosophy — making their own is literally what Nazi Germany DID!

My grandparents lived in National Socialist Germany, and they could tell you about how the years before the war, in NSDAP Germany, were far, far preferable to what came both before and after.

Why? Well, it might have to do with the facts that unemployment hit zero. They broke free of the Jewish banking scam and took control of their own money. Wages rose due to the fact that now you could only pick from Germans to hire. Unemployed men could join the military, which created demand for more ammo and shipping of said gear. The degeneracy of Weimar was purged. The average worker only required about 1/8 of his monthly salary to afford his home. The birthrate rose. There were financial incentives to have children, not too dissimilar from what Hungary has recently implemented to success. The government gave businesses bonuses for putting Germans to work. Social cohesion rose greatly, and everyone basically got a free annual vacation through programs like Strength Through Joy.

I don’t seem to recall any of this being a thing under Bolshevik Socialism to the east.

It’s also important to consider that, when discussing National Socialism Vs. Jewish Socialism, which necessitates WW2 discussion, one is ultimately missing the point by discussing economics, anyway. The economic conversation is basically a tool to make some sort of argument that “The Nazis and The USSR were two sides of the exact same coin”, as if WW2 was about capitalism vs socialism, or racists vs not-racists (everyone was “racist”) instead of what it was actually about — Nationalism vs globalism. 

But all of the successes of the NSDAP’s economic policies mean nothing to Dan and libertarians because it fucked with their sacred capitalism. We can’t allow such economics to make a comeback, ever, because the government might tell you that you’re not allowed to sell a bottle of fruit juice for 15 fucking dollars, US. The fact that, at the prices that are allowed, you can still go home to a family — something white people don’t have today — your own home, etc. and get perhaps even a first-class cabin on this summer’s cruise, despite being from the lower rungs of society is all rendered meaningless because you couldn’t charge $15 for fruit juice!

While I do have, as an ethno-nationalist, issues with the ideology of Nazism — its obsession with futurism and modernity, among others — I absolutely would not argue against the reality that their economic policy was the only economic policy that actually benefit the people in this post-industrial-revolution world. All they had to do to make it happen, at the end of the day, was to be “racist” and put their own people first, last and only, and to get in the way of businesses who’d exploit the population for power and profit.

 Libertarians are directly opposed to this.

Sorry Dan, I don’t care whether NatSocs were in fact “real socialists” or not — I’d take what they had over your corporate anarcho-tyranny of today, any day.