Freedomain Radio in the mainstream media...

[Brainpolice]

Funny, you didn’t seem to mind so much when it was other members wanting to “purge the parlour revolutionaries”. Not that I mind, it’s necessary to remove bad elements from a movement. Which is exactly what the libertarian movement should be doing to non Austrians and the likes of Molyneux. Lenin was exactly right in this regard.

Nonetheless, you have double standards.

I never specifically cheered on Niccolo about that, although I admit, I found his rhetoric hilarious.

I’m sorry, but absolute adherance to Austrian methodology is not a prerequisite to being a libertarian (unless you want to deny that people like David Friedman are libertarians). Neither is sharing your cultural preferance a prerequisite to being a libertarian. If you think libertarianism is going to succeed by excluding it to a small elite of conservatives, then you’re fooling yourself.

Funny that you appeal to Lenin of all people.

Indeed, posting “ROFL” to a most unamusing post by somebody you’ve gone to great lengths to defend (wrongly) in the past, especially when this individuals in question in one in regards to whom you have double standards, that is not in the least bit “fanboyish”.

No, it really isn’t, but I find it funny that you dwell on such petty things.

That is an exagerration. In any case, the leap is hardly a huge one. Not to mention, you assume FDR is good for the movment. It isn’t.We need to move beyond Youtube.

I only claimed that he’s brought people into the movement (most of which do not exclusively stick to him), something you should see as good. Any spread of ideas and interactions is good for the movement. As for your swipe at youtube, you just seem to be making low blows.

Of course, you know who did get beyond Youtube and converted thousands more than your idol? Ron Paul, I wonder why you’re not fond of him. Is it because of his cultural conservatism or the fact that he proved the political process to be effective.

Molyneux isn’t my idol, I’m just defending him from your sweeping axe grinding. You’re being assumptive and contrarian for the sake of it.

As for Ron Paul, could it be that I find him a half-assed libertarian, given that he’s a minarchist? Could it also be that he’s a politician, and hence should be trusted with a grain of salt? As for the political process being effective, he didn’t prove that, considering that he didn’t get anywhere with it and has yet to succeed at getting anything libertarian to occur by trying to work within the state.

He can have a place in regards to the libertarian movement: outside it. We don’t need bloggers, we need serious thinkers.

Oh, come on. Drop the reactionary nonsense.

There’s no cult around Rothbard, he’s deeply respected within the movement and rightly so when one considers both his academic and strategic work. Likewise, it’s no doubt the Mises is respected, he is the beginning of the modern Austrian school.

The point is that they are sometimes used as rhetorical authorites to stifle polycentrism and new ideas in libertarianism. That’s no fault of their own.

Ron Paul should be highly respected, instead fools like yourself would put Molyneux a second rate thinker and egocentric moron above a genuine libertarian.

Wait, so a minarchist politician is a genuine libertarian, while a radical anarchist isn’t? You have your standard backwards.

What a digrace. What does he represent for the movement anyway? The usual marxist tirade against family and religion? That has no place in society let alone the libertarian movement.

You’re being a conservative reactionary, and you continue to disingenously throw around the term Marxist when noone in question is one. People don’t have to share your extreme cultural conservatism to be libertarians, and nor does it make them marxists by default if they don’t share it.

The bottom line is Molyneux needs to be purged from the movementl

Nonsense, you’re on a retarded crusade.

How is he completely correct? Rothbard is the founded of the modern libertarian movement, and he quite clearly favoured an alliance with statists.

There was also a debate between Rothbard and his primary heir, Konkin, over politics and strategy. I think Konkin won. I don’t indiscrimiately follow everything Rothbard ever said down to the detail. Rothbard’s alliance with statists also failed, and he eventually ditched the libertarian party.

How many people visit the Mises institute founded by the dreaded paleocons you hate?

The Mises Institute wasn’t founded by paleocons.

Far more than visit his woeful website, how many people have read The Revolution: A Manifesto? Thankfully more than have ever read his poor excuse of a book.

You’re just making an arguementum ad populum now.

He’s jealous that he isn’t getting in on this, that’s what it is.

An armchair psychoanalysis.

You have one set of standard for Molyneux, another for Paul. Which is fine, just don’t pretend to be promoting libertarianism when you do.

Actually I hold them both to the same standard, and clearly Paul is not as radical of a libertarian compared to ANY anarchist, Molyneux or otherwise.

You’re being highly vitrolic and disingenous.