- Reply to Horwitz, about how conservatives are really just criminal socialists with some makeweight justification; comparing the motives of criminals to the theories of socialists. Someone sent me this email about this exchange:
Now I know why you are bald—you tore out your hair trying to debate the paleocons. Jesus **** Christ, is it so hard to admit you favor aggression? I guess it is. Try debating liberals and they will swear that taxation is not aggression because there is some “social contract” you have to obey. It’s mystical mumbo-jumbo on both sides. Perhaps this is good—maybe most people know ~deep down~ that aggression is bad and are just trying to play word games to rationalize themselves. Maybe that’s a start of some sort, although you seemed to run into a dead end with everyone. But how many criminals admit they are criminals? I’ve seen former S.S. guards at Nazi death camps say with a straight face that what they were doing was self-defense. Yes, sending children into the gas chambers was “self-defense” because they’d grow up to be nasty adult Jews.
- Reply to Palmer (where he insinuates I’m a Nazi sympathizer because I made fun of the idea of “inadvertent racism”); followup reply by me posted on The Palmer Periscope.
