[Leonard D Neubache]

This is something I've been thinking about for a few days. It emerged from the debate over in the Drug Policy Thread where Ghost Tiger put the dagger in the last vestiges of my libertarianism with a stalwart appeal to paternal protectionism being valued over pie-in-the-sky ideals.

The blow-by-blow death of my belief in libertarianism has been the acceptance that by definition outcomes trump principles. Some would argue that solid principles will lead to better outcomes, but where those principles are impossible to enforce they are irrelevant.

Libertarianism as a whole it seems to me is therefore irrelevant.

So where does masculinity fit in?

Well I got to thinking "where did my love of libertarianism spring from" and when I dug deeply and honestly I realised something personally profound. That I had surrendered all paternal control of my society and fallen back to a position where I demanded everyone else behave as weakly as I was".

That's correct. In my society where all people are granted rights while being simultaneously bound by mutual obligations, I had become so disenfranchised, so disempowered and emasculated that I had relinquished all engagement. I had effectively pushed away from the table and said "I don't want to play any more".

Laughable in hindsight. Society is not going to let me play by different rules and widespread libertarianism exists only in the fevered dreams of socially reclusive hermits. I was in effect relinquishing power while failing to free myself of the burdens associated with my citizenship. All of the calories and none of the taste.

How did this come about?

For those of us that are any combination of white, male and heterosexual, we are effectively told that we effortlessly garner the fruits of society whether we realise it or not, and as such nobody is interested in hearing our demands much less considering them. We are in effect told that we have so many rights and so few obligations that we really ought to simply shut up and be grateful.

And this is where we come back full circle to Ghost Tiger's stalwart appeal to paternal protectionism. He realises that his child's life is his responsibility, and when forced to choose between pie-in-the-sky principles and keeping a firm hand the rudder of his community, his state and his nation he unapologetically chooses the latter, no matter how un-progressive it might be.

He does not foolishly relinquish his power in a futile attempt to disengage.

And that, my friends, is masculinity.

I therefore put it to you all that the resurgence in libertarianism is born of emasculated men demanding full disengagement from their societies when the truth is that they need to sack up like Trump did and fight to get their hands back on the rudder! There is no society without patriarchy. There is no civilisation without patriarchy. We are completely entitled to demand how we want our societies to function, who we want to be a part of them, and on what conditions. In the protection of our prosperity and the future of our children we do not need to dance around the supposed rights of saboteurs and civilisational assassins. We are not required to put the well being of human trash before that of our sons and daughters. Unapologetically we should chart a course forward for out own betterment and the betterment of our nations, taking full control to that and end.

And to hell with all of the screaming degenerates who want to get in the way.

Put them through the props, never look back, and never apologise for it.