Skip to content


An Anarchist Explains Why He Hopes Romney Wins

(From the Freedom Feens Blog.)

by Michael W. Dean

Most Democrats and Republicans are calling this “the most important election of our lifetime.” They each believe that there has never been a more divided set of candidates running, and both “sides” believe that if “their” guy doesn’t “win”, America will fall into a tyrannical horror world, or collapse into chaos. But they’re both wrong……

Romney and Obama are not more dissimilar than any two presidential candidates in American history. They’re actually more similar. Which is why it shouldn’t mean anything to me who wins. They are both sociopaths and tyrants who think they know better than everyone how to “rule” us all, and both want, or more accurately NEED, to “rule” rather than seek cooperative voluntary solutions on how to organize society. In short, both want to use government aggression to do things that could be done more efficiently and far more ethically without force. And both give lip service to “God”, but value the god of the State, and collective unquestioning allegiance to their idea of the State, far more than any individualistic spiritual ideas. In short, they both want to kick God off the throne and park themselves on that throne.

But all that could be said of any politician, in any nation, throughout history. Where these two are really similar, more so that most politicians, is in their goals and methods. Both want to bomb the shit out of brown people around the world, and don’t care about “collateral damage.” Both want to heavily regulate free markets, free speech, end private ownership of guns, and cage anyone who has unauthorized plant material…..Both would rather grandma die a painful death of cancer and rack up a huge pharmaceutical debt for the family than “let” grandma smoke a joint while dying. Both want to spearhead an absolute government takeover of all industry, food production, energy, health care, banking, communication, transportation and everything else that humans heavily depend on. (That is the definition of fascism.) Both want to have drones spying on all Americans 24/7, and both want those drones to also have the capacity to bomb Americans they don’t like. Both want warrantless access to everything anyone says on a telephone or on the Web or in a private e-mail. Both want to be able to indefinitely detain any American citizen without trial for disagreeing with them. Both want a heavily militarized cop on every corner, and cameras everywhere. And both constantly blame non-governmental entities for problems the government caused, and both say that the only answer is more government.

When the similarities are stacked side by side like this, it’s plain to anyone with a brain that these two candidates are far more similar than different. They remind me of the two actual clone candidates on Futurama, John Jackson and Jack Johnson. There is very little difference between Obama and Romney. Obama wants to allow gays to openly die in the military, but that’s about the biggest difference.

So if I think they are basically no-choice clones, why do I hope Romney wins?

Because Obama wrecking things for four years drove a lot of conservatives to become Libertarians. And the day after the election when Ron Paul doesn’t become president (because of the systematic conspiracy within the GOP that made it so he never had a chance, examples HERE and HERE), a lot of those Ron Paul fans will become peaceful anarchists. I think that any conservatives who had enough of a brain to move toward giving up statism have already done so in the past four years, now it’s time for a different tyrant to do the same favor for smart Democrats.

I hope Romney wins because if he does, it will drive a bunch of Democrats to realize the futility of statism. And if even more people stop believing in the State, it will reduce the market for the violence of the State. And that will mean it will be sooner that our soft-slavery will end and we can progress in a peaceful manner into LibPar. (Libertarian Paradise.)

–Michael W. Dean

Posted in damn liberals, guns, liberty, take action NOW!, The road to serfdom.


4 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Jimmald (not Jimmy) says

    Hmmm. You could say I used to be a liberal, but only a lukewarm one, who voted Democrat because he had never heard of anyone doing otherwise, or advocating otherwise. I was never a true believer. A conservative becoming libertarian is just a person becoming less gullible; a leftist becoming libertarian is doing a 180-degree turn. Neither Bush nor Romney would make liberals do that; Republican rule will just strengthen their commitment to Leftist ├╝ber-statism.

  2. MichaelWDean says

    Jimmy says “Nothing can convert a liberal to libertarianism, short of a total personality change.”

    Wrong. I was a liberal three years ago, and I have pretty much the same personality now as I did then. Neema used to be a liberal too.

    MWD

  3. Jimmald says

    Conservatives, by nature, have something in common with libertartians in terms of their ideals. When they recognize the hypocrisy of their leaders, they become libertarian. Liberals have nothing in common with us. Sure, they want to smoke pot, but that has nothing to do with principles – they want pot-smoking to be mandatory and taxpayer-funded (I am not exaggerating – I live in NYC and this is a mainstream opinion here). Nothing can convert a liberal to libertarianism, short of a total personality change.

  4. Phill says

    I’d actually beg to differ.

    During the Bush era (W, that is), you saw democrats acting like typical democrats: complaining about how the guy in power is so bad just because he’s a republican, and did republican-esque things. Meanwhile, their guy gets in power, does everything the republican did to a much more grandiose scale, but just because he did a handful of things here and there that they like (thus further strengthening their worship of him for simply having a D next to his name), all the bad things he did are null and void simply because he’s their guy.

    There was no “libertarian revolution” amongst the liberals and democrats, they just acted typical of their herd. Come Obama, however, a lot of republicans (myself included) eventually hopped onto the Ron Paul train. This is because right-wingers and conservatives have some degree of a libertarian/constitutionalist heritage to their philosophy…by no means anarchist and/or voluntaryist, but even if they stop at the beaver dam because the lake is too scary for them, they at least know which direction the river flows. Save for the “blue republican” types that somehow stuck to the magnet of libertarian appeal, many of the “Liberal until I Googled Ron Paul” variety are little else beyond politcally-correct socialists who have a handful of things in common with libertarians in regards to social issues. These people have little to no connection to the classical liberals, much unlike the Ron Paul republicans who actually do have some connection to their philosophical roots.

    If Romney wins, all they’re going to do is get their panties in a wad the same way they did with Dubya. They’re going to excuse Barry’O for all the rethuglican-esque things he did, but as soon as Romney “inherits” his mess (Didn’t they use that excuse to defend Obama from his mistakes?), they’re going to act like he’s satan and the anti-christ and all these horrible things…which he would be, but not for the reasons they see him to be).