Larken Rose Goes Full Blown SJW

Larken Rose’s puppet piped up about my article on Spangler’s daughter


Then Larken Rose chimed in, going full on social justice warrior.

Larken SJW


Firstly, I quoted her entire statement. Nothing was taken out of context.

Understand something, the term “rape culture” is nothing but State propaganda. If Larken had ever bothered to look into it, he would know that. The idea that we live in a culture where rape is socially acceptable is so completely beyond any semblance of reason, that you have to at least suspect some aspect of statism being involved.

What we actually live in, is a rape accusation culture. Where the mere mention of rape ruins careers and shuts down fraternities. We live in a society where a woman can subject a man to decades in prison, and all of the other horrors of a rape accusation, be proven to have lied about it, and suffer no consequences whatsoever. We live in a society where the definition of rape is constantly changing based on the whims of radical ideologues, to the point where consensual sex after a night of drinking can put a man in prison. We live in a society where the burden of proof for rape accusations is steadily declining to a point where a man has to prove his innocence instead of the state proving his guilt.

We live in a society where men are 90+% of the prison population, and women claim they are being oppressed.

We live in a world where men are just plain viewed as disposable, we work the most dangerous jobs, we suffer the vast majority of war casualties, even as non-combatants, we are genetically predispositioned to put our lives on the line to defend women, and women claim they are treated as inferiors.

Well, Larken, and the rest of you fucking maniacs out there, I’m not going to keep on with that charade. You can call me a misogynist if you want to, but a lot of people are going to look at you like the New York Times for doing so. If you have a point to make, then make it, but I say it’s a sad day in the history of libertarianism when Larken Rose resorts to Rachel Maddow slander tactics.

Look, I get it, she’s purdy, I lived with the bitch, and I know what it’s like to fall under the spell. But make a fuckin point if you’ve got a problem with me instead of throwing around meaningless ad hominems like “misogynist”.

We talked about this last night on Some Garbage Podcast

This is what I do for a living, and it’s far from luxurious. I rely upon your contributions to continue producing this content. So if you appreciate the work I do, please consider donating, or advertising here. If money is tight, I could also use some volunteers.

Follow me on, UStream, YouTubeFacebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Diaspora.

Subscribe via email and never miss another post!

[mc4wp_form id=”7723″]


Christopher Cantwell is a former political prisoner, and current host of the Radical Agenda. The most entertaining podcast of the Alt Right.

  • Dennis Wilson

    Wow Chris. You keep hitting home runs!! Keep up the good work!

  • Infinite Limit

    Apparently Larken Rose’s lack of original ideas and sex appeal finally got to him. So he took an even worse, horribly invalid idealogy called feminism because he realized that professional victimhood enabling is the easiest way to get attention based on his lack of abilities.

    Chris, what did you ever see in Josie?

    • Christopher Cantwell

      Like I said bud, I was under the spell. It happens to the best of us.

      • Infinite Limit

        I know that and I don’t blame you. Hell, given your position I might have done the same (she’s gorgeous). Was that it or was there anything else (character, philosophy, etc.) that you saw?

        I might be delving too deep here, but Josie’s beliefs have gotten progressively worse (pun partially intended). And she seemed like a great person in the past (based on first impressions anyway).

        • Christopher Cantwell

          When she was parroting Larken Rose on use of force I thought she was ideologically spot on. When she moved into the house I got to know her better, but by then it was difficult to think objectively.

          • Infinite Limit

            Well, she was for a time. Then everything changed when the feminists attacked.

            Only John Galt, master of all four branches of philosophy, could stop them. But when the world need him most, he vanished.

            Anyway, it’s always a shame when we lose libertarians to the irrational. But at least we didn’t lose you as well (though it takes a profoundly dense motherfucker to go full SJW).

      • Liberfree

        Wait, so you criticize a woman for blaming men for her problems but you justify blaming women for your emotional instability when dealing with unrequited love? That’s fucking rich dude. No one put a spell on you. However, whoever raised you certainly did a number on you. Take responsibility (or at least put it where it truly belongs) just like you insist others to do. Don’t put it on some magical matriarchal fantasy witchcraft. You’re hurt. I understand. Most people have been hurt, some far, far more than you. Deal with it. And by deal with it, I don’t mean lashing out every time you get the chance to shit on a woman. And I don’t mean burying it like a repressed sociopath. I mean get some help. Talk to someone before it’s too late and you slip and fall on love once again. If you don’t, rest assured, these things have a way of repeating themselves over and over again. I hope you do and I hope to one day see the word “former” before the asshole in your tagline.

        • Christopher Cantwell

          Is it in some way unclear that I am responding to an attack on me with researched evidence?

          • Liberfree

            But, but, but, Larken is under a spell man! “It happens to the best of us.” LOL.

