StephanKinsella.com

heh heh, he said “Woods”.

Steve Horwitz– my bigot, can you please help me out with The Rules. If I understand you correctly, it’s now anti-semitic for a bigot to … ummm,… be in favor of usury laws … you know, the kind most US states still have on the books?

Fine, fine, whatever, this bigot understands you here. This here bigot’s question is a corollary one: if someone disagrees with you on this, is that also anti-semitic? Dis here bigot just needs to know, so I can adjust my behavior accordingly.

This is fun, playing these made up games. What do you call this one?

Respek! Booyakasha!
Stephan “your bigot” Kinsella | Email | Homepage | 02.26.05 – 11:20 am | #

A couple items today:

1. THE PRINCIPLES OF JEWISH BUDDHISM — from Eric Muller’s blog. Hilarious, e.g., “To practice Zen and the art of Jewish motorcycle maintenance, do the following: get rid of the motorcycle. What were you thinking?” I’ll avoid quoting more, don’t want to be charged with anti-semitism by the dimwit-Seriosos. Oh, who am I kidding, I don’t care.

2. I like the expression, “come to find out,” which my wife uses frequently.

Another annoying expression: when people say “bully for him!” What, do we live in the 1920s?

More replies to snot-nosed, hypocritical, ridiculously holier-than-thou punks on Catallarchy: Whaddya want? A cookie? and The N-Word.

First:

Kane–right on. Ghertner’s views are schizophrenic because he is in thrall to the incoherent standards of the PC left.

Nesbit, a few points. First, I speak only for myself. So Garrison need not be “embarrassed” by me.

Second, I am calm. Very calm. This is all a joke to me, as a matter of fact. I don’t take any of the PC gnats seriously.

Third, who gives a rat’s ass if Ghertner “supports” Hoppe? With friends like him, who needs enemas?

Fourth, my “ridiculous accusations about a comedian being quoted” are no more ridiculous than the bleatings of Ghertner and his brainwashed, hypocritical, leftist, dimwit-Serioso ilk about HHH being a “bigot”. HHH is a great man who devotes his life to promoting liberty and individual rights for all; and in person is warm and gentle and does not have a bigoted bone in his body. If Ghertner could get his head out of his ass and have a bit of humility, and not be a snot-nosed punk like all the youngsters now apparently are becoming, he might see this, or at least bite his fucking tongue before making such stupid, evil statements.

Fifth, don’t even imply Hoppe has made bigoted statements. It’s a lie, and anyone who makes such lies is a lowlife scumbag. You don’t want to be a scumbag, now, do you, Nesbit?

Second:

You don’t like being caught up in the hypersenstiive standards of your own making do you?

HHH does not have “anti-homosexual views”.

Stupid, silly, petulant brat. Hypocrite. Grow up. Why are today’s boys such PUSSIES?

***

“They are upset at me because in the past I have called Hans-Hermann Hoppe a bigot for his anti-homosexual views.”

Thank God you are such a nobody that no one has to be “upset” with what you say. You are just useful as an example of the brainwashed leftist punks college is generating nowadays.

***

“My problem with Hoppe has never been with his use of a particular epithet, but with his ordinary language hatred of homosexuals,”

You brainwashed, insippied moron. He nowhere does that.

“and his equating them with all sorts of (libertarian defined) criminals.”

And he equated childern and old people with criminals too! He’s ageist too! Gasp! What a PUSSY!

“As I explained then, this doesn’t mean that I hate Hoppe or think that he is terrible thinker or person.”

Oh, how fucking GENEROUS of you! What petulant brats we see nowadays.

“We all have our flaws, and much of what Hoppe has to say about economics and libertarianism is valuable and important.”

Really? Then why did you join in the Not Reason ridicule and jeering of the idea that he is a world-renowned and important figure? You asshole.

“But that does not mean that he should be given a free ride when he says hateful things about homosexuals. If we wish to remain thoughtful and reasonable people and not fall into the ideological traps that many orthodox Objectivists, Marxists–and for that matter many mainstream Democratic and Republican party activists fall into, then we must be willing to criticize each other’s flawed views.”

Not when your comments are tantamount to character assassination and libel that are serious charges that demand more than your silly, college-boy politically correct Princess and the Pea standards, boy. Not when you join in the jeering of a great and significant thinker by a bunch of jealous, envious, malicious loser nihilists. Prove yourself before you dare to comment on a man as great as that. Punks, fucking punks.

As for your little lecture on racial epithets, do you really think anyone needs you to explain to us in kindergarten language the various types of racial epithets? Please.

“These critics were trying to make me look inconsistent or hypocritical for criticizing Hoppe’s anti-homosexual bigotry, and they did so in an abusive, unserious, and troll-like manner. That is not the kind of argument that deserves a reasonable response.”

