Like Kaycee Nicole, if she read Ayn Rand
February 17, 2005 8:14 AM Subscribe
Libertarian "Girl" (previously snarked at here) -- Russian mail-order bride, or Libertarian Man of Mystery? We report, you decide. [via w.i.h.d.c]
Yep, another loser guy pretending to be a hot chick online. Never heard of "her" before the other day, don't care. This has been done by others, better.
posted by fenriq at 8:24 AM on February 17, 2005
posted by fenriq at 8:24 AM on February 17, 2005
I'm not sure which of these blogs is more pathetic, Libertarian Girl or Why.I.Hate.DC.
The worst thing about D.C. is the fucking asshole transplants who have nothing better to do than complain about how much better it is where they came from. (I'm a transplant myself, but I rather like it here).
posted by casu marzu at 8:29 AM on February 17, 2005
The worst thing about D.C. is the fucking asshole transplants who have nothing better to do than complain about how much better it is where they came from. (I'm a transplant myself, but I rather like it here).
posted by casu marzu at 8:29 AM on February 17, 2005
I spent year there, getting back this past August, and I still miss it.
posted by The Thnikkaman at 8:32 AM on February 17, 2005
posted by The Thnikkaman at 8:32 AM on February 17, 2005
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog ... unless you can't stop barking.
posted by boaz at 8:58 AM on February 17, 2005
posted by boaz at 8:58 AM on February 17, 2005
Some of my early posts tried to capture the pretty blonde girl's feeling of entitlement
This is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever read in English. Why are so many hacks attracted to libertarian thinking?
posted by teece at 9:00 AM on February 17, 2005
This is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever read in English. Why are so many hacks attracted to libertarian thinking?
posted by teece at 9:00 AM on February 17, 2005
Libertarians tend to be ugly because it’s an anti-majority philosophy.
No, they tend to be ugly because, like duh, pretty people are too busy having crazy sex with each other to care about obscure political movements.
And, it's not an "anti-majority" philosophy, it's anti-popularity.
posted by axon at 9:07 AM on February 17, 2005
No, they tend to be ugly because, like duh, pretty people are too busy having crazy sex with each other to care about obscure political movements.
And, it's not an "anti-majority" philosophy, it's anti-popularity.
posted by axon at 9:07 AM on February 17, 2005
Actually ugly folks pretend to be libertarian because we like pissing off pretty people. Pissing off liberals and conservatives is just a bonus.
posted by jonmc at 9:12 AM on February 17, 2005
posted by jonmc at 9:12 AM on February 17, 2005
Some people might think there’s something homosexual about me pretending to be a girl
No, but I think there's something anti-sexual about a grown, unemployed, single man pretending to be a young, blonde girl.
posted by axon at 9:13 AM on February 17, 2005
No, but I think there's something anti-sexual about a grown, unemployed, single man pretending to be a young, blonde girl.
posted by axon at 9:13 AM on February 17, 2005
Pissing off liberals and conservatives
Have you looked up the photographs of many liberal and conservatives recently? As they say, politics is hollywood for ugly people.
posted by axon at 9:14 AM on February 17, 2005
Have you looked up the photographs of many liberal and conservatives recently? As they say, politics is hollywood for ugly people.
posted by axon at 9:14 AM on February 17, 2005
"Libertarians tend to be ugly because it’s an anti-majority philosophy."
No, they tend to be ugly because, like duh, pretty people are too busy having crazy sex with each other to care about obscure political movements.
Um...I don't know if you realize it or not, but that's basically what he says in the three sentences above that part you quoted.
posted by Bugbread at 9:14 AM on February 17, 2005
No, they tend to be ugly because, like duh, pretty people are too busy having crazy sex with each other to care about obscure political movements.
Um...I don't know if you realize it or not, but that's basically what he says in the three sentences above that part you quoted.
posted by Bugbread at 9:14 AM on February 17, 2005
I just think it's a shame that this guy couldn't continue to keep his blog in shades of pink. Obviously his first choice, he formulated a personality that could utilize that color scheme without scorn.
