Libertarian Twitter Master. Blogger and Vlogger! Veteran, Voluntaryist, Vegan. GoA Member and Non-Profit Director.

Saturday, March 16, 2013

The Dream State

Early last week, I was recruited to become a Columnists for the website The Libertarian. Here is my first article for them! Hope you enjoy!

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Very Virulent, Vexed, Voluntaryist Veteran's Vengeance

Don't worry, I don't even own a Guy Fawkes mask, so I will spare you the "Verbose Verb-age".

Now that the hype and the initial shock of "HOLY GOD NO IT'S SEQUESTRATION!" is over, the true scope of effect is coming to fruition. The shit has rolled down hill, the bottom feeders and little guys have a fine dusting of new silt to try and sift through, and these so-called cuts have hit hard, allegedly.

In true Bureaucratically Statist fashion and in likeness to the movie "The Hangover", government officials are retracing their steps and trying to figure out where they started, trimming the fat along the way. What is included in this removal of adipose tissue with surgical precision? The troops of course!

It's not like many have and are currently serving four, five, six or more tours! It's not as if they are subjected to over 310 days of combat on average! Compared to WWII with 40 days of actual combat, Korea with approximately 180 days and Vietnam with approximately 240 days! You surely couldn't say that 349 U.S. Troops committed suicide in 2012! Oh... wait...

So what does the Military-Industrial Complex do to say thanks? Chew them up and spit them out! According to The Air Force Times, The Defense Department will be cut by $46 billion. Along with the Air Force, the Army and Marines have said tuition assistance program has been suspended for the remainder of the fiscal year due to sequestration. Ok, fine, they had to cut last minute and things will be back to normal next year, right? Don't count on it. If they even reinstate T.A. next year, the Air Force will "need to review the eligibility requirements to ensure sustainability." AkA - the percentage of coverage will go down.

Am I protesting cuts in military spending? Absolutely not. To take the ax to the troops first, however, is typical and regrettable. But let's put things into perspective: Since late last year, the Federal Reserve has been buying 85 billion dollars a month in mortgage backed securities, and does not plan to stop any time soon. The total sequestration cut was 1.2 Trillion dollars. Does no one in the Mainstream Media see a problem here? By January 2014, the Fed will have spent as much as was cut in sequestration.

As a Veteran, I still have a lot of buddies in the Service and this truly does effect them. T.A. is not one of those B.S. perks that can be sucked off of with little effort. People that really want to go to school and get a degree use T.A., mainly because T.A. is a reimbursement and not an upfront payment. Service Members have to get a C or higher to get reimbursed (at least for the Air Force).

Bottom line, I saw this coming and that's one of the big reasons why I got out. For anyone in the service that thought the country could be in the condition it is in and still receive these cookies, you are foolish. I understand that not everyone is in a position to get out. If you don't like your T.A. being taken away, I have a secret to tell you. *PPSSSTTT* It's not going to get any better!

P.S. With private defense, companies would compete with each other to gain soldiers. A company that cut benefits promised would see a mass exodus and likely go out of business. 

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Is Rand Paul the Beginning of the End?

Could Rand Paul's heroic filibuster be the "Paul Revere" type ignition moment that many within the Liberty Movement have been waiting for? Well, maybe not, but he definitely tossed some barrels of tea into the ocean. 

A Washington Post headline reads: "Senator Rand Paul: My filibuster was just the beginning." I certainly agree. Although Rand is a little less candid on what he thinks "the beginning" is, those of us in the Liberty Movement know exactly what he means.

As I predicted in my YouTube video "2014 Election GOP vs Liberty Movement" posted back in December, the Republican Party has a choice: Choose Liberty or wither away.  It is no surprise that the GOP is in trouble, they can not win elections and the old timers are like sour milk, past their due dates. Look at the past few election cycles and at the percentages of "Tea Party" republican candidates beating their Democratic opponents. Excluding those wins, the GOP has a terrible and declining record.