The reason you got such a reply is that YOU do not deserve a reasonable response, you irresponsible ingrate punk. YOU are the one who blithely joined with the PC mob in hurling the damaging “bigot” charge, based on stupid, flimsy, paltry “evidence,” and using ill-defined, vague, self-contradictory, incoherent, arbitrary, unjust, but obviously hair-trigger standards–standards which would no doubt ensnare your own comments. The point is to show that your STANDARDS ARE RIDICULOUS since they catch even you. You can tip-toe all you like and bend over backward trying to mollify the PC police but nothing you say will ever be good enough for them. To do this is to make the mistake of granting them the right to be the grand inquisitors, as if their character and standards are beyond reproach, or at least better than yours; when, far from it, they – and you, who have joined them – are far worse.

Grow up, be a man, and get a conscience.

I hate it when people put their name in the signature line of emails in a stupid, large, different-colored, script-like font. Like they are gonna fool me into thinking it’s a “real” signature? Morons!

Also: people who use quotation marks for emphasis, or inappropiately. E.g., on a sign in a restaurant, it might say, “No cell phones, please.” What are the quote marks for? What do they add? Are they trying to specify that they are quoting someone? If so, what would it matter? Dumb dumb dumb.

I feel like a big fish in the small pond that is the world.

What’s worse–a hypocrite or a bigot? Answer: someone who’s both (2). And speaking of obsessed losers, from my post at Not Reason:

Tom Palmer and his fellow Seriosos have made themselves laughingstocks and their silly little foot-stamping petulant cries of “bigotry” into ignored yelpings. Just as blacks have taken on the N-word and use it familiarly among themselves–in part a backlash from it being used as a pejorative against them; so we “bigots” (and that means everyone alive–we are all bigots according to the Princess and the Pea standards employed by our ridiculous, self-enthroned Grand Inquisitors) are doing to treat the word as the joke it has become. Ya dig, mah bigot?

This inspires a new term to use for these yelping, petulant idiots: bleaters. Daddy like!

Great response by Bargainer to the Serioso libertarians. And my reply is reproduced below [note: my reply on HNN has been taken down; HNN editors apparently received complaints and asked me to cool it; The editor wrote me:

You have a lively style of writing, but you have repeatedly made belittling references to other people’s ethnic backgrounds.

This has to stop or you will be bounced.

Unacceptable are references to your “little group” or “clan- oriented types.”

and Beito asked for a cooling off period and is asking others too. As I remarked to both of them, my sarcasm is being equated with the outright libelous statements and personal attacks of others. My “little group” and “clan-oriented” types comments is not about others’ ethnic backgrounds; it’s worse–it’s meant to show I don’t give a damn about their little clans, and their attempt to impose their internal standards on a substantive libertarian issue is pointless. It’s their property so I’ll indeed cool it, but I hope that if I drop my sarcasm the other shits on the list stop their outrageous libels and character assassinations. It’s frankly getting old…]:

Mr. Sonnenworth,

Your calling someone “bigoted assholes” is not consistent with civilized discourse or with the rules of this forum.

I am not sure what exactly all this is about re Israel. When did this become about Israel? From what I can tell, you think anyone anti-Israel is anti-Semitic or, if Jewish, not a very good Jew. Whatever dude, I don’t know why you are trotting out your little club’s internal rules here (about who is a good Jew; or about the standards of pro-Israelis); I am not reciting to you the rules of Castle Risk, after all.

In any event, I have no idea what this has to do with libertarianism, which clearly has no positions on Israel or Judaism.

“Lew’s group of anti-Israel or anti-Semites or whatever the hell they are (I don’t care about labels)”

Interesting. Thanks for admitting that you and your fellow dimwit-serioso libertarians have totally corrupted and diluted the term “anti-semite” by your overuse and hypersensivite standards. For now you equate it with anti-Israel! Anti-Israel, anti-semite–what’s the difference, after all. I can just see your fellow Seriosos cringing, “shit! he just gave away our game!”

“Even your idiot comment “Hypersensitive Zionists”…shows you to be an insensitive idiot.”

Just curious–which is worse? To be insensitive, or an idiot?

“I guess those of us who don’t hate Israel are just overly sensitive to the smear campaigns of such luminaries as Alexander Cockburn, Raimondo, Sobran, Reese, Margolis, P.C. Roberts, and the list goes on…”

Sobran is not an Israel hater. Only dimwit-Serioso libertarians think so.

“Does Lew have Jewish columnists? Yep. His partner in his venture is Bert Blumert. Does that prove Lew is no anti-Semite? Maybe.”

No one needs to “prove” anything to you. Who are you, some unimpeachable Grand Inquisitor? Sorry, but we are not playing your game anymore.