Alas. The only real mystery about this guy is who really gives a rat's ass.
posted by Busithoth at 9:26 AM on February 17, 2005
Alas. The only real mystery about this guy is who really gives a rat's ass.
posted by Busithoth at 9:26 AM on February 17, 2005
In Iceland, the youth movements of the ruling right wing party has views and policies that are very similar to the libertarian party.
I know some pretty hot girls with libertarian views, but over here libertarianism hasn't got the weirdo stigma that it has in the US. Over here these views are usually held by young upper class people.
posted by svenni at 9:32 AM on February 17, 2005
I know some pretty hot girls with libertarian views, but over here libertarianism hasn't got the weirdo stigma that it has in the US. Over here these views are usually held by young upper class people.
posted by svenni at 9:32 AM on February 17, 2005
Over here these views are usually held by young upper class people.
It's that way here, too, svenni, although many in that camp end up being Republicans because that is the bought-and-paid-for party of the upper class. But Republicans are essentially libertarians: the anti-libertarian planks of the Republican platform are what is needed for electoral success, but they are window-dressing. They take the aggrandized selfishness of libertarians to heart.
I imagine the only difference in the US is the "lottery classes:" those that are not in the upper class, but support its philosophies out of the hope of getting the right light lotto number, and thus being accepted into that class.
posted by teece at 9:43 AM on February 17, 2005
It's that way here, too, svenni, although many in that camp end up being Republicans because that is the bought-and-paid-for party of the upper class. But Republicans are essentially libertarians: the anti-libertarian planks of the Republican platform are what is needed for electoral success, but they are window-dressing. They take the aggrandized selfishness of libertarians to heart.
I imagine the only difference in the US is the "lottery classes:" those that are not in the upper class, but support its philosophies out of the hope of getting the right light lotto number, and thus being accepted into that class.
posted by teece at 9:43 AM on February 17, 2005
I liked this comment: "I don't mind him pretending to be a woman. Actually he was better at that than pretending to be a libertarian."
But yeah, male blogger discovers readership is higher as a pretty woman? Nothing new there [semi-selflink]. I don't think Kaycee is the best comparison. Kaycee was "fake to get attention, sympathy, and gifts." Gender-bending, IMHO, is closer to dishonest fiction than a scam.
posted by pzarquon at 9:52 AM on February 17, 2005
But yeah, male blogger discovers readership is higher as a pretty woman? Nothing new there [semi-selflink]. I don't think Kaycee is the best comparison. Kaycee was "fake to get attention, sympathy, and gifts." Gender-bending, IMHO, is closer to dishonest fiction than a scam.
posted by pzarquon at 9:52 AM on February 17, 2005
But Republicans are essentially libertarians
I dunno. I don't see that many Republicans in favor of drug legalization, prostitution legalization, staunch separation of church and state, extreme freedom of speech, etc.
Libertarians have their own wacky bad stuff, and some of it matches up with what Republicans think, but they've got lots of stuff that is pretty steadfastly opposed to Republican thought.
I think the problem is that Americans are so inculcated with the two party system that people try to place all other parties somewhere on a line with Republican near one end and Democrat near the other. Political beliefs don't actually work that way, but thought patterns fostered throughout upbringing are hard to shake.
posted by Bugbread at 9:56 AM on February 17, 2005
I dunno. I don't see that many Republicans in favor of drug legalization, prostitution legalization, staunch separation of church and state, extreme freedom of speech, etc.
Libertarians have their own wacky bad stuff, and some of it matches up with what Republicans think, but they've got lots of stuff that is pretty steadfastly opposed to Republican thought.
I think the problem is that Americans are so inculcated with the two party system that people try to place all other parties somewhere on a line with Republican near one end and Democrat near the other. Political beliefs don't actually work that way, but thought patterns fostered throughout upbringing are hard to shake.
posted by Bugbread at 9:56 AM on February 17, 2005
Are libertarians against all sex-punishment laws?
If so, I wish we had more libertarians in office because I swear I didn't know she was three.
posted by dios at 10:17 AM on February 17, 2005
If so, I wish we had more libertarians in office because I swear I didn't know she was three.
posted by dios at 10:17 AM on February 17, 2005
You missed the next sentence, bugbread.
