Some thoughts about some well known figures in anarchy/liberty movements and some other thoughts about fame and moral degradation as well.
This isn't going to be a really long post but I wanted to briefly touch on some thoughts I've been having.
So.. The other day I watched a video by Larken Rose essentially calling out Adam Kokesh and.. He had some pretty damning evidence in my opinion.
If you dunno who these people are, they are well known so called anarchists.
I used to really like most of these well known talking heads for anarchy and freedom and alternative information movements, though lately.. I'm getting signals I don't like from almost all of them.
I was actually planning on making a movie and had talked with Adam and there was a possibility I was going to interview him or just have him submit a clip to me for a movie on Anarchy I wanted to make.
I wanted to also interview Larken as well and Stephen Molyneux among others, though not so much anymore. They've pretty much all become suspect in various ways to me.
Also, not that Alex Jones is an anarchist, but he does claim to be for freedom and liberty and there was a time I even liked him and listened to him.
That stopped years ago and he's only become more bizarre and questionable, and just recently a friend on Facebook posted a link of him where he's basically calling for martial law..
Can you believe that? He basically made his fame speaking out against martial law, and now he basically said the only way to fix things is for Trump to create his own martial law..
WOW.... Even Jason Bermas came out and parted with AJ on that subject and said he disagreed, that's amazing cause AJ basically gave Jason his position in the movement to a large degree in my opinion with giving him such a significant spot on AJ's platform and he even got his Free Masonic family connections to fix his teeth for him too! -.-
Anyways.. Looks like a dude on Adam's political team was basically caught doing some really shady dishonorable sorts of things and Adam didn't really take proper responsibility for it it seems.. I don't want to interview any of them anymore really.
I may still make a movie on anarchy, though.. These talking heads all have issues. I think everyone does really, that's one thing I'm learning.. We're all fucked up human beings in one way or another.
Larken is probably the least bad out of all of them but I recently had an exchange with him on veganism and he's going out of his way to try to attack "militant annoying vegans" rather than to talk about the issue.
I was going to make a whole post on it, but.. I lost interest. I have better things to do than that, I still may make my "false leaders" documentary some day, though I'm really losing interest in people politics. I'm more interested in the subjects themselves than the flawed humans who make themselves a part of the picture.
Molyneux also fell out of my favor when he started defending/basically supporting Trump and I found his opinion on veganism which was lazy as well. Don't get me wrong I don't distance myself from someone just cause they support a given president, but when you're an anarchist and you claim "no rulers".. How do you defend one of the most pompous "rulers"? In regards to veganism he basically said he respects vegans but he's not one.. And I'm like.. How can an anarchist and someone who talks about morality on a regular basis not go into more detail than that?
These people dance around the issue of morality when it comes to animals because they love the taste of dead flesh and animal secretions.
These people are not the "champions" of anarchy. They are just the biggest personalities who yell the most or get the most attention for whatever reason.
I guess I'm just kind of disappointed These people used to all sort of be heroes to me and then over time I saw that they are mostly like.. Compromised individuals who have really big egos and who can not even seem to acknowledge or look at their contradictions.
In my exchange with Larken, he basically agreed with me.. But said he was too busy to respond and then went off and argued BS on other threads about how vegans still kill insects with farming so it's okay to kill even more sentient animals and more animals the way him and his vocal followers do.
He said stuff like he would take physical action if a cat was tortured or an exotic/endangered ape was being hunted and then on the other hand says it's okay to kill and eat other animals cause some peoples pesticides kill bugs to protect their plants.
All the while ignoring points about intentional death versus accidental, and how eating animals kills more insects cause you have to feed the animals more more plants than humans eat and that you can bypass pesticides and many people do using other methods of farming like permaculture food jungles.
I mean.. I wonder.. Does Larken think our ancestors were using pesticides? According to fossil evidence our Paleo ancestors ate something like 99% plants and like 1% animal products and they didn't have pesticides..
Not to mention if we evolved from the animal kingdom our closest relative is the same and eat around 99% plants to 1% animal products.. So.. I mean.. Do we really even need pesticides? I don't think so, I don't promote them. Yet.. Larken can't stop killing bigger more sentient animals and more insects as well because some people use pesticides and kill insects accidentally growing food to survive..
He just showed me that he really doesn't have a deep grasp of the details of the subject or the morality involved and he continued to act like he did even though he didn't in his sort of arrogant "I'm right, everyone else who disagrees are idiots" manner. Anyways.. Enough about him and all the other ones.