Either way, it is the beginning of the end of the Republican Party as we know it. This schism between the Liberty Movement and GOP Establishment will go down in history. It is an incredible time to be alive and politically active. I hope, as I urged in my video, that the GOP embraces Liberty.

On a side note, why does a Voluntaryist care? Philosophically, I believe that this entire process is silly and of course in our perfect world none of this would exist. But a truly free Stateless Society is not going to just manifest itself. Certainly as technology increases, it becomes much easier to achieve, but tyranny also becomes more high tech, automated, efficient and centralized. We need Liberty minded individuals of all shapes and colors. We need to help Minarchists, Constitutionalists, True Tea Party, ect reduce the massive government that is oppressing everyone.

As I asked in a previous blog post: Is it easier to transition to a Stateless Society from a Minarchists dream reduced government or a massive bureaucracy we have now?


-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Saturday, March 2, 2013

An Open Letter To Glenn Beck: Embrace Voluntaryism!

People are scared of things they are ignorant about.

Glenn Beck, you are scared of Anarchy because you are either ignorant or grossly misinformed on what Voluntaryism is or what it means. Either stop being so scared of it or learn what it is all about. I stood up for people like you (Minarchists) in my last blog because I do think we need to work together to reduce government. We just disagree to what degree it should be reduced.

I was just like you not too long ago. You talk about slowly going deeper and deeper into Libertarianism and it's true. You have just scratched the surface my friend. You are bashing the conclusion that many Libertarians are coming to. You are bashing the "rabbit hole" that many of us are "tumbling down". That rabbit hole is this: Governments must operate by having a monopoly on the use of force. The use of force to control humans and restrict voluntary interaction is irrelevant, immoral and WILL be phased out peacefully. If you are ever going to either fully accept Libertarianism and/or be accepted by the Libertarians, you are going to have to stop bashing Anarchists.

A short time ago, you made a plea to Libertarians to accept and teach people like you what Libertarianism is all about. Also, just recently you made a bold statement that Anarchist within the Libertarian Movement are just "a couple of nut jobs".

In normal "Glenn Becky" fashion, you displayed a hand drawn chart on a chalk board to help demonstrate the spectrum of political ideology in the U.S., where each stands relative to each other and relative to "total anarchy" (left side of the chart) and "total government" (right side of the chart). You explained that on the very edge of Anarchy all the way to the Constitution is Libertarianism and some of the Occupy Wall Street. It was at this point, you made the comment about Anarchists, implying we are a fringe minority that should be cast aside.

Where shall I begin?

First of all, who are you to frame every aspect of Libertarianism? Where it fits in the political spectrum? Who belongs and who doesn't in the same month of asking to be guided to that very same conclusion?

Secondly, Anarchists of all colors are everywhere and ever growing. Especially when you scale down to just the Libertarian crowd. I don't think you really understand how many people you are alienating with your statements. Don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater" to use your own words.

Lastly, why would you plead for Libertarians to accept you and then ostracize a large portion of them? As I just said, you know how it feels to be rejected, now you are rejecting? Come on now... That's like asking to join the football team then screaming at the defense and offensive linemen for not scoring enough points.

"Anarchists want to see the government burn to the ground." Yes and no. If you mean the peaceful transition to a Stateless Society through natural evolution of the human condition and technology? Then yes. If you implying a violent overthrow of government through force and a thousand years of total chaos, violence and fighting? Absolutely not.

As a Voluntaryist, I abhor the initiation of force. I also believe in truly free markets and the Self Ownership Principle. The principle that says I own my body AND my actions. All fruits of my labor are mine as well as the rotten pits of my mistakes.

I plead with you Glenn, research Volutaryism. Look into Libertarian Anarchists such as Stefan Molyneux. Even if you do not agree with it completely, accept it as a part of Libertarianism because it is. As I explain in my blog "Libertarian? Guess what... you are an Anarchist"(and if by some wild chance you are reading this, please read my other blog entries) Voluntaryism is not mass chaos and rampant crime. The visual you get when you think of Anarchism is a warped, Hollywood and Mainstream Media hyped illusion of the truth.

