the only real libertarian™

Joined January 2021
2,276 Photos and videos
I think the flaw here is assuming that a father's only value is financial. Creating a bunch of single mommies with privatized child support downplays the developmental & psychological benefits of having a present father figure in your child's life.
ppl seem confused about what this is. my goal is to have women who want to have and raise a child as a single mother, get matched with a guy who wants his genetic progeny to continue (sperm donor) and is happy to provide financial support for it.
3
3
345
Moxie is an acquired taste, and you aren't a *true* New Englander (Massachusetts obviously doesn't count) until you've passed the initiation ritual of acquiring it.
My wife made me try this and I don't get the hype. It tastes like Banana Soda. Why would anyone binge this stuff?
12
1
21
1,439
No, it’s not “billionaires.” It’s because Maine is a small-state economy with big-state bureaucracy. Aren’t you a fisherman? You should know better than anyone how this works. The fishing industry has been buried under licensing requirements, reporting rules, gear mandates, federal whale regulations, seasonal restrictions, fuel costs, bait costs, insurance costs, and compliance costs, all while the same political class tells working Mainers they’re "fighting for them." They blame billionaires in the abstract while protecting the exact bureaucratic and regulatory system that created the problems in the first place, making it harder for smaller operators to stay alive. If you actually cared about working Mainers, you'd stop defending the machine that makes their lives impossible while simultaneously acting shocked when only the rich can afford to navigate it.
It's not immigrants making life impossible for working mainers. It's not trans kids. It's billionaires, and the politicians like Susan Collins on their payroll.
4
2
13
696
Creatrix retweeted
There's no greater joy than being a father and husband (especially to this absolute dime). This house is so full of love than I ever thought was possible... and I've never experienced anything like it.
16
5
163
2,495
John Doyle says "everything is downstream from immigration." No. Everything is downstream from economic and monetary policy, and those bills he accuses Thomas Massie of voting against on immigration were larger packages with broad fiscal consequences, including deficit expansion. Immigration might change the speed or shape of certain pressures, but without fixing the underlying economic issues in this country, you're not actually addressing the root problem. If the currency continually loses purchasing power, if deficit spending keeps expanding, if housing and asset prices are inflated by monetary policy, if political incentives continue to reward debt over productivity, those pressures will not just disappear because you stop letting in immigrants.
.@JohnDoyle: "It's only a principled stand when it helps Republicans... every other time [Thomas Massie] can vote in lockstep with Democrats!" Me: "Well, that's not accurate!" @ComicDaveSmith: "That's just a lie, it's just not true!" @JohnDoyle: "Effectively, the guy is a Democrat!" Watch more from the latest "Brad vs The World": youtu.be/5RFsW_TyLSo
8
2
53
1,904
Citizens United v. FEC & Speechnow v. FEC are a huge part of the problem when it comes to politics in the US, but no one is ready for that conversation. Money is NOT speech, it's a resource. I think libertarians have historically been wrong on this issue, and this is one of the few times I have disagreed with Ron Paul. The birth of the Super PAC was one of the worst things to happen to modern political incentives. It’s a mechanism of political capture that encourages rent-seeking and turns elections into proxy wars between donor networks. This only fuels socialist thinking because when people see that political weight increasingly depends on whoever has the most financial resources, they start to believe the system is rigged against them. And on this issue, they’re not wrong. When wealthy donors can contribute unlimited sums of money to a politican in a state they don't even LIVE in, who is the politician REALLY representing? Not their constituents. This is political coercion. This is cronyism. And until conservatives and libertarians get their heads out of their asses on this particular issue, we will keep watching politics in this country become more and more corrupt.
6
3
8
657
Democrat and Republican is a false dichotomy. Assuming either label consistently represents a fixed set of principles or beliefs at this point is foolish. They’re largely just the only viable vehicles people can use to gain influence and win elections. Do your research and vote for whichever candidates are best on net. (ideally that's whoever is best on economic freedom and monetary policy.. but ya know I'm a bit biased.)
I’m seeing several libertarian accounts saying to vote democrat in November. Not doing it. That’s groyper shit.
1
1
10
582
I've only been saying this for years. If you don't talk to people regularly outside of X or your own political bubble, You end up with a distorted picture of what the average person actually thinks. People increasingly mistake highly online consensus for actual consensus.
Vivek, who is hated on X, won. Massie, who is loved on X, lost. Politics on X is just not reality
5
1
22
1,272
BUT I think it's entirely possible that Massie lowkey didn’t want to win, and instead wanted to position himself for a presidential or VP run in 2028. So if the goal was to gain more national attention and recognition, I’d say he succeeded.