Yes, Republicans and Libertarians disagree. But the heart of big 'L' Libertarianism and Republicanism are exactly the same: they focus on the totally selfish nature of liberty. Further, the top of the top of the Republican party would have little to no problem with a libertarian agenda of drug legalization, staunch separation of church and state, etc. They do not, however, pursue those actions, because they want to get elected. They have no natural base outside of the top 1/10 of 1%. Hence, they ditch the libertarian ideas when necessary, to get elected. Usually they do so by appealing to the religious, jingoistic, and reactionary.
posted by teece at 10:34 AM on February 17, 2005
Yes, Republicans and Libertarians disagree. But the heart of big 'L' Libertarianism and Republicanism are exactly the same: they focus on the totally selfish nature of liberty. Further, the top of the top of the Republican party would have little to no problem with a libertarian agenda of drug legalization, staunch separation of church and state, etc. They do not, however, pursue those actions, because they want to get elected. They have no natural base outside of the top 1/10 of 1%. Hence, they ditch the libertarian ideas when necessary, to get elected. Usually they do so by appealing to the religious, jingoistic, and reactionary.
posted by teece at 10:34 AM on February 17, 2005
Are libertarians against all sex-punishment laws?
If so, I wish we had more libertarians in office because I swear I didn't know she was three.
As far as I know, no, they aren't. The minarchists are in favor of a police force (dunno exactly what scope/laws they would have), and the anarcho-capitalists are in favor of private security forces (think "neighborhood security"), which would enforce the rules of the community, and would probably argue that all communities would adopt laws like "don't have sex with 3 year olds", hence it would be illegal, same as now.
posted by Bugbread at 10:36 AM on February 17, 2005
If so, I wish we had more libertarians in office because I swear I didn't know she was three.
As far as I know, no, they aren't. The minarchists are in favor of a police force (dunno exactly what scope/laws they would have), and the anarcho-capitalists are in favor of private security forces (think "neighborhood security"), which would enforce the rules of the community, and would probably argue that all communities would adopt laws like "don't have sex with 3 year olds", hence it would be illegal, same as now.
posted by Bugbread at 10:36 AM on February 17, 2005
Yes, Republicans and Libertarians disagree. But the heart of big 'L' Libertarianism and Republicanism are exactly the same: they focus on the totally selfish nature of liberty. Further, the top of the top of the Republican party would have little to no problem with a libertarian agenda of drug legalization, staunch separation of church and state, etc. They do not, however, pursue those actions, because they want to get elected. They have no natural base outside of the top 1/10 of 1%. Hence, they ditch the libertarian ideas when necessary, to get elected. Usually they do so by appealing to the religious, jingoistic, and reactionary.
Teece: Then I'm not really sure what you're saying. You're comparing the average Libertarian with the party leaders of the Republican party? Isn't that comparing apples and oranges? Wouldn't it be a much fairer comparison to talk about what the average Libertarian and the average Republican believe when saying that the heart of the two is the same?
Personally, I don't believe that the totally selfish nature of liberty is a focus of Republicans in general. If it were, then, yes, I'd agree that that is a similarity. The problem really comes down to what we're comparing: Libertarianism is a belief system and a party. It has wavy edges, but it has a central core that defines it. Republicanism is not a belief system, it's just a party. There is no core that defines it, its definition is constantly changing. So it's difficult to compare the "core" beliefs of the two.
posted by Bugbread at 10:42 AM on February 17, 2005
Teece: Then I'm not really sure what you're saying. You're comparing the average Libertarian with the party leaders of the Republican party? Isn't that comparing apples and oranges? Wouldn't it be a much fairer comparison to talk about what the average Libertarian and the average Republican believe when saying that the heart of the two is the same?
Personally, I don't believe that the totally selfish nature of liberty is a focus of Republicans in general. If it were, then, yes, I'd agree that that is a similarity. The problem really comes down to what we're comparing: Libertarianism is a belief system and a party. It has wavy edges, but it has a central core that defines it. Republicanism is not a belief system, it's just a party. There is no core that defines it, its definition is constantly changing. So it's difficult to compare the "core" beliefs of the two.
posted by Bugbread at 10:42 AM on February 17, 2005
Whoa, that first part was just copied for reference in writing my response. Please ignore everything up to the word "Teece:" in the response above.