But you can understand the corruption of Hollywood and the Mainstream Media, right?

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Libertarian Elitism: A Self Destructing Statement

Is "Minarchist" a dirty word? For many hardcore Libertarians/Anarchists it is!

If you identify yourself as wanting to re-upload the Republic, "That government is best which governs least" or a Constitutionalists you are labeled a Minarchist. While I think that most small government advocates embrace this classification, especially when they are immersed in what Libertarianism really means. But I also think there is a growing trend of Libertarian Elitism as the movement gains popularity.

This Elitism is clearly present in the recent criticisms of public figures that identify themselves as Libertarian, but are rejected by many hardcore Libertarians. Figures such as Julie "Token Libertarian Girl" Borowski and Glenn Beck have come under harsh attacks for not being Libertarian enough. While having evolved to full Voluntaryist in the past few months, I obviously disagree with some of their philosophical ideas. On the other hand, having just been in their shoes a few months ago, I can firmly say on their behalf: "Give me a FUCKING break!"

If you are a Libertarian and are acting in an Elitist fashion, you are going against some of the principles you criticize these individuals for not
fully embracing. The Libertarian Movement should be about acceptance and unity under Liberty and Freedom, not rejection and snobbishness. Someone you would label and ostracize as a Minarchist could very well be ignorant to "how deep the rabbit hole goes". Such as how I was a few short months ago.

Even if someone knows full well all the aspects of Libertarian Anarchy and still chooses to identify themselves as Minarchists doesn't mean we tell them to take a hike! It is fine to disagree with them about the degree to which government should be reduced, up to and including completely eliminated. It is not ok to make them feel unwanted in a movement they so desperately want to be a part of.

If you are an Anarchist, consider this. Will it be easier to reach a Stateless Society by:

1. Partnering with Minarchists and reducing the government to a near non-existent point and then go from there? 


2. Rejecting everyone who does not think exactly the way we do and keep preaching to a deaf society that feeds on big government forever and ever?

To be clear, I am NOT advocating for the Libertarian Movement to be hijacked and corrupted like the Tea Party Movement was. I am also NOT advocating for either Minarchists or Anarchists to give up their stance. What I am advocating for is Minarchists and Anarchists have so much in common that it is ridiculous, illogical, irresponsible and counterproductive for us to be dividing and fighting already.

Let's pull back the American Empire, together.We will NEVER change anything if we are fighting with each other.

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Libertarian? Guess what... you are an Anarchist!

Yes, that's right! If you consider yourself a Libertarian, Tea Party member, or just advocate for smaller government, YOU ARE AN ANARCHIST! I know, scary right?! And you thought you had no excitement in your life...

When you say the word "Anarchy", Mainstream Media culture says you should think of Molotov Cocktail hurling rioters, teen angst hoodlums and ruthlessly destructive vandals overturning cars and burning down businesses. This is an obvious misrepresentation and oversimplification of the term and couldn't be further from the truth. If it wasn't, I wouldn't be call you an Anarchist right now! 

Done under the correct conditions of morality, non-aggression, truly free markets and voluntary exchange, anarchy DOES NOT mean mass hysteria, rampant unchecked criminality and constant disorder.


Five years ago, I considered myself a devoted apathetic, politically speaking. It took me that long to reach the point where a mere few months ago I considered myself a "Constitutionalists, Ron Paul and Founding Fathers Fan". Nothing wrong with considering yourself those things, but the natural evolution of your awakening is to accept your Anarchism, but allow me to explain! 

In reference to how you feel about government power, size and scope, it boils down to two positions: Anarchism and Statism.

The definition of Anarchism "is a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful." Even if you just want the government to shrink in size and do not advocate for it's full abolition, you are still advocating an Anarchist position in contrast to the current state of affairs. Thus you are an Anarchist (at least to a degree or in regards to specific aspects of government and society).

