Comments on: Penn Jillette: Bullshit Libertarian

By: Mike Gogulski

Mike Gogulski — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:48:44 +0000

Illusions and delusions… I suppose that’s a symptom of a lack of consistency.

By: Tristan

Tristan — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:43:45 +0000

The violence some engage in does depress me – it just reinforces the view that anarchists are violent window smashers and nothing more…
It also lends a veneer of legitimacy (in the eyes of most people) to police brutality.

Protest peacefully, with or without police permission. Don’t damage property, but occupy it if its unjustly acquired.

Most importantly make anarchy respectable (not by watering it down but by showing how it can work without violence).

By: DarianW

DarianW — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:25:54 +0000

Maybe I should have added that this isn’t a matter of something “going mainstream” and thereby becoming uncool. The fact is that once a radical ideology is contorted to serve the status quo, it ceases to stand for change, and therefore will cease to cause any changes, becoming irrelevant to anyone seeking a change as big as the greatest possible respect for individual rights.

And the really offensive thing about this interview is not that Penn holds incorrect beliefs, but that he applies them to libertarians in general. I just thought of the interview’s mention of nuts infiltrating the libertarian movement. Who are these nuts they’re speaking of? The radicals whose positions once defined the word libertarian?

By: bosco

bosco — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:40:43 +0000

Ouch! Here we are back on the windows, where’s Kinsella? I’ve got to admit though, I really like Penn. I never considered him that much of a constitutional fetishist. Then again I also really like Arrested Development, so I guess in some Enron accounting scheme it all balances out.

By: Brainpolice

Brainpolice — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:17:26 +0000

*facepalm*