4
7
419
Me watching the live @RepThomasMassie election results rn:
2
1
29
450
What a chad.
The woman who was dating Thomas Massie, Cynthia West, has revealed that Massie was having sex with Lauren Boebert while dating West AND his current wife shortly after his wife died. Massie used a burner phone known to people around him as the "boner phone" to handle his DC kind business. This is just SICK! 😵‍💫
7
36
1,273
Says a lot that the biggest scandal they have against Massie is that he got laid lol. Do people actually find this stuff incriminating?
4
1
34
1,769
Creatrix retweeted
I’ll let you guys keep arguing about dress code policies for the rest of the day, but while I have your attention, I am spending today participating in a 5K fundraiser benefiting the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. The event raised nearly $100,000 so far today for CF research, treatment, and support for families dealing with this lifelong and debilitating disease. If you’d like to learn more about cystic fibrosis or make a donation, check out the website linked in the comments below.
6
2
39
847
So how does that translate to sex workers? Are their bodies collectively owned by the state? If the state or "collective" owns the "means of production," and your body is the ultimate means of production for your service, then the state or "collective" claims ownership over your person. If I own my body, I have the right to lease its services privately. If I'm forbidden from doing so, it implies the state owns me as a public utility. Is self-employment allowed in your socialist society? If a person runs a private service without employees, do they still own the fruits of their labor? If they do, how is that an "abolition of private property"? If they don't, how are you not just promoting state-sanctioned slavery?
3
5
23
2,549
Commies have historically always hated sex work. They believe sex work it's just a symptom of exploitation and inequality which would no longer exist in their utopian vision once they finally do away with evil capitalism. This is why sex work has eventually gotten outlawed in pretty much all communist regimes because it doesn’t fit within their model of how labor is supposed to function. Sex work is one of those services where demand is persistent across cultures and time, thus showing the emergent nature of markets. This is considered threatening because it's an autonomous market that arises spontaneously from human demand and cannot be fully captured by central planning.
Again: it's a socialist argument vs work.
42
18
185
18,846
It's so funny to me because they think they are cooking but this is literally the frame the Bolsheviks had (sex workers are victims of capitalist exploitation) until Lenin's patience wore thin and ordered the mass deportation and shooting of prostitutes. lol nothing new under the sun I guess.
2
17
3,939
It essentially shows why the entire premise of their framework is wrong lol
2
18
1,696
Marxists argue that capitalism commodified things that shouldn't be for sale. They think that if you remove the profit motive, people will only work for the common good. But even if the state abolishes private property, it still hasn't solved the "problem" of the individual. Sex work proves that value is subjective. If two people agree on a trade involving their own bodies/time, they have created a private market. How do you apply a rigid labor theory of value formula to a subjective service? The value of sex work is determined entirely by private, individual demand. If you can’t stop people from trading their most private property (themselves), then the dream of a fully planned property-free society is impossible.
4
1
21
1,633
It's because they don't respect women as a whole (clearly.) It stems from a refusal to acknowledge the personhood of women. If you have zero respect for someone, nothing they do is going to be good enough. It's always going to be framed as lazy, wrong, selfish, incompetent, or manipulative. If you meets one standard, they will simply move the goalpost or find new flaws to focus on. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, so you might as well just ignore them, do what's best for YOU and YOUR family because some yapping podcast bro isn't going to be the one paying your bills or raising your kids.
Feminism usually gets blamed for devaluing motherhood and stay-at-home-moms. But NO ONE is more disrespectful of stay-at-home motherhood than rightwing patriarchy bros. It’s almost like they just don’t want women to be able to win. Work outside the home, and you’re a feminist shill. Stay home with your kids, and you’re a privileged non-contributing freeloader. They don’t want you to vote because you can’t be drafted in the military, but if you join the Army of your own volition, they’ll accuse you of trying to be a man and make it crystal clear you’re not welcome there either. These guys need Jesus.
35
19
221
10,325
I always disliked my last name and never thought I’d struggle with changing it, but my dad died in 2020 and now the thought of changing it makes me want to cry. It feels like this piece of him that I carry as part of my identity. I probably wouldn't think twice about it though if he was still alive. Might eventually hyphenate but it's definitely a decision that weighs on me which might seem dramatic I guess idk?
I don't think keeping your name from birth is "keeping your father's name," that's your name! Just like your married name is also your name! You are your own person!
5
13
1,248