On the other hand, Statism "is the belief that a government should control either economic or social policy, or both, to some degree." Statists always turn to a government solution to all problems in all aspects of life.

Do you think Obamacare is "undesirable"? Do you think that endless budget deficits and debt is "unnecessary"? Do you think that our foreign policy is "harmful"? If you answered yes, then you are an Anarchist. If you answered no and believe the opposite, you are a Statist. It's just that simple.

Now, I know this may be sort of shocking to you(some of you reading this are saying "Duh, already there, bro") but hear me out. Anarchism is the next logical step in your journey into the world of Libertarianism. This is the "tumbling down the rabbit hole" scenario that you find many Libertarians talking about. Once you discover the true philosophical meaning of being a Libertarian and, by association, being an anarchist, you enter the next phase of  "becoming awake".

There are TONS of different names, definitions and variants once you have reached the point of accepting your anarchism, such as Anarcho-capitalism, Anarcho-socialism, Anarcho-communism, minarchism, Rothbardarians, ect. But what I advocate for is what's called Voluntaryism.

"Volutaryism is generally considered to be the philosophy which holds that all forms of human association should be voluntary." It hinges on the cornerstones of the Non-Aggression Principle, Self Ownership Principle and Voluntary Free Association.

So, now you ask "The Slavic Libertarian, I accept my anarchism(to whatever degree it is) and I may even believe that a peaceful transition to NO state whatsoever is what is needed, but WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?!" The answer is the principles of Voluntaryism practically applied to what is commonly referred to as "The Stateless Society".

The Founding Fathers were literal geniuses that considered every aspect and used all means they could postulate to try and keep the new U.S. government tied down, separated in power and tyranny-proof. Considering how the government has been perverted to become everything the Founding Fathers despised and tried to avoid, you have two possible causes leading to one conclusion: Either The Constitution failed us or we failed The Constitution. If you accept that, then you must accept that humans can not be trusted with establishing a State. The next logical and evolutionary step is to establish a Voluntary Stateless Society.

In a handful of paragraphs, I have given you the blueprint to the next phase of your awakening. Now it is up to you to go and do the research. Look into all the terms I have mention above. Also, seek out the works of Rothbard, look up Stefan Molyneux(Freedomain Radio) on YouTube (check out his book series: "Everyday Anarchy and Practical Anarchy") and seek out the knowledge that all of us inherently crave.

Be sure to tuck and roll on the tumble down :)

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Friend Asked Me About Fast and Furious

This was the original question posed to me on Facebook by one of my friends from back home. As a contextual note, this person has been on the right and republican-ish for a long time. But more and more this person comes to me for my opinion and slowly their eyes are opening up. I have to admit, the Obama administration has a lot to do with their willingness to listen!

"If you are familiar with the "Fast and Furious" investigation, or lack there of, please tell me if I am crazy to think that the current penalties handed by the DoJ (headed up by non other than Eric Holder) against HSBC for the laundering of billions in drug cartel money, might be a little bit sketchy! I'm thinking there is something way deeper! To have a investigation into the transportation of guns into the cartels hands, as well as the laundering of money, and the only result is no investigation and a $1.2 billion dollar fine? You mean to tell me no one is in jail yet..... Who is really behind all this?"

And the following is my response to this person, and I thought I'd share with you:

In my humblest opinion, at the lower level this was a legitimate gun sting operation. At the very highest levels this was a planned "False Flag" event. It was to be used to demonize the 2nd Amendment and change the culture of gun ownership through fear. As Eric Holder said back in 1995: "Really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way." This is coming from the guy who was Deputy Attorney General during Waco disaster.

As for the penalty handed down to that bank, it seems to me to be a scape goat effort to quell the outrage. Especially considering other large US banks have also been caught, such as Wachovia laundering over 378 Billion in drug money( But even if they "fined" every single bank involved, it really does nothing to penalize the people responsible. The bank is a corporation that will just pass the cost of the fine on to customers or employees, such as what Bank of America did (or tried to do) with the 5 dollar debit fee after getting fined.