Humans are often disappointing. Even my hero growing up Jackie Chan appears to be in the secret societies and I've seen pictures of him flashing occult symbols.
There are few people I can look at and say they are true heroes to me anymore.. There are some and, I don't expect anyone to be perfect.. Heroes are flawed humans too. It's just.. I dunno there's a certain ego that goes along with most of these people when they get "famous" that I think is very disingenuous thing I don't like very much.
Seems like the liberty anarchist scene is a circus at times.. However.. I've met some really awesome anarchists and liberty people who maybe aren't as famous, but.. Are nonetheless very consistent and awesome people from what I can tell!
I have to wonder if, once you reach a certain level of fame if it gets to you and corrupts you. Do some people reach a high level and manage to resist the corruption? I dunno. It's interesting to think about though.
Thank you for writing this. I don't know that I am informed enough to be an anarchist, but the more I have interacted with those here on Steemit I do not find much I disagree with, just issues such as property rights and borders that leaves me questioning where lines are drawn.
I do think most are susceptible to corruption, which is why I never see anarchists or libertarians ever becoming the way. The people want their experts, want their parent government telling them what to do and (pretending) to care about their welfare. And they wish the large parent government to force things on their neighbors. I have long given up on expectations of my neighbors doing what is right, and devote my energy to trying to walk right myself. I guess that's about the best I can do, and live with that.
There was a time I thought I would one day be a great man of high level, but as the years have come and gone, I no longer seek that in life. I am thinking that maybe those who have certain standards it might not be possible to reach a high level. Those already occupying those levels have made this an invite only club and those not on board with their programs do not get such invites.
The "Libertarian" scene is indeed a circus at times.I would even go further and say that the alternative media is kinda dead, since the censorship on Youtube stroke last year.
Alex Jones or Adam Kokesh have always been "Gate Keepers", that's why they will never be taken down. It's 70% BS with sometimes a glimpse of truth.
Don't get me started on Molyneux, most of his views are very close to Paul Joseph Watson and I find these people the most dangerous, because spreading hate speech, in a very eloquent and clever manner.
I just can't watch them anymore, it physically repulse me.
To be able to reach a certain amount of fame like you say, it takes a lot of compromises, and all of these individuals are ready to deceive.
The only libertarian (anarcho capitalist)that I respect, is James Corbett from "the Corbett Report" but it recent years, he has been as disillusioned as all of us.
You are your own hero! :)
No rulers, no idols - even 'jesus' figured that out apparently, despite him being turned into one! lol
Stephen Molyineauieox is absurdly lazy, pompous and arrogant - I have no time for him. Larken Rose gets some respect from me for taking the time to lay out logic regarding humans and politics that makes sense.. However, as you rightly point out, he - like most humans - is still entrenched in the gap of heartlessness that allows denial to penetrate the sub conscious and thus behaviours. Vegans force us to look at our own denied self, the evil that we support while thinking we don't.. This is partially why they trigger the denied rage and hatred that others try to justify against them.
I will talk more loudly as time goes by, but not before gently coaxing the world to see other humans with greater balance first!
@careywedler's pretty great. That said, maybe there is no we and this isn't a movement, it's just a whole lot of people realising something and telling each other.
There was no pythagoras movement. He just discovered that in any right angled triangle the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides, and spread the word.
He might've smacked his wife around, or welched on his wagers; but his observations are still true.
It should be a red flag to any honest thinking person when spokespersons can't consider alternative perspectives.
TJ just did an awesome vid. on the culture of outrage and I say that as a theist. I'm also a liberal in some areas and a conservative in others.
Most of these actors seem to be in an intentional divisive mode and fighting just for the sake of arguing. I also call them sloganeers...
I think "Veganism" is the wrong place to look. I consider NAP to be sacrosanct and I consider that animals shouldn't be killed because it would a violation of NAP. Meat industry is a violation of NAP. No sentient creature should die (unless it is accidental) just because we need to eat stuff. I don't have a problem if Hannibal Lecter was eating lab grown meat. My issue is with the acquisition of said meat being a violation of NAP.
Same goes for the poor creatures. Slaughter cannot be condoned simply because these animals are less capable in cognitive tasks. If that is the case, we should also be killing the mentally disabled because they can't think properly.
As for pesticides, it's just an industrial complex. Especially in the East there were many natural remedies and most of them didn't kill other animals. Plus pesticides poison our food and the soil. On a short time span it means nothing and has zero significant effect. But over generations it will destroy our civilization. I mean look at the rats of Cancer, Autism etc. I'm 100% convinced that pesticides play a part in this along with some vaccines and drugs and other things.