Monday, September 26, 2011

The Lesson Liberals Should Learn From the Troy Davis Murder

A few days ago, the state of Georgia murdered Troy Davis.  Predictably, liberals and black activists are outraged, blaming America's justice (sic) system, white racism, and law-and-order conservatism.  They are overlooking, perhaps intentionally, the real culprit: big government.

This is what governments do: they give people fancy uniforms, titles, and weapons and let those people kill others without consequence.  Governments are founded upon violence.  Whether it's by starving and working to death people in concentration camps or gulags, by dropping atomic or conventional bombs on cities, or injecting lethal drugs into peoples' bloodstreams, governments have perfected the art of murder.

If liberals want to prevent another murder such that of Troy Davis, instead of wasting their time ranting against White America, they should use their energies to combat the mafia that the sheeple have foolishly given the power to destroy lives.


  1. This is a complex one for a race-realist with libertarian sympathies. I think the emerging synthesis is that Libertarism works great among mono-racial societies of northerm Europeans, but is impracticable when society is contaminated by the Muds. In the final analysis, the purpose of the American police state is to protect us from unpredictable and violence-prone primitives living among us. Living in "flyover country" you are perhaps shielded from this a bit, but no one who has to live close to large Mud populations wants to "dismantle police power". Just a thought, not sure if it applies to you personally.

  2. Liberals like to live without social responsibilities. They have no policies for their lives.

    1. Woah!??? "Liberals like to live without social responsibilities." You're seriously posting that comment on a blog that is devoted to criticizing other people's opinions and forms of action? This entire blog is just a backlash to what other people believe/do. It's criticizing social action which whether or not you agree with what they are saying or where they are coming from, is is action. It is not fair to say that anyone who is actively raising social and cultural questions does not take on some social responsibility. Both liberals and conservatives need to DO more and blog less. Instead of criticizing what liberals, feminists, anti-racists do, why don't we all look at ourselves and ask what we as individuals can do to better our society?

  3. Gun-Toting LibertineOctober 11, 2011 at 11:46 PM

    Well said! You can shout "racism" all day, but the government retains the power to slaughter its citizens should they step far enough out of line. THAT is the problem.

    What gets me is how none of these hypochristians seem to have a problem with all this. I'm fairly certain that Jesus was anti-death penalty. He echoed the injunction not to kill, some like to argue that it does not apply to one who killed first. However, that whole Sermon on the Mount was really a repudiation of that primitive Semitic revenge-based system of punishment, was it not? Why is it that professing Christians seem to be the demographic most in favor of the death penalty while the secularists are usually most opposed?

  4. Love the post! I also love the non-statist perspective on HBD.

  5. The appropriate anti-statist critique here would be that the state prevented us for so long from meting out justice to Troy Davis. A length of rope and a solid oak bow would have done the trick quite nicely.

  6. Anonymous writes "... Libertarism works great among mono-racial societies of northerm Europeans, but is impracticable when society is contaminated by the Muds."

    I hadn't thought of it that way. My view was that libertarianism does not allow groups to form land areas of their own. So once an area has become full of many different kinds of people, it is impossible for the original group to change it back to how it was. That would be the case under libertarianism.
    One other issue I would like to touch on in a delicate way is the use of the word "mud" for people other than ours. It is certainly your right to use the word "mud". But it is negative and insulting to them. Is that your intention?