You must log in or register to comment.
Everyone knows that if someone threatened one of the stooges behind this tweet they would absolutely be crying to the website, and police, about it.
Glad I left the party before it went completely to hell.
Yeah something that could easily be taken as inciting a murder, is actually not legal under our free speech laws, so… Yeah, he has no choice in the matter.
elongated muskrat is a fucking pathetic excuse for a free speech absolutist
What does this have to do with this shitposting?
Nothing
This is why there are so many libertarians who are not Libertarians.
Sir please keep your voice down, you are going to disturb the librarians
Does this guy have a pro-Confederate ancestor?
Don’t need to go that far, pretty sure he’s a pro-confederate himself.
Didn’t Kathy Griffin pretty much do the same thing only with many more times the consequences?
She made a skit cutting a fake head off as part of a skit, so it wasn’t even actually this serious.
Libertarians are just conservatives without the religion and/or who smoke weed. They hide behind the label because they agree with right-wingers but are too chicken-shit to admit it and can say “bUt I’m LiBeRtArIaN” when something heinous happens
Here in Australia, our libertarian party was the only political party to illegally keep advertising well past the election… Fuckers didn’t even clean up their own signs which they are legally required to
Libertarian ideology at work. “Fuck you, I have money” or “I dont want poor gay or black people dying in the streets cause they are black or gay. I want them dying in the streets cause they’re poor.”
libertarians are conservatives with even worse critical thinking skills.
most conservative arguments fall apart when you ask 3 consecutive questions, but it only takes 1 or 2 questions for the typical libertarian argument
- We should cut funding to Israel.
- We should not tariff Chinese EVs.
- Marijuana should be legalized.
- The war in Iraq was wrong (either of them).
- A woman has a right to bodily autonomy.
Don’t forget that most are pedophiles.
Umm ackshually you mean ephebophiles ☝️ *libertarianism intensifies*
Source: I made it up
They’re usually even greedier than normal Republicans too, and lean as hard on the 1st amendment as Republicans lean on the 2nd.
Isn’t he just amplifying it?
Domestic Terrorists.
Wait, where is Leon Skum involved?
I’m not entirely sure, because I’ve never gotten the hang of Twitter. But reading between the lines, I think this is the sequence of events:
Libertarian twit tweets a death threat against Harris.
Libertarian twit is reminded of the rules (and common decency) and removes the offending tweet.
Libertarian twit passive aggressively tweets about having removed the tweet they twote, invoking the promises of free speech to imply that Leon was censoring their tweets and trampling on their freedoms.
Leon responds to the complaint with the tweet the twit twote, simultaneously demonstrating that the twit is a twat and amplifying the message.
> we don’t want to break the terms we agreed to
> it’s a shame that even on a “free speech”…
Can’t even stay ideologically consistent in the same post
Why are so many of those who claim that they’re libertarians not actually libertarians?
First and foremost, it’s because libertarians aren’t a thing
- They are republicans that are too embarrassed to identify as such publicly .
libertarians aren’t a thing
[Libertarians] are republicans that are too embarrassed to identify as such publicly
Be careful to not make hasty generalizations.
When a movement builds itself of reduction in governance, the antisocial people we successfully govern against get a hard on
Because they are embarrassed about being Republicans.
I mean, trump is leading the republicans and has for almost a decade.
I’d be embarassed too if THAT GUY represented me too.
cough Ben Shapiro cough
He doesn’t seem embarrassed but he should be.
And yet (at least from an outsider perspective) libertarians are closer to democrats than republicans
Republicans seem all about telling you what you can and can’t do (can’t get hrt, can’t get an abortion, can’t smoke weed, must marry and have children etc.) whereas both democrats and libertarians are largely “just live your life” but that could just be because all the american parties seem so financially right wing that they’re basically the same in that respect
And yet (at least from an outsider perspective) libertarians are closer to democrats than republicans
I’m an outsider too, but here’s my take on this
For the most part (certain exceptions exist, like guns), democrats seem to be about individual freedom from government, but they want government to regulate corporations.
Republicans are more about corporate freedom from government, but they want government to regulate people they don’t like (women, LGBT, immigrants).
Libertarians ideally want corporate AND personal freedom from government, but a lot of people only want personal freedom from government if it applies to “their kind”. So they’re really republicans.
Republicans are also always on about how the government is bad (even when they’re the incumbents) and how deregulating things make everything better. Libertarians are people who drank a full jug of that particular kool-aid. Also like republicans, they tend to only care about gun rights, though they will sometimes pretend to care about other rights to make it feel like an ideological thing.
To be fair, Libertardians also care about lowering the age of consent!
To be fair, Libertardians also care about lowering the age of consent!
Based on what are you making this claim?
Reality, you delusional fuckwit.
Anyone who promised to remove that regulation would get most libertarians and a good chunk of Repubs to vote for them.
So they fucking should be, although being libertarian is only marginally less embarrassing anyway
being libertarian is only marginally less embarrassing [than being a Republican] anyway
What about libertarianism is embarrassing to you?
The idea that a functional society can arise from a population that only does what it wants is, let’s say, unlikely. It removes checks and balances, so there is not really anything that prevents someone with huge resources to become a tyrant. What happens if someone with billions of dollars ignores the NAP to get their way? They can fund a private army, I can’t, so how can I prevent them from aggressing against me? Without a state law enforcement and legal system, there is no entity that can stop them. We would regress to a society of warlords, dukes and serfs.
Likewise it makes the country as a whole more vulnerable to enemies. If there is no central state to run the military, just a rag tag collection of powerful, self-interested groups, then could they successfully repel an invasion? What if they are bribed with power by the oppressors, and facilitate the invasion? Look at colonisation in Africa and the Americas to see examples of how that played out. Tribes played off against each other for the benefit of the highly coordinated invaders.
Libertarianism is a user-pays society, where if you can’t pay and can’t generate income (even if it’s no fault of your own) then you better hope someone takes pity on you and you receive charity, or else your remaining option is to just die. Our current system is a playground for the rich and a crushing, lifelong burden for the rest as we compete for relative scraps, Libertarianism would dial that up to 11.
Note that I live in a country where although government has its problems, there is quite a bit of pro-worker and pro-citizen law on the books, and government institutions are generally seen as competent and are trusted. If that wasn’t the case then perhaps Libertarianism would seem more appealing.
I miss whn NH libertarians just got worked up about toaster licenses
Since 2020, the NH Libertarian party has received coverage in the press for controversial, far-right, and antisemitic statements made by its Twitter account. They got skunked, the old leaders were ousted and replaced from what I remember its a purposeful Russian backed psy op.
I never know who is replying to who on twitter screenshots at first glance. I know the format predates Elon, but the interface really sucks for any proper discussion.
The only thing I think is worse is Tumblr. The common way to communicate there is with “notes” adding new tags to the post and not, like, the actual chat/comment section that it has.
People trying to have long-form discussions on Twitter/X has baffled me since the beginning. It is decidedly not the right platform for that and it was never designed to be. In fact, its design clearly discourages any meaningful discourse. I have never been able to wrap my head around that site and its users.
