It started on a thread regarding libertarianism and gay marriage, which I responded:
Another poster on the blog responded with:The problem with Rand Paul is that he is not very good at explaining his views, which is lethal to any libertarian politician. Also, he tries to pander to everyone.
If you want to read a coherent libertarian view of same-sex marriage, I would suggest reading this article by Michael Badnarik, the 2004 Libertarian Party presidential candidate.
However, the "omg ur a racist" comments soon started coming at me. A pleasant fellow named joe wrote:TAS, I’ve found your posts interesting. Would you say that you’re a pretty good representative of libertarianism?
—Myca
I’d say his posts are NOT a good representation of libertarianism.
Decent representation of misogyny though.
Try http://www.theagitator.com as a ‘good’ representation of libertarianism.
At least he plugged Radley Balko. Then a gentleman named Chris responded:
To which I replied:I would agree with Joe. Most libertarians, rightly or wrongly, don’t believe in civil rights laws because they legitimately think property rights are more important. TAS doesn’t believe in civil rights laws because he hates women and minorities. The first kind of libertarian can be debated against, the second kind is only worthy or scorn and mockery.
Chris responded, complete with a request for my banning. Liberals realize they can't win against HBDers - the statistical evidence is just too strongly against them - so they seek to silence us"TAS, I’ve found your posts interesting. Would you say that you’re a pretty good representative of libertarianism?
Perhaps. I’m far more politically incorrect than most libertarians. Also, I’m not a corporation-worshiper like the Beltway libertarians, since I recognize that most corporate power comes from government-granted privileges, pro-corporate laws (i.e. DMCA), and corporate welfare.
I’d say his posts are NOT a good representation of libertarianism.
Decent representation of misogyny though.
I’m hold views that most would consider to be “sexist,” yes, but that’s not the same as misogyny.
Most libertarians, rightly or wrongly, don’t believe in civil rights laws because they legitimately think property rights are more important. TAS doesn’t believe in civil rights laws because he hates women and minorities.
I freely admit I hold racist and sexist views (most people - even many liberals - do, they just pretend like they don’t), but I don’t “hate” any certain groups, I’m just strongly critical of them.
Also, I’ve been a libertarian for several years and I did adopt my opposition to civil rights laws because they infringed on property rights. My views on race didn’t evolve until much a few years later.
I cordially invited him to comment on my blog if he felt offended:I freely admit I hold racist and sexist views (most people - even many liberals - do, they just pretend like they don’t), but I don’t “hate” any certain groups, I’m just strongly critical of them.
TAS, some of the post titles on your blog are “Screw Single Mothers,” “Obama Nominates Jewish Dyke to Supreme Court,” and “Blacks Ruin Everything.”
That is called hate.
This bigot should not even be allowed to post here.
If you have a problem with something I wrote on my blog, then feel free to comment on the relevant posts there. I have a very open moderation policy - the only comments I generally delete are spam.He declined and decided to stop talking to me. Liberals are basically overgrown children. Also, he claims to have commented on my blog. I think he's Souza, the bastard son of a single mom, who enjoys calling me a racistsexistclassisthomophobe on various posts of mine. Both Chris and Souza seem to have very similar political positions, are quick to anger, and are highly childish.
I have commented on your blog, TAS. I find engaging with you a fruitless exercise, so this will be the last time I respond to you directly.Then mythago joined in:
Finally, the big man (in multiple ways) himself, Ampersand joined in, issuing his banning edictRand Paul’s website says that he has been married for 19 years. If he believes government should be out of marriage, why didn’t he and his “loving wife” go for private contracts rather than state-sponsored marriage? Or, if that were not possible 19 years ago, why don’t they now legally divorce and use private contracts to arrange their affairs?
Those are rhetorical questions, of course.
TAS, “politically incorrect” is the PC, euphemistic term for what, in pre-PC days, used to be called “loudmouthed bigot”. I don’t understand the current fashion for tiptoeing around calling something what it really is.
Notice how he doesn't even bother to respond to anything I posted on my blog or commented on his. He saw my HBD/racialist views and decided not to talk to me. Liberals fear people who recognize racial and gender differences. They realize that no amount of social engineering and brainwashing can change the fact that blacks and whites are not equal and that men and women are different. Thus they to avoid conversations about such topics entirely and silence those who believe that racial and gender differences exist.TAS, after checking out your website, I’ve decided that you’re not someone I wish to have a discussion with.
Please don’t post any further comments on “Alas.”
The irony is that I wasn't even disagreeing with anything in the original post. I didn't attack gay marriage, I in fact criticized Rand Paul's flip-floppy, pandering view on the subject.