"Since the 2006 crackdown on cartels that the United States urged on, between 35,000 and 40,000 people have been killed by drug violence in Mexico alone."( The DoJ needs to CRIMINALLY PROSECUTE and JAIL people involved, from bank heads to government officials that green lighted this terrible program. But it is kind of hard to do that when the people involved were most likely among the top ranks of the DoJ in the first place.

Lastly, If US banks will launder their money, and US government arms them with fully automatic rifles and hand grenades, who is helping them ship their narcotics all over the US? The CIA has been accused of trafficking drugs to fund black ops that they do not want to divulge to Congress. They even address the accusation on their official website(

When it comes down to it, this event is just one in a string of large scale disasters that ALL stink of nefarious intentions and inconsistent facts. Just research WTC Building 7 if you have any doubts about that.

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

My First Official Censorship(Really was Exploited)!

 **UPDATE #3** 07Jan2013

Well it looks like the exploiters really don't like me. I just got hit with my SECOND suspension over this ridiculous behavior. Getting really tired of it!

Other people have hit their max follows and NOT been suspended, correct? I see people have been doing it constantly. That is the ONLY thing I can think of that could have caused it other than this exploit.

Oh well,  I sent a complaint into Twitter about it. I am just worried they will permanently ban my account over theses exploits!

BTW: It seems like I always get suspended after I get into an argument with a Liberal... hm......

**UPDATE #2**

After getting involved with the TGDN movement that has been sweeping Twitter for the past few days, I came across this article. It seems more and more that I was a victim of this exploit. If this exploit is targeted, I was definitely censored. Not by Twitter directly, but by a person who did not like what I had to say, using Twitter in an abuse way. You decide...


Greetings Everyone!

I am proud to report that I have officially been handed my first censorship at the hands of Twitter. 

As you can see from the picture below, I was cited for "multiple unsolicited mentions to other users". Below the black line is what "Twitter Rules" constitutes the violation I was cited for.

As you can see by my Twitter feed, nothing I have done in my Twitter history would be considered "large numbers of duplicate @replies or mentions" or "large numbers of unsolicited @replies or mentions in an attempt to spam". Twitter did not tell me what specifically I was suspended for or who reported me for my "activity".

Funny thing is, the only person I have sent multiple unsolicited "@mention" or "@replies" to was Mr. Piers Morgan. Again, as you can see by my feed, they were never duplicate or in a spamming fashion. All my mentions and replies to Mr. Morgan were spread out over long periods of time.

Another funny thing about it, I have also created a YouTube video that is very critical of Mr. Morgan... hhhmm...

Well my account was suspended at approximately 5p.m. Mountain while I was asleep. I unlocked my account at 12a.m., it is now past 1a.m. and I still have no Followers or Following. Oh, but it "could take at least 1 hour for your list to repopulate".

Even if this was an automated response by Twitter to complaints against me, it shows how effective I have been. The people I am critical of can not argue their flawed points against me, so they report me for "spam".

Twitter, if this what an automated response, you need to seriously review how your suspensions are handed out. Twitter needs develop a system to make sure complaints are valid and substantive. If this suspension was reviewed by a representative and still handed down to me, shame on you Twitter for censoring me in blatant disregard of your own "rules".

Do not ever let them shut you up!

-The Slavic Libertarian
My Twitter

My YouTube Channel


Thanks to Vandaloo Titan, He pointed that the pictured activity below may have been the reason I was suspended. As pictured above: "If you send large numbers of unsolicited @replies or mentions in an attempt to spam a service or link"

As you can see, in two seperate tweets, I mentioned 11 people, of whom I interact with on a regular basis. If this is the reason I was suspended, was it justified?

Again, all we can do is speculate because Twitter does not disclose the specific event you are being cited for.