"Anarchists"

There is a massive disconnect among some of you claiming to be Individualists, Voluntaryists, Anarchists, Libertarians, Classical Liberals, etc. You need to be logically consistent, or your ideology is just another primitive tribe of children throwing a tantrum and your claim of the morally superior position is hypocritical at best.

If you practice what you preach, please upvote and resteem this post. If you don't, please go back to circle-jerking in your mom's basement with your buddies on 4chan.

Didn't you stop throwing tantrums when you were a toddler?

via poorlydrawnlines @ http://www.bullshift.net

So @didic shared a screenshot of this post created by @arevolution last night. This kind of post is far from uncommon, and if you think it's just the views of one person I suggest you either stop reading this or acknowledge that right there is the disconnect. @builderofcastles joined the conversation on @didic's post, and I have tagged all three here very deliberately.

The logically consistent position is to support your freedom to be a raging dickhole, but not necessarily your choice to do so. Which brings me to the main points:

1. Censorship
It's a slippery slope, banning speech or ideas we find repugnant. It stinks of the Thought Police from Orwell's "1984". I would rather have them out in the open, subject to critical analysis and even ridicule, because free speech means "they" have the freedom to say whatever they want and "we" have the freedom to call them out on it. There is also some chance - however increasingly marginal as we become more and more polarized - that we might engage in rational discourse. Who is the arbiter of what constitutes acceptable speech? We only seek such power for ourselves, never for others because ours is obviously the only correct worldview. I'm reminded of Martin Niemoller's famous poem condemning his own complacency as the Nazis rose to power.

You cannot ban words or thoughts. Attempting to do so has backfired so spectacularly every time it's been tried, I cannot believe anyone in this day and age still thinks it's a viable solution. How's that working out for North Korea or Venezuela or dozens of other countries run by repressive socialist regimes?

Everyone in the foreground of this picture is an asshole

via https://muricatoday.com

2. "The New World Order"
If you think there's some shadowy organization sitting around dimly-lit smoke-filled rooms plotting world domination, I have some bad news for you: "They" achieved world domination over 100 years ago. You've been watching too many movies. Furthermore, if InfoWars is your source of information, not only is Alex Jones far from a credible source of information, you're being herded like cattle to soak it up as gospel truth without independent verification (the doctor's advice to get a second opinion is ... good advice), and you have the knowledge and experience of a child if you use his entertainment show to claim that you're an independent thinker, revolutionary, or actually believe in any of the political ideologies I'm addressing here. He's also a Donald Trump supporter, which makes sense because they both "suffer" from narcissistic personality disorder. Ya, real fucking revolutionary, bruh. He's selling you a product, and you're gobbling it up without even knowing what it is or what it might do to your porous little mind, and then convincing yourself that you're "woke". Please. Grow up.

You'd like to make this about some mysteriously nebulous cabal that may or may not have the power you assign it, outside of your infantile need to abrogate responsibility to some fictional movie villain for problems you're too chickenshit and lazy to get off your ass and contribute to solving.

Your views aren't validated by a mob drinking the same Kool-Aid you are

via https://wearechange.org

3. "The LGBT Agenda"
The claim that there is a "Gay Agenda" or "Transgender Agenda" is not only delusional, it's pretty fucking hypocritical coming from someone who demands their individual liberties while denying others any agency based on some arbitrary group to which you alone presume to assign a shared ideology. I've covered my own thoughts on the perceptions and portrayals of transgender people here, and my views are unorthodox but grown from a lifetime of personal experience with the LGBT community.

Why are LGBT people such a sore point for you self-described Anarchists, Libertarians, etc.? Don't tell me it's just "SJW's" 'cause we both know that's bullshit. It's a fucking obsession. You would think people who claim to defend an individual's freedom to choose would support LGBT people's freedoms - independent of the debate over whether or not it's a choice - but instead they group everyone into their own conception of tribes so they can claim moral superiority and refuse to see their own glaring hypocrisy. If you demand self-entitled liberties you would deny to others, you are no better than those whose ideologies you claim to oppose. Being as provocative as you possibly can then claiming you're offended by someone else's mere existence ... well so fucking what if you're offended? Does liberty only apply as long as it doesn't interfere with your delicate sensibilities, snowflake?

LGBT people have existed in every culture since the dawn of civilization, such as it is. If you think they are part of some grand conspiracy to depopulate the planet, I can destroy that fantasy pretty easily: Many LGBT people have children, and many more wish they could. Remind me again who keeps putting kids up for adoption. Remind me again who is prevented by law in many places from adopting kids. If you hate and fear "the gaaaaaaays" (your Jerry Falwell is showing), blame the straights. They're the ones who keep having gay babies. If you think homosexuality is some evil plot to turn your kids gay, I will kiss this woman right in front of them!

It won't be long before humans can reproduce via stem cells (although I certainly don't claim to be an expert on the subject), so maybe it would be a more productive long-term solution to leave your contrived toxic masculinity back in the Bronze Age where it belongs, because it's obviously over-compensating for your fear of what your boyfriends might think if you came out of the closet.

via http://www.weknowawesome.com

I will close with the following excerpt from last night's "conversation", because it's both exemplary and notable that none of these clowns had a clever unoriginal response to anything I said:

@builderofcastles:

I believe that an evil group is shoving LGBT in everyone's face to

1. Get a reaction. To make a new bogeyman.
2. To break down society via degeneracy.
3. Trying to get society to push back against LGBTs and so they can be the first ones to be taken to FEMA camps.

Just like Hitler did with the Jews. Have you studied the propaganda campaign done by Hitler to make the Jews out as the most evil of evil. The ones responsible for all the problems in Germany?

There is a very close parallel with what Hitler did then, and what is happening now. And since I do not want to see my gay and lesbian friends hurt when this blowback comes, I attempt to point out these parallels.

@ancapbarbie:

1. Are you fucking seriously going there? Daring to exist in public spaces is not "shoving LGBT in everyone's face". I've said a few informative things, to which of course you aren't responding. Nobody thus far has engaged in hate speech, but you are definitely delusional. (Edited for correct syntax)
2. What reaction? What bogeyman? Transgender people have existed in every culture since the dawn of "civilization". If you represent society, I hope it breaks down sooner than later. Degeneracy is subjective. You sound like a Sunni Muslim with that shit.
3. Umm ... wow. Just wow.

Hitler put yellow Stars of David on Jews and pink triangles on homosexuals. Just like you're advocating. Hitler got away with it because he convinced people that Jews and homosexuals were "degenerate" and reducing the birth rate and "purity" of Germany. Have you even read the Nazi Party Platform or Mein Kampf? Maybe don't invoke Hitler when it's gonna backfire so spectacularly.