Libertarianism, Helicopters, and Leftists
All it takes is a Hoppe, skip and a jump for those, who are joking online about throwing communists from helicopters to justify their actions.
A growing wave of Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalists are finding themselves drawn to the world of anti-Communist rhetoric, which extends to the nth degree. So, is Commie killing a justified response to the violation of the N.A.P, or is this simply lunacy concocted to ideologically discriminate? Where does the line between ‘threat’ and ‘belief system’ exist?
To discover this, we must first look at the emerging resurgence of Hans-Hermann Hoppe and his beliefs through the Facebook page ‘Hoppean Snake Memes.’ It’s a page which has amassed nearly seventeen thousand likes for its ideological tint, which takes heavy opposition to Marxism and Leninism; ideologies which are acting in opposition to Anarcho-Capitalism.
Just as one must fight to maintain their freedom, one must also work to secure their own free society. The difference between an Anarcho-Capitalist society and an Anarcho-Individualist society is based on the premise of the Left and Right dichotomy, with Anarcho-Capitalists representing the right-wing and property rights, and the Anarcho-Individualists representing the Left-wing and Communism.
Anarcho-Individualism, as indicated through the works of Max Stirner, completely disregards pragmatism, societal progress and morality to favour the Ubermensch perspective of Friedrich Nietzsche, which essentially involves giving complete reign of one’s life and actions over to the people to allow them to decide their life based on their own moral compass.
Essentially, given the rise of groups such as Antifa – which run contrary to the Libertarian principles of personal and property rights – Hoppean Snake Memes takes a hyperbolic approach to Hoppe’s original views by mixing them with Augusto Pinochet’s historically notorious habit of dropping Communists from helicopters.
The death of Communists is seen very much in the same way that one would see the killing of ISIS – regardless of whether or not individual ISIS members have committed atrocities, their group is reason enough for suspicion and consequential action to be taken to stop it. Given that groups such as Antifa and ISIS threaten the peace and prosperity of societal participants (since Communism and Islam represent the two biggest terror threats in the world at the moment), it is clear that action must be taken.
I interviewed the administrator of the Facebook page who simply went by the moniker ‘Snek’ for the purposes of conversation; he elaborated on his disdain for Communism, which he saw as antithetical to a society which follows along a pathway of objective self-servience and capital-based Individualism.
“When I say ‘Communist,’ I am referring to one who advocates gulags. Not simply worker control of the means of production. I have nothing against worker control of the MOP, provided it’s all voluntary, et cetera et cetera.”
Upon being pressed as to how this runs contrary to freedom of association and freedom of speech, the terminology of ‘threat’ was used to justify the way in which Communist advocacy works; their ideals stomping over the civil liberties of person and property.
This, paired with the forced radicalism of groups such as Antifa, is now acting as the basis for an emerging ideology that pairs Anarchism with practicality, in order to minimise big government to small government and gradually make the transition to a stateless society. This is why the forces in question have fallen in love with the bombastic reductions taken by Donald Trump; reductions which run counter to the prior ‘Democratic’ tendency to slide down a slippery slope and fall into a pit of authoritarian tripe (think Franklin D. Roosevelt). This heavy focus on pragmatism for Libertarianism has led followers to co-opt the Alternative-Right and expand it’s audience in the retaliation against Leftism.
Snek detailed the following:
“It should be noted that the helicopter memes are, for the most part, an exaggeration; the purpose, though, is to provoke thought on what is to be considered legitimate self-defence. The argument that Pinochet did nothing wrong stems from the argument that Allende would have been worse. Allende had very close ties to MIR and Castro, judging by Castro’s actions we know that if Allende was even remotely like him, Allende would have been objectively worse than Pinochet, in terms of human rights violations.”
Given the low polling numbers of the Libertarian Party and the fact that the ideology has as much momentum behind it as a Snorlax on a bridge, can one really blame a frustrated branch of Austrian economics for a kneejerk reaction to the Left and their omnipresent threat of attack on our fundamental rights?
Out of the philosophical and epistemological questions that lie behind the nebulous terminology of the NAP, it should be determined (at least to some extent) by the public consensus what is considered justifiable retaliation.
Do you approve of the Commie killin’ freedom fighters, or do you simply see them as being full of Pinoshit?
We here at Being Libertarian are not at liberty (ironically) to disclose our personal position on ideological discrimination, however, we must advocate peace towards your fellow man, to set a good example for the thieves more extreme members of the left.
And stay up to date with all my articles on my personal Facebook page.
Latest posts by David McManus (see all)
- Doth Protest Too Much: Gooney Tunes - June 22, 2017
- Doth Protest Too Much: Australia’s Communist Collusion - June 15, 2017
- Doth Protest Too Much: No True Anarchist - June 1, 2017