“But as of late, all I read is one article after another, on the ones that do mention Israel, by the likes of the bunch above, i.e. there is nothing but the most vicious words against Israel.”

I actually am not interested in that Israel-Jew stuff. I skip most of it. Only Israel stuff on LRC that I’m aware of is my column New Israel: A Win-Win-Win Proposal, which is of course not anti-semitic. It proposes relocating all Israelis to Utah. I got tons of hate mail from real anti-semites. Unfortunately, calling these people anti-semites means nothing nowadays since you Serioso types have totally diluted the term by overusing it. Hell, if the mailman delivers your mail late, he’s an anti-semite. Yawn.

“More pieces lately…defending the Poles as defenders of freedom, not the collaborators in Auschwitz.”

I visited Dachau about 15 years ago. Not Auschwitz. Does that count?

“I know, she was another hypersensitive Jew. Like me.”

Word to the wise–don’t air your dirty laundry in public.

“I do realize there are many who don’t like Israel’s politics (including some Jews who are not rabid Jew haters as I can only suspect Margolis is), including many Israelis!”

Wow! I know many people who don’t like America’s politics–even many Americans!

“I would be happy to point out the complete and UTTER CRAP espoused by some of these people) on LRC that they would be quite content if Israel were to be destroyed tomorrow.

“Kinsella, you might disagree with that. You might say, “but where did anyone say that”? They don’t have to explicitly say it. It is the one country (outside of the U.S.) that is attacked over and over on LRC, and not for the foreign aid nonsense.”

Like pornography–you know it when you see it, eh?

“Ron Paul espouses that view (and yes, I know he is attacked as an anti-Semite or anti-Israel person), but Ron Paul at least says to cut out ALL foreign aid, which would include…guess who’s the 2nd largest donor recipient…those close friends of ours the Egyptians!”

Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for only using single exclamation points.

“Gosh, golly, not once do I recall seeing any of the jerks on LRC mention that a whole lot of countries get huge sums of American cash also, and are SO friendly to the U.S…Egypt has TONS of pro-U.S. propaganda being spread, is a true friend of ours…but this is the kind of BULLSHIT the LRC anti-Israel crowd conveniently likes to forget in its rush to blame Israel for the world’s woes.”

When you talk like this, I feel like Marlin in Finding Nemo who says to Squirt, after he just told him in surfer-dude language how to disembark from the current–“You’re awfully cute and your lips are moving so I know you’re trying to say something, but I have no idea what it is!” (paraphrasing)

“Some of the LRC writing brings to mind the same fictional qualities of that masterpiece of anti-Jewish lit., “the Protocols of the Elders of Zion”…”

Oh my God, if I hear about this stupid fricking book one more time, I’m gonna blow my brains out. That, or the fricking “Black Panthers” and SDS.

“the ADL is so powerful, neo-con Jews are ruining the U.S. (and yes, some LRC’s did make that connection fairly obvious..that neo-con=Jew..though not all did so), Israel wants to push the U.S. to invade Iran and Syria solely for its own good (gosh, nice to know Israel is SO powerful!), the Arabs would be our best friends (and they’re nicer, too) if we’d only let Israel go…”

I may have missed something in Israel-education class… but are you implying that these views are obviously false, or that merely holding them means you are anti-semitic? What is anti-semitism for you Seriosos, anyway? I mean how do you even stay married? Surely with such hair-trigger standards, your spouse does anti-semitic things all the time, e.g. if she forgets to pick up the dry cleaning.

“If libertarianism equates with letting Arabs destroy Israel, then to hell with it.”

Nooooo! Please don’t leave us!

“But I don’t believe most libertarians believe that. I hope not. They may not like Israeli policies, and that’s another story. I have friends, Jewish, non-Jewish,”

Hey hey HEY–how come if I say I have Jewish friends, I get crap for it…? I sense a double standard here…

“You can get into long debates over what a “bigot” is,”

Or, you can just save time and accuse them of it.

“…but Roderick, Steve Horwi
tz is correct…sending people to learn about libertarianism and the idea of no-aggression against others…to read some of the truly hate-filled obnoxious screed on LRC SULLIES THE LIBERTARIAN MESSAGE.”

And my God, we don’t want to “sully” that message! It must remain unsullied! Everyone knows that!

“Why am I so worked up about this? Because at times, as I wrote above, Lew can have such incredibly SMART things to say and intellectually brilliant columnists,”

Awwww, shucks

“I’ll read one of these columns…and then read a smear piece of shit like Margolis’ latest piece or the one Murphy wrote (in his defense, Bob Murphy wrote a very nice letter to me stating that I had either misread it or had not gotten the point, and that maybe he had not gotten that point across to ME as well as he might have…and I believe him; but…Kinsella, do I need to subjected to a piece of contemptible shit like Alex Cockburn and his diatribes against Jews “using” the Holocaust?”

