Here’s some wonderful news from the wonderful world of absolute freedom, also known as Jewish Libertarianism: If you have kids, you do not have to feed them. Yes. It’s true. A parent do not have to feel obliged to feed his children, because that would «entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights». How liberating! And it’s all very rational and logical, you see, because it’s Objectivism, you see, and therefore it is objectively true. OK? But if that’s not enough to convince your brainwashed collectivist ass, then let me just add that it was a Jew who said it, so therefore it must be true. Because Jews are so intelligent. And they – like – use lots of words. And stuff. And have money. Man.
To repeat this new golden rule of objectively correct child care, just in case your silly goyische kopf didn’t quite catch it the first time: Do not feel obliged to feed your children. To do so would be an evil act of collectivism, and therefore evil. Don’t compromise with evil! Kill your kids!
Idiots. Sorry, Jews, but you’ve really blown your cover with this one. Here’s an excerpt of Jew Murray Rothbard’s ‘The Ethics of Liberty’, Chapter 14, ‘Children and Rights’:
Applying our theory to parents and children, this means that a parent does not have the right to aggress against his children, but also that the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.
Read the entire bogus argument here, if you can be bothered, or click the picture for a shorter version that’s a little longer than the quote.
Update: I was wrong about dragging Objectivism through the mud for this. Libertarianism and Objectivism are not the same thing just because they are both strands of Liberalism. But it’s still Jewish philosophy, however, and you can’t trust its design to be meant for much more than divide and conquer through ideas.
On a side note, I expect right wing liberalism to receive gradually heavier promotion in the mainstream media, now that the Jewish elite has used corporatism to grab almost everything there is to grab. When even more is on Jewish hands, they won’t need the state anymore, and can release one or another form of anti-statism on the masses. Whether that turns out to be Objectivism or Libertarianism doesn’t matter much, as none of these ideologies will be able to take down a completely privately owned New World Order.