I posted a response to Ampersand,
If any liberals from Alas are reading this, I'd like to reiterate once again that unlike Barry, I do not fear people who hold different political opinions. I do not ban people or delete comments unless they are spam. It doesn't matter if you are a libertarian, neocon, Christian conservative, moderate, liberal, socialist, anarchist, or Black nationalist; I welcome people who wish to debate or argue with my about my posts.TAS, after checking out your website, I’ve decided that you’re not someone I wish to have a discussion with.I figured this would happen. Liberals generally do not like debating people who understand human biodiversity.
Please don’t post any further comments on “Alas.”
No problem, although it’s worth noting that I allow pretty much anyone to comment on my blog, including feminists, socialists, and other leftists.
Holy hell, THAT's what Ampersand looks like? Think I'm gonna hurl.
ReplyDeleteEh, I had a run-in with that guy a year ago when he declared my post on George Sodini to be "ugly" and "disturbing". I wrote back the next day to tear him a new one:
http://www.inmalafide.com/2009/08/07/my-views-are-ugly-and-disturbing/
Also, one of the MRA old-timers told me that Ampersand used to troll men's rights forums, nailing anti-feminists for their supposed "misogyny". The guy's a prick with paper-thin skin - forget about him.
I read that article not too long ago in your archives (I hadn't yet discovered HBD blogs when the Sodini shooting occurred) and I noticed that Amp must have spent a lot of time cherrypicking. Considering that all of his quotes came from comments in posts of the hard-hitters of the HBD blogosphere, including Roissy, a man who could post a blank line and get a hundred comments, the fact that a few of the hundreds of comments would be misogynistic shouldn't have been surprising to him.
ReplyDeleteWhat's amusing about Ampersand is that his website is owned by a pornographer, to whom he secretly sold his domain to cover some expenses four years ago. He admitted it five months later, way back in September 2006, and the feminist blogosphere erupted in a fury that continued into October. The feminist in-fighting was very entertaining, see here:
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2006/10/11/i-sold-amptoonscom-comments-are-now-open/
http://fauxrealtho.com/2006/10/10/um-yeah/
http://hugoboy.typepad.com/hugo_schwyzer/2006/10/ampersand_male_.html
Me thinks he's jewish. A quick look at his cartoons via google shows them to have a definite anti-white stance.
ReplyDeleteAh, Ampersand AND mythago? You were swimming with some hard-core fembots there.
ReplyDeleteI tangled with both of those two, particularly mythago, on the Family Scholars blog way back in 03-05 before I started blogging full time. Amp was reliably feminist and misandrist but not too terribly difficult to deal with. Mythago was both of these and particularly impervious to vertical-thinking deductive reasoning in a way that Amp wasn't.
I wonder if, to be a male feminist, you have to be overweight and unattractive. Kinda like the requirements to be a female feminist.
TAS, you tried to say that you are not a misogynist but a sexist. The two are one in the left wing mind, whereas you and I and some others that can actually read English know the difference.
Good use of facial hair. It gives the illusion of having a chin.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that got me to look at HBD was the fact that the multicultists want to ban any discussion about it. When someone tells me that they do not want others to look at the evidence, I proceed to look it up.
ReplyDeleteI'm more than willing to look at liberal evidence for their egalitarian beliefs, except that they do not present any kind of scientific evidence. Instead, they proceed from their ideological assumptions to manipulate the perception of reality.
A case in point is post-colonial Africa. If what liberals told us about equality was true, then Africa today ought to be a a utopia of democracy and economic progress. The reality is not quite that!
It's a measure of the bankruptcy of modern liberalism-PC that they can not provide any scientific evidence for their assumptions. Instead, they rely on shutting people down or off.
They realize that no amount of social engineering and brainwashing can change the fact that blacks and whites are not equal and that men and women are different.
Ultimately, yes, they know that PC ideology is a dead-end.
One wonders in future years, after PC has been exploded for the toxic myth that it is/was, people will ask, "How did anyone in days past believe in such nonsense?"
Petey boy
ReplyDeleteMuch like white liberal egalitarians never encounter NAMs in their natural habitats, it seems most male feminists have not had much interaction with normal women. In real life, at least.
ReplyDeleteHm. I don't know what relevance Ampersand's physical appearance has to your disagreement with him. I mean, it's unfair that he banned you when you hadn't actually *said* anything wrong on his blog, that's true, but what does how overweight or conventionally unattractive he might be have to do with, well, anything? (And does his being Jewish have anything to do with anything, either?) What does the physical attractiveness or otherwise of feminists have to do with the political/ideological validity of feminism? Though FWIW I've met plenty of feminists who were attractive. Or attractive to me, at any rate.
ReplyDeleteAlso, can someone enlighten me as to the difference between "sexism" and "misogyny"? Maybe I've been browbeaten by liberal feminist women, but I'm not entirely clear on the distinction.
-E.
"what does how overweight or conventionally unattractive he might be have to do with, well, anything?"
ReplyDeleteIt gives you insight into his perspective.