Bill Whittle goes off the deep end...dreams up libertopia?

I know it prob doesn’t look good that like my first 2 posts both feature this guy, but this was just too good.

So this is like really long, so I don’t bother you if you don’t feel like watching the whole thing, but you just might want to if you have some time to kill. I find this whole thing to be one of the most fascinating things I’ve seen.

So like Whittle’s like a typical neocon-lite kind of guy…the flavor of big “R” Republican who prefers to call himself and everyone who agrees with him “conservative”. And my first post was the video of him making a plea for us to vote for his Paul Ryan. (Since there’s too many undeniable issues with the actual candidate, he liked to focus on the “budget hawk” guy. In fact I’m pretty sure he made an entire video about it after Ryan was named the running mate. It was like we were all supposed to fall in love with Romney because he picked the budget guy.)

Anyway, I was especially curious to watch the reactions of all the hard line Republican guys (maybe it’s shadenfrude or something, I don’t know). So when I see a video from this guy that’s 90 minutes long, titled “A New Beginning…”, I figured I was gonna get exactly what I was looking for!

And in a way, I kind of did. I knew this guy would be really affected, but i totally didn’t see which direction he was gonna take it…

So it starts off kind of predictable “I’m not gonna waste any time whining, blah blah blah”. Then he states his assessment of the situation…basically that the problem is, 50% of the country is without virtue. Kinda rubbed me the wrong way, but I guess if you tweak your definition of “virtue” I can kinda see what he’s saying. (Although I love the hypocrisy when he’s talking about the virtueless hedonists who go around promoting drugs and homosexual activity…and then right away comes back and tries to be like “I have no problem with homosexuals!”, right after he literally just said they were essentially bad people.)

Anyway, then he starts talking about what he thinks we should do about it. Right away he’s like “I’m not talking about revolution or going Galt, I’m not even talking about civil disobedience. We FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW.” And I’m like, “way to go asshole. You go right ahead and turn Harriet Tubman in to the proper authorities.”

And then it starts to get crazy.

He starts getting into his plan. He describes “parallel structures”. And when he starts going into it, you realize he’s basically talking about libertopia…privatized, voluntary-everything. He starts sounding like Seasteading Institute but without the moving out to sea. His plan is: if we could just get enough people to pool their resources (the model he describes is a recurring monthly payment into a 501c3), we could essentially pay for whatever we wanted.

It’s like, he’s almost getting it. It’s so remarkable…it’s like the re-election of Obama just shook him to the core and he’s detaching.

But then it gets even weirder. The first example he gives is private space flight. This part you gotta listen to. The whole thing starts at 27:10. You just gotta watch it. I can’t say I’ve ever seen anyone who could articulately string two sentences together and considered them crazy. Like actually insane. But that’s exactly what I started to think as this guy went on. I was like “holy crap, this man has actually gone insane.”

For the best example of this, check out 35:00-37:09. That has to be the most insane 2 minutes I think I’ve ever seen where the person was actually talking intelligibly. If you watch nothing else, just watch that segment if for nohting more than the shock value.

But as if that werent enough, RIGHT AFTER that, he goes right into making the most sense, and relating the most to us that he ever has. 37:13-41:00, he more or less becomes a voluntarist. It’s the strangest thing.

And he goes on to basically talk even more good stuff (of course mixed with some confused and not-quote voluntarist stuff) throughout the rest of the video.

It gets really serious at 53:54. That’s another part you gotta see. This guy has been seriously shocked to the core. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen such a hard core neocon Republican flip so fast. Literally (literally) overnight.

I seriously. Just watch. It’s literally watching a necon become almost a full voluntarist right before your eyes.

This man is so ready to join our team. He’s essentially beating on our door. I mean, listen to him come up with ideas that libertarians have already been working on for years. At 1:17:34 he starts to invent the FSP. It’s almost comical. The guy’s been so immersed in his neocon world for so long, and been so busy calling libertarians hippie kooks or whatever, that he literally has no notions at all of the fact that essentially all of these things he thinks he’s coming up with are already underway, and have been for a long time.

Someone needs to send him a copy of Chaos Theory or something. Is there like a single definitive book or set of books for just nudging someone in the right direction?

In this case it wouldn’t even be like pushing someone over the tipping point…this guy is already gone…it’s more like just correcting his course a little. Giving him a little clearer direction.

This Romney loss may be even better than we imagined.

Oh my god you were right about the 35 to 37 minutes. OMFG that’s gold, It’s a crying shame that I just put up my new sig today because that’s a quote that f***ing sig worthy if ever there was one!

“There’s bigger things in life than getting killed”

Oh my god! XD

Wowwwwwwwwwwww. He’s totally, bang-your-head-against-a-walll, eat-your-own-dung, prance-around-like-Napolean, drool-on-yourself, batshit crazy.

Clayton -

lol that was really funny, but I can’t watch the rest.