Sorry.
posted by Bugbread at 10:43 AM on February 17, 2005
Sorry.
posted by Bugbread at 10:43 AM on February 17, 2005
Wow, she's bitter.
posted by tittergrrl at 11:00 AM on February 17, 2005
posted by tittergrrl at 11:00 AM on February 17, 2005
Over here these views are usually held by young upper class people.
I've been at Iowa State University since 96, off and on (I'm on the 10 year undergrad plan) and every Libertarisn I've ever met has been young, cleancut, white, rich, fratboy.
These people tend to ignore the parts of Libertarian philosophy that deal with drug legalization and other issues of personal freedom, instead they fixate on the laissez faire capitalist ideas. They beleive, rightly or wrongly, that in a Libertarian system there would be no FDA, FCC, OSHA, etc.
I'm sure that you can see why this appeals to the rich.
By the way, there is absolutely nothing abby-normal about a grown man pretending to be a woman, honest, there isn't, it's perfectly normal.
Goes to corner, curls up in fetal position, quietly sobs in Chanel dress with fishnet stockings and stilleto heels.
posted by berek at 12:44 PM on February 17, 2005
I've been at Iowa State University since 96, off and on (I'm on the 10 year undergrad plan) and every Libertarisn I've ever met has been young, cleancut, white, rich, fratboy.
These people tend to ignore the parts of Libertarian philosophy that deal with drug legalization and other issues of personal freedom, instead they fixate on the laissez faire capitalist ideas. They beleive, rightly or wrongly, that in a Libertarian system there would be no FDA, FCC, OSHA, etc.
I'm sure that you can see why this appeals to the rich.
By the way, there is absolutely nothing abby-normal about a grown man pretending to be a woman, honest, there isn't, it's perfectly normal.
Goes to corner, curls up in fetal position, quietly sobs in Chanel dress with fishnet stockings and stilleto heels.
posted by berek at 12:44 PM on February 17, 2005
Berek: that would be the anarcho-capitalist end of Libertarianism. The minarchists tend to be more focused on the "get the hell out of my house" side (drug legalization, sexual freedoms, etc.) Understandably, rich white kids tend to go to the anarcho-capitalist end (they're rich, and they're kids), while middle aged middle income folks tend to go to the minarchist end.
posted by Bugbread at 1:32 PM on February 17, 2005
posted by Bugbread at 1:32 PM on February 17, 2005
As a 20 year old left-leaning female Libertarian, I can tell you that none of my libertarian friends are from the upper classes.
My dad runs a sewage treatment plant (but was a laborer there for most of my childhood), and my mother teaches school (she was a retail manager when I was a kid, went back to college at age 30).
A libertarian friend of mine who's considerably more extreme spent most of her childhood in and out of the foster care system.
Another grew up with a single mom in a trailer.
However, none of us "ignore" all the civil liberties aspects--in fact, those are the parts of the libertarian philosophy we pay most attention to and advocate. We're all strong advocates of church/state separation, and we think people should be able to do with their bodies whatever they please. We also think that consensual sex isn't a crime and that determining "sanctity" of marriage or anything else isn't a government's job by definition. We are pro-euthanasia, anti-drug war (though some would make the hardest drugs illegal and some wouldn't - that's a matter of internal debate).
My friends aren't hardcore "FUCK THE POOR" libertarians. But we do believe that lowering the deficit is incredibly important and that deficit spending does not work to anyone's benefit, least of all the poor. We believe in low taxation and low spending on government services (though exactly how low is, again, a matter of debate -- but I've never seen any but the hardest-core libertarians advocate privatization of police or roads, and those aren't people I'd hang out with).
I just wanted to let you know that there are a great many non-fratboy libertarians out there and that stereotypes are pretty lame when you're basing them on your experiences at the University of Fucking Iowa (I've met no one from there who wasn't a white fratboy in general, except one brilliant math grad student who was a terrific lay).
posted by u.n. owen at 1:37 PM on February 17, 2005
My dad runs a sewage treatment plant (but was a laborer there for most of my childhood), and my mother teaches school (she was a retail manager when I was a kid, went back to college at age 30).
