Young Voices And The Marxification Of Liberty

Some interesting stuff happened in the libertarian world yesterday.

A lady by the name of Pamela Stubbard decided to leave the organization Young Voices. She wrote a blog post explaining her reasons for resigning.  The reasons involved morals and personal convictions. Pamela isn’t completely ready to give up some of the baggage, but she’s definitely on the right track; I encourage my readers to check out her article.

It doesn’t surprise me that the response from the milieu has been largely negative. Like most secular post-Christian ideologies, libertarianism does not take kindly to apostasy or heterodoxy.

However, It does surprise me to see what is being written, how the disagreement is being framed. It surprises me to see how quickly things have shifted left in the libertarian camp.

According to the new libertarianism, it is now oppression and bigotry to disagree or disassociate with things deemed “so much liberty” by individual consensus. It seems that in the absence of Ron Paul’s R3volution, libertarian feminists have successfully lowered the bar for not only libertarianism, but “petulant white girl” behavior as well.

I wish I was surprised, I really really do.

The following pics come from an illuminating discussion of Stubbard’s article on the facebook page “Bleeding Heart Libertarians.”

Libertarian principles involve the money shot.
Libertarian principles involve the money shot.
Bigotry is a two-way street, my dear.  Had she been raised properly, Weeks would have been told something along the lines of “when you point, you have three fingers pointing back at you.”

It remains to be seen how sex work brings about liberty. Reducing one’s body to a rented penis storage unit doesn’t strike me as particularly empowering. I am not sure how supporting a stupid, spoiled girl being treated like a fleshlight on camera is principled libertarianism.

Oh and protip: if your argument amounts to shrill cries of “bigotry” and posts that read like adolescent tantrums, you may need to do something drastic. Something like… Oh, I dunno,* actually reflect on the positions you hold*.

Finally, Weeks is too busy playing liberty princess to recognize that Young Voices is using her in a manner no different, though more hygienic, than the fellows on Facial Abuse.  I’m not sure whether to chuckle or feel bad.


Of course Pumpkinhead had to give her $.02. Of course.

It’s enough to point out that Cathy completely misrepresents Pamela’s article in order to prevent any real discussion.  See: poisoning the well, non sequitur.

However, one of the responses in the thread was so awesome that I’m going to repost it here.

Cathy: “Sex workers are some of the most vulnerable and stigmatized people on the planet.”

“Sex workers” who have chosen that profession, are vulnerable as a result of their own choices. Ergo, cry me a river (you) baby.

Sex workers who have chosen that profession are stigmatized because they deserve it.

Cathy: “What this is saying is that ideological differences are fine, but that sex workers are beyond the pale.”

Because they are. Unless of course you are a self-destructive fool bent on turning the world into a nihilistic dead zone full of hedonistic zombies.

Cathy: “And that not only do sex workers not deserve a voice, but an organization which works with them is not worth working with.”

Everyone capable of speech “has a voice.” But not everyone capable of speech deserves to be heard. * No one has a natural “right” to be heard. *The legitimate right to be heard is a thing that must be earned. And no, people who choose to work as sex workers have not earned the right to be heard.

Cathy: “There’s nothing “respectable” about anti-sex worker bigotry.”

Prove it.


Rounding out the thread, there are of course a number of the “fuck you” variety of responses in the thread, as well as a few “no true scotsman” posts. Which is to be expected.

It is worth noting there are a number of amusing responses/retorts by a several people in the thread, that it’s not a total echo chamber. There are those who seem off-put by this visceral and unfair reaction to what amounts to conscientious, polite dissent.  It’s good to know that not every libertarian has bought in to this rebranded progressivism.

Nevertheless this kerfuffle disturbs me.

I see these “libertarians” appeal to things they don’t understand to achieve petty things they desire. You can not be libertarian in any meaningful sense if you sincerely believe ostracism, bigotry, discrimination and shaming are not peaceful means of social interaction that do not violate human rights. Getting your feelings hurt doesn’t constitute immorality, liberty doesn’t stop where your feels begin.

I see these “libertarians” promote vulgar materialism in a pious, religious manner. God may be dead, but they keep conveniently forgetting to bury Him.

Finally, I see an obstinate refusal to consider any contrary opinion valid, an utter inability to deal with disagreement in anything resembling a mature manner.

This is disturbing for me, because this sort of behavior, this script is exactly like your typical socialist today. This BHL thread is in no way different from the leftist “debate” boards I have been known to lurk.

This actually isn’t very surprising if you think about it. Both libertarians and socialists tend to attract the same sorts of people: bourgie, intellectually nomadic white people. Children of the post-Boomer generations, they seek identity and meaning, but have no clue how to find such things (isn’t there, like, an instruction manual out there?). Spoiled and stunted, never knowing hardship, never having to sacrifice, they are attracted to easy ideas and kitschy ideals that don’t upset their childish worldview.

The liberty movement no longer simply represents a dark mirror, it seems to actually be in the process of becoming Marxism. At least, Marxist in the vapid, pornographized manner of the modern socialist.

But at least you’re fighting bigotry, or something.