How are you “subjected” to it? you chose to read it, no? Are you saying there is some obligation only to publish things you agree with? Are is the crime making it easier for others to find the objectionable piece? But then you are doing it here, since I never heard of this Margolis piece–and now I’m going to look it up. Good job, sommerschein, you have helped spread his word! I guess you’re anti-semite now. I’m so confused.

“So yeah, I am hypersensitive to jerks like you who lie about Israel and its critics.”

I think that goes in the “lighten up” file.

“LRC has far too much stuff against the memory of the Holocaust (interestingly, Elie Wiesel, the author, spoke at the U.N. about how the world should remember the other horrible things going on RIGHT NOW, the murders of others, non-Jews…this was at a Holocaust rememberance event that came 60 years too late…but my, he didn’t use the Holocaust only to defend Israel or the Jews…he wanted to save the Darfur Sudanese etc. Not that anyone at LRC would ever bother to notice). The ADL is attacked…though many Jews are not supportive of it…we have to read about how 10 million Ukranians were murdered by Stalin, and how those who “promote” the Holocaust are insensitive to that, or that the Holocaust, gosh, let’s waste more time on this, wasn’t unique and quit bothering us about it…yeah, ’tis true, I care nothing about what happens to any stinking person in the whole world except Jews…heck, I give out candy when I hear about Moslems getting blammed, even by fellow Moslems as the Sunnis are doing to the Shias in Iraq (but that’ the U.S.’ fault, I forgot!)..just like the Palis do when there’s been a successful bombing of a bus in Israel…yeah, that’s us Jews. Kinsella, you’ll no doubt shoot this down, but that’s the kind of utter stupidity on LRC at times.”

I read a Primo Levi book–the Drowned and the Saved. Does that count?

“LRC loses its credibility time and again when it comes up with some of the friggin’ most lunatic hate-filled things. Again, I use the Zionist thing because it is what I am most qualified to write about. Kinsella, I can guarantee you, I have studied far more of the history of modern day Israel pre and post-state, than any of the LRC writers.”

Er… yeah, you seem like it’s your thing. You do, er, um, realize this is a … libertarian blog, no?

“I’ve been to Israel, I have friends and relatives in Israel. I do not see Israel as purely right about things, and am intellectually willing to agree that Israel at times has made tremendous mistakes.”

Tell us more about your experiences with Israel. Really.

“But the last word I’ll write on this tonight is that therein lies the problem with LRC. There is never a gray zone. Lew’s lousy columnists (again, I am not saying that everyone who writes for him…but unfortunately, it’s some of his most prolific group of authors) are purely hate-filled and see only one thing. Israel wrong, U.S. wrong, Arabs lovely, peace-like and right.”

Look–I’m not saying this is the last word or antyhing, and of course it’s in part anecdotal… but didn’t you see Lawrence of Arabia?

“Sickening stuff. If it were only about foreign aid…but even then…has one columnist ever mentioned that, Kinsella? Probably someone has, but I can’t recall it…but numerous are the articles on how foreign aid to Israel is evil and part of the neo-con plot to take over the world!”

Congrats, again, for using only one exclamation point.

I have to admit I am adopted. My name was originally Kinsellaberg. We dropped the -berg. I’m so ashamed. =sob=

As I said, for some reason into Neil Diamond lately. The lyrics to I Am, I Said are frickin’ freaking Daddy out. Especially that fifth “but”. And what does swearing have to do with being alone?

Burger King Marcus had an interesting suggestion the other day. Since the hypersensitive, dimwit-Serioso libertarians and other intellectually bankrupt moral blowhards continue to label everything they don’t like as racism, bigotry, anti-semitism, etc., why not adopt a strategy from the African-American community. Blacks often refer to each other by the N-word, as in, “What up, my N__?!” We should do the same with bigot. When greeting each other, for example, we could say, “How goes it, my bigot?” Or, “Bigot–what you up to?!” Two guys tangling in a bar: “Look, bigot, get OUT MY FACE!” To your unemployed brother-in-law: “Bigot–when you gonna get a J-O-B?” If you see a fine girl, you could say, “Man, oh, man, what this bigot would do with that!” Since we are slapped with their silly, overwrought labels, let’s take it from them, make it our own! You dig, my bigot?

Instead of the light-in-the-loafers sounding “hat tip to ….” to thank someone for a good link tip etc., I have decided to use “respek’“, from Ali G’s hilarious show. As in, “Respek’ to John D. for the link.” Respek’ means “respect,” as in, thanks, or I respect you for that, gentle sir.

Note to any Dimwit-Serioso libertarians who may be reading this–I apologize for my praise of humor. Re-SPEK!