A libertarian friend of mine who's considerably more extreme spent most of her childhood in and out of the foster care system.
Another grew up with a single mom in a trailer.
However, none of us "ignore" all the civil liberties aspects--in fact, those are the parts of the libertarian philosophy we pay most attention to and advocate. We're all strong advocates of church/state separation, and we think people should be able to do with their bodies whatever they please. We also think that consensual sex isn't a crime and that determining "sanctity" of marriage or anything else isn't a government's job by definition. We are pro-euthanasia, anti-drug war (though some would make the hardest drugs illegal and some wouldn't - that's a matter of internal debate).
My friends aren't hardcore "FUCK THE POOR" libertarians. But we do believe that lowering the deficit is incredibly important and that deficit spending does not work to anyone's benefit, least of all the poor. We believe in low taxation and low spending on government services (though exactly how low is, again, a matter of debate -- but I've never seen any but the hardest-core libertarians advocate privatization of police or roads, and those aren't people I'd hang out with).
I just wanted to let you know that there are a great many non-fratboy libertarians out there and that stereotypes are pretty lame when you're basing them on your experiences at the University of Fucking Iowa (I've met no one from there who wasn't a white fratboy in general, except one brilliant math grad student who was a terrific lay).
posted by u.n. owen at 1:37 PM on February 17, 2005
every Libertarisn I've ever met has been young, cleancut, white, rich, fratboy.
You need to see the world more before assuming that your experiences in Iowa generalize to the rest of humanity. I am a libertarian, and I'm not cleancut, not white, not rich and have never been a fratboy.
I'm sure that you can see why this appeals to the rich.
I'm sure seeing their children grow up and get happily married appeals to the rich too, but that doesn't mean that it's something only they should want, is it? All sorts of things "appeal to the rich", good and bad, and in the case of the Holywood and New York rich, it usually tends to be more regulation and higher taxes they find appealing. So much for that theory, then.
Your arguments are as smug as they are ill-informed, and all too typical of a certain sort of "liberal" who's never bothered to test his or her ideas against others, what with being so sure of their "self-evident" rightness. I came by my libertarianism the hard way - by seeing Third World governments fuck up millions of people's chances of bettering their lives through corruption and ineptitude - and it really takes the cake for some pampered sod living in the world's richest country to confidently state that the only reason I can believe what I do is because I'm an Ashton Kutcher clone living in Animal House.
posted by Goedel at 5:10 PM on February 17, 2005
You need to see the world more before assuming that your experiences in Iowa generalize to the rest of humanity. I am a libertarian, and I'm not cleancut, not white, not rich and have never been a fratboy.
I'm sure that you can see why this appeals to the rich.
I'm sure seeing their children grow up and get happily married appeals to the rich too, but that doesn't mean that it's something only they should want, is it? All sorts of things "appeal to the rich", good and bad, and in the case of the Holywood and New York rich, it usually tends to be more regulation and higher taxes they find appealing. So much for that theory, then.
Your arguments are as smug as they are ill-informed, and all too typical of a certain sort of "liberal" who's never bothered to test his or her ideas against others, what with being so sure of their "self-evident" rightness. I came by my libertarianism the hard way - by seeing Third World governments fuck up millions of people's chances of bettering their lives through corruption and ineptitude - and it really takes the cake for some pampered sod living in the world's richest country to confidently state that the only reason I can believe what I do is because I'm an Ashton Kutcher clone living in Animal House.
posted by Goedel at 5:10 PM on February 17, 2005
phew I, I thought that said 'International Librarian of Mystery', and that the secret was out.
Oh, hold on...
posted by noizyboy at 6:04 PM on February 17, 2005
Oh, hold on...
posted by noizyboy at 6:04 PM on February 17, 2005
actually, as with pzarquon above, I should have labelled that previous post with a [semi-selflink]...
posted by noizyboy at 6:28 PM on February 17, 2005
posted by noizyboy at 6:28 PM on February 17, 2005
« Older Negroponte Newsfilter | “These are some drawings my colleague Richard... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by es_de_bah at 8:17 AM on February 17, 2005