The former Chairperson of the US Libertarian Party, Nick Sarwark’s, main occupation these days seems to be baiting Mises Caucus types. You might think that’s not much to shout about, but to be fair to him, if that was the only thing I could contribute to civilisation, I would. We’re unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of his painfully blue-pilled perspective.
Let us summarise what’s been going on in Sarwark’s world.
Now, there’s a number of ways one could interpret what happened a week ago at the US Capitol Building. Nick seems to have chosen the most obvious, least interesting, and most establishment-endorsed view possible: That what we saw on that day was a deliberate insurrection attempt that puts a shame on America’s democratic institutions. In other words, exactly what Nancy Pelosi might say.
Amongst these sorts of high-attention events with a lot of traffic, it’s important to stand out. There is clearly an opportunity there for libertarians to make some sway in the debate. Though it seems to me that one must have a point of view that is at least novel, at least something that couldn’t have been written by any random Democratic NPC. Surely establishment narratives delivered in the same old way, down to the phrasing, will get lost in the throng?
From the point of view of potential converts – what is the point of libertarianism? There has to be a USP. Libertarians have a lot to stay about this matter whilst maintaining principles, so let’s say them. Not stuff like this:
Call me silly, but I thought most libertarians were understanding by now that these terms, like “republic” and “democratic principles”, are propaganistic fudge terms coined to brush an exploitative violent system with a veneer of legitimacy. I had thought that the idea that the imperialist and inflationist United States government was tyrannical per se was a basic common understanding amongst nominally anti-state people. I was under the impression that a core consensus was that all of these politicians are slime, and buying into and endorsing partisan narratives was naive if not missing the point completely. I’m pretty sure I’m not wrong.
Nick positively retweeted the following endorsement of war criminal Barack Obama:
This is incredible. After a period of what must be years now, Nick has gone out of his way to inflame the division with his perceived enemies, and now he wants to make some common ground. I simply don’t believe it. And sorry Nick, the appropriate response to someone calling for peace and civility when they are a key culprit in nationwide division is not a retweet, but “fuck off.”
Here’s Nick deliberately spinning Dave Smith:
Obviously Dave’s initial Tweet regards the latest state response to the Capitol riots – encouraging friends and family members of those who attended the protests to “tattle” on them. Some Redditors were bragging about this. Nick thought it would be funny to make allusions to sexual abuse, especially in context with the recent allegations of abuse directed against high-ranking members of Young American for Liberty. It was nothing to do with that.
Never take the blue pill. As well giving you the questionable result of forgoing truth, it turns you into a prick.
Here’s Nick gaslighting people concerned about internet censorship and insulting a great man at the same time:
For those out of the know, this is in reference to Ron Paul being locked out of his Facebook page for a short time as part of this wider Politi-Tech crackdown that included President Trump being banned from Twitter. After this event, even leftists such as Caitlin Johnstone were rallying against it, seeing it as a concerning signal that this banning movement will not restrict itself to so-called “seditionists.” Trust Nick Sarwark to fall on the side of turgidness – the problem isn’t banning one of the best anti-war activists in the world, but that his page apparently shared conspiracy theories sometimes.Â
In general, Nick and his Blue Man Group have been boringly conventional on this issue – “[These social media platforms] are private companies, they can do what they want” without qualification or nuance. No recognition that these companies are snuggling up well and good with government agencies, and are essentially narrative-shapers on behalf of the deep state. It’s getting a bit tiresome.
James Smith
Latest posts by James Smith (see all)
- A Year and a Half in Communist China – Opting Out - February 18, 2021
- What Is A Libertarian? – Opting Out - February 11, 2021
- When Leftists Are Better Than Libertarians – Opting Out - January 28, 2021
