Anarchist Rage Syndrome on Display

Last Friday I had an opportunity to take part in Todd Andrew Barnett’s show Liberty Cap Talk Live on Blog Talk Radio. It started out as an interesting but not particularly remarkable show with Mary Ruwart as the primary guest and me joining in late. Then about two thirds of the way through we switched topics and things got out of control and perhaps more entertaining — certainly more provocative.

At that point Todd switched the topic to Iran and brought up as his starting point an article either by Eric Dondero or from his site Libertarian Republican which took issue with Ron Paul for opposing a congressional resolution in support of freedom for the Iranian people. Eric is always trying to stir the waters and has a well-known personal beef with Ron Paul, so the article isn’t surprising. My mistake was in trying to explain why a libertarian might support such a resolution or even support foreign intervention on behalf of liberty.

I wasn’t trying to advocate that position, merely explain the reasoning behind it and how it comes from a legitimate strain of classical liberalism and perhaps point out that it was a pretty trivial issue, but that was lost very quickly when Jim Davidson who was one of the other guests on the show, went completely berserk. It seems Davidson is a very emotional and passionate anarcho-socialist who sees all actions of government as treason and believes that anything government does in the name of the people is essentially a crime. That didn’t exactly leave a lot of common ground with my belief that a republican form of government is the greatest safeguard of individual liberty. Though I tried to pursue a reasonable course, in a matter of seconds he was ranting and screaming about murdering babies and genocide and other craziness which was hard to follow, taking the position that supporting a non-binding resolution in favor of liberty in a foreign country was the first step to and essentially equivalent to invading that country and murdering their people. Davidson seemed to have a specific obsession with republicans as the source of all evil, which put me in a difficult position as the Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus and someone who always looks to find common ground with other libertarians — something which was clearly not happening here. And, of course, he immediately jumped from square A to square Z and assumed that I was a warmonger and perhaps even a war ciminal, in response to which I kind of feebly pointed out my decades of opposition to war an involuntary servitude, but the rant went on.

Then the fates, technical glitches or perhaps the host intervened and the whole thing came to a crashing halt and went off air, which was probably just as well. In the aftermath, Todd Barnett apologized to everyone concerned and banned Davidson from future appearances on his show, which is understandable. I feel like I ought to apologize too for provoking Davidson, but I’m not sure that anything more than mentioning the word “republican” was needed to set him off.

I bring it all up here, and offer the recording below for reference, because I think that this is a classic example of the irrationality which lies at the heart of anarchism and much of the libertarian left. Jim Davidson may be an extreme example, but there are many who share the same beliefs and seem to be incapable of looking at issues in any way other than one of emotion, rage and unreason. I find them difficult to understand, because for me the belief in liberty is the natural outcome of reason and I think that liberty can really only be preserved and maintained in an atmosphere of rationality.

Their viewpoint seems to be one of blind and unconsidered faith rather than the product of any kind of rational process, and it makes me wonder how easily that irrationality could be turned to violence or twisted upon itself in service of a demagogue or a totalitarian movement. It is a characteristic of the irrational rage which motivates domestic terrorists — even though they may have very different core beliefs — and which motivated the anarchists who tried to incite riots at the political conventions in 2008. It’s a narcissistic attitude which causes a violent response to disagreement rather than a more rational desire to understand and dispute or disprove opposing viewpoints. Many of the greatest tyrannies in history had their beginnings in movements which espoused liberty and attracted followers who were blind and uncritial fanatics like Jim Davidson. Then they evolved and accepted the idea that the only way to implement their vision of liberty was the force it on others — which is not liberty at all.

I think that’s the essential fallacy in the beliefs of not only left-libertarians and anarcho-socialists, but also the problem with the religious right and nativists and conspiracy fanatics and followers of the John Birch society who have been attracted to the liberty movement and revere Ron Paul as some kind of messiah. All of these groups put certain other issues to which they have a great and irrational emotional attachment ahead of the basic principle of individual liberty. Someone may have convinced them that they are libertarians, but so long as they don’t believe in liberty first, they are something else in my book. This doesn’t mean that we should purge these people from the liberty movement, but they do need to be educated and taught to reason and moved away from fanaticism and towards a rational understanding that liberty has to come first and that maybe hatred of immigrants or republicans or jews doesn’t make much sense and is certainly less important than liberty.


About Dave 536 Articles
Dave Nalle has worked as a magazine editor, a freelance writer, a capitol hill staffer, a game designer and taught college history for many years. He now designs fonts for a living and lives with his family in a small town just outside Austin where he is ex-president of the local Lions Club. He is on the board of the Republican Liberty Caucus and Politics Editor of Blogcritics Magazine. You can find his writings about fonts, art and graphic design at The Scriptorium. He also runs a conspiracy debunking site at


  1. I think reasoned debate, based upon sound principles, usually works best, but I somehow understand how hard it is to reason with people who get personal and consider any other view, no matter how rational, as “un-anointed”. This is what the left almost always does, and it is easy to be sucked in and respond in kind. My only concern with debate is that it leads to compromise, and there are certain principles – liberty comes to mind – about which there is little or no room for compromise. What possible good, for example, is there in cap and trade?

  2. Oddly, some people think cap and trade is an application of free market ideas to cleaning up the environment. I think it’s a big stretch, but they seem to buy it.

    What the fellow mentioned in the article seemed not to get is that even a little liberty is better than no liberty at all, and a compromise is better than no progress whatsoever. Even when it comes to liberty, more liberty is better than less liberty as we work to get as much liberty as we can.


  3. Liberate your enemies soul from his mortal body!
    Anarchy is (Peloski, Obama,Reid,Kennedy,Bush,Clinton,Progressive Democ RATS). Rail ride with tar and feathers is too good for these evil people!

  4. Everyone who has ever had dealings with Jim Davidson knows that he’s a fanatical raging two-year old trapped in the body of an aging anarchist. Everybody seems to have a funny Jim Davidson story.

  5. I simply want to say I’m all new to weblog and absolutely loved you’re web-site. Most likely I’m want to bookmark your blog post . You certainly come with tremendous stories. Thanks for sharing your web site.

  6. Needed to draft you that bit of remark to give many thanks once again about the extraordinary tactics you have shared in this case. This has been certainly incredibly open-handed with you to offer openly what exactly many of us would have marketed for an ebook to generate some profit for themselves, certainly now that you might have tried it if you ever decided. Those thoughts also acted to become a easy way to fully grasp that other people online have the same eagerness really like my personal own to see a little more with regards to this problem. I’m certain there are a lot more pleasurable periods up front for individuals who take a look at your blog post.

  7. This is a very good blog ! I’m glad I found it on the web . I hope that the author will write something else ? Together with my sister send greetings and customary “KsięgowA” !

  8. Aw, this was an extremely good post. Taking a few minutes and actual effort to generate a top notch article but what can I say I procrastinate a whole lot and don’t manage to
    get nearly anything done.

    Stop by my webpage: JanelZIzzi

  9. The following time I read a blog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me as a lot as this one. I mean, I know it was my choice to learn, however I really thought youd have something attention-grabbing to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about one thing that you could repair if you happen to werent too busy on the lookout for attention.

  10. F*ckin’ tremendous things here. I am very satisfied to see your article. Thank you a lot and i am looking forward to touch you. Will you please drop me a e-mail?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.