That’s what kills me! He sounds so insane at some points…but then at others he sounds a lot like a voluntarist. Doesn’t exactly reflect well for us. There’s enough people calling us crazy as it is. The last thing we need is some guy who is literally driven insane by the Obama re-election and ends up dreaming up a bunch of ideas that turn out to be basically voluntarism.

“Doesn’t exactly reflect well for us.”

Huh? When Neo-nazis endorsed Ron Paul did that reflect badly on Ron Paul? You do understand how attribution works, right?

Clayton -

You tell me…

“Ron Paul was recently photographed with Don Black, director of the white nationalist Web site Stormfront, and his son, Derick. Paul has has been endorsed by several extremist groups, and has said that while he disowns them, he won’t disavow their support.”

–http://www.buzzfeed.com/pajaroentertainmentltd/photo-of-ron-paul-palling-around-with-neo-nazis-31ii

“ask yourself why the Klan holds rallies for Paul and neo-Nazis are drawn to him? All by accident?”

–http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2828637/posts

“The Paul campaign declined to comment on why he is accepting donations from people the candidate says he disagrees with. The contributions represent an ongoing Paul tie to right-wing extremism – one that could be severed simply by sending back the checks.”

–http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/27/ron-paul-white-supremacists_n_1305509.html

“Ron Paul’s neo-Nazi ties, Romney alliance exposed”

–http://peoplesworld.org/ron-paul-s-neo-nazi-ties-romney-alliance-exposed/

“Paul keeps donation from white supremacist”

–http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/ns/politics-decision_08/t/paul-keeps-donation-white-supremacist/

“OPINION: Ron Paul Is A White Supremacist”

–http://newsone.com/444922/opinion-ron-paul-is-a-white-supremacist/

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html

(just look at the sheer length of that last one.)

You do understand how public opinion works, right?

His video on NDAA was great at least:

Prime,

Why does it matter whether or not Ron Paul is the most ardent racist who ever lived?

Also

@Prime: So you’re linking to HuffPo to show that the “general public” had a negative reaction to Ron Paul on the basis of the decision of neo-Nazis to support him?

This is the rule: It matters who you support. It doesn’t matter who chooses to support you. Hitler believed 2+2=4… does that reflect badly on mathematicians? Even the stupid sheeple public understand this.

Clayton -

Maybe I’m losing it a little bit myself, but I actually found the parts of this that I watched to be motivational.

We are you guys trying to make an enemy of Bill Whittle? I didn’t find his “insane rantings” to be so very insane at all. He’s talking about the rebirth of an ethos of heroism, completely voluntary of course. He’s not a neocon either, he just happens to toe the party line on republican foreign policy but he’s not out there waving pamphlets of bomb-strapped muslims in your face.

@ Clayton - you were being sarcastic right?

This is what we were talking about in the other thread with Obama winning the election being the best case scenario. Republicans are getting ‘radicalized’ or drifting away from the state. Aside from Bill Whittle not being a party-line libertarian, what exactly is the problem here?

Holy rainbow-colored pony shit!

@Prime: Neo-Nazis liking Ron Paul’s positions that have nothing to do with race is evidence that Neo-Nazis are pretty cool, not that Ron Paul is bad.

a) Whittle is generally annoying, even just in his demeanor. I hate that fake furtive crap.

b) Whittle is hard-right; like any Bush-era neocon, he does lip-service to small government.

c) In his last video on election day, he was pathetically begging libertarians/anti-statists to go out and vote for Romney. It was really sad and lame. And it shows where his true loyalties lie: Republican Party, 100% right-down-the-line.

Clayton -

Actually, I’ve known a couple in my time and they’re just generally reactionary, egotistical assholes who sincerely believe that being white somehow makes them superior to other non-white races.

Clayton -

Is this a real question? You honestly need someone to explain why an openly racist person would never gain public favor? Do you honestly not understand why the enemies of Ron Paul worked so hard to associate him with racists and racist comments?

Well, that was one of many links illustrating the negative tone surrounding it. A large part of the proof of the point is in the fact that those articles exist in the first place. If it’s really so meaningless to people, why exactly is it so easy to find so many sources focusing on it?

I think you’re making presumptions about the general public that are a stretch, to say the least.

Milton Friedman had to explain to the current President of Iceland that gravity works the same regardless of whether the country you’re in is a dictatorship or republic.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3D7JXggLOY#t=37m3s

And it sounds like you’re suggesting that someone accepting the political and monetary support of, and/or pal-ing around with white supremicists (or, in Neodoxy’s case, actually being one) makes essentially no difference to the general public. I honestly don’t see how you could be a functioning human being with eyes and ears, and possibly even begin to think such a thing.

Cite or GTFO.

Clayton -

“Is this a real question? You honestly need someone to explain why an openly racist person would never gain public favor? Do you honestly not understand why the enemies of Ron Paul worked so hard to associate him with racists and racist comments?”

I was asking in terms of why it should affect why one would support him in terms of policy prescription, not in terms of whether or not it would affect his political career.