  • Brandon Piccione

    I’m just impressed.Larkin said something without resorting to analogies. I like Larkin rose’ work, but it gets a bit redundant.

  • Liberfree

    It’s unfortunate Larken dipped his toes into this but what’s done is done. Social Justice Warriors (SJW’s) though are clearly in favor of the state. Neither Josie nor Larken are in any way shape or form. Any ostracism of Chris is just that and not to be confused with advocating the SJW philosophy. Far from it IMO. That being said, I do think the way these spats have unfolded are totally counterproductive.

    Here’s the comment I made on Josie’s post:

    torn for a few reasons. Not because this article is more or less
    douchey than others Chris has written. He’s a self-proclaimed asshole
    after all. Being controversial for the sake of being so is admittedly
    part of his marketing scheme, regardless of
    whether or not any sensibilities are respected, which is by far usually
    not the case. No, I’m torn because as a person yearning to live in a
    free society, who tries to connect to fellow freedom loving people, I
    know (as much as one can without knowing someone personally) that Chris
    is staunchly among us. I recall not too long ago photos of Josie and
    Chris hanging out being friends. Obviously things changed in a big way. I
    don’t know why and I don’t care really unless it’s for a NAP-violating
    reason. Nevertheless, it does leave me wondering why these kinds of
    spats occur so publically if the overall idea is to keep focused on the
    message of freedom as we all here understand it. That is the point,
    right? All of us, in our own little way, staying focused on statism vs.
    slavery is really what separates us from everyone else caught up in the
    left/right paradigm of utter stupidity.

    been very critical of Chris on numerous occasions and so I won’t bother
    piling on here because it’s all been said above. What I will say is if
    the goal of spreading ideas of freedom to the vast sea of psychological
    victims of the state (which we all were at one point at time) is
    paramount, then each of the various condemnations of converts (however
    justified) takes away from that objective. What I find most sad of all
    with respect to Chris is that he doesn’t seem to see this or care if he
    does. In his quest for marketing success, he continues to hack at
    low-lying branches of freedom rather than strike the root. He may very
    well be a true, unadulterated asshole deep down, but from what I’ve seen
    and heard, there are clearly times he is anything but and it’s my hope
    that he embraces his non-assholeness and focuses on spreading the
    message to statists rather than spraying shit all over fellow converts
    faces (or victims of molestation in this case) every chance he gets with
    how goddamned right he thinks he is. My point is, for me personally I
    realize how little time we have on earth and so I highly respect those
    who use this time to zero-in on what matters most (converting statists)
    rather than their own personal, selfish bullshit, whether that bullshit
    is as innocuous as a cute selfie or in the form of yet another
    asshole-filled article aimed at the sole purpose of making money.

    • Simon

      At some point you must draw a line between “inclusiveness” and telling the truth.

      You think truth about a leftist bastard & his damaged daughter are not worth saying. That’s your opinion. Hiding the truth has always (bad) consequences. Pro freedom ideas are about telling the truth, whatever it takes.

      Even worse, Josie & Larken throw ad hominem for telling the truth. THAT is hurting the freedom ideas. Are you ok with that ?

      • Liberfree

        “At some point you must draw a line between “inclusiveness” and telling the truth.”

        How about no?

        I couldn’t care less about inclusiveness. Being a despicable asshole, on the other hand, matters a lot to me and any decent human being. I rarely disagree with the underlying arguments Chris makes, even though many times I think his focus is in the wrong place. However, the WAY he goes about telling “the truth” is what I’ve always recoiled from. Unlike most people, I can fairly easily make that distinction without resorting to drawing a line in the sand.

  • Max Sand

    Since when does victimization prevent someone from being criticized? She threw her hat into the public arena with her statement. She called out Chris, by name. She repeated the same argument we hear from the left, time and time again, about “rape culture” and “patriarchy”. She is no longer immune from debate.

    Had she said a simple, 2 or 3 sentence “leave me alone please” maybe I would give her that much, but she didn’t. She turned a personal tragedy into a full blown political soapbox, and when you do that, you are fair game. Covering that basic fact with radical feminist buzzwords doesn’t change it Larken, and I generally respected you until now.

  • Damien Hollon

    Larken knows his stuff when it comes to liberty, but I suppose he hasn’t done his homework on feminist buzz words. Patriarchy and Rape Culture are not, as he has described, the belief that some guys are buttholes to women. They are nearly supernatural beliefs in the inherent evil of society, but especially in men, that is invisible, omnipresent, and affects everything we do. It is literally a tool for blaming every wrong thing in the world on a single gender. Larken should know that the medal for “everything wrong in the world” goes to government, not men, because women who get power do the same shit.

    He may also not know that those buzz words are used as excuses to introduce legislation that makes being white men practically illegal in the name of fairness. Feminism is socialism in panties, and I know Larken doesn’t like socialism. Why he would defend the use of female supremacy language is beyond me, except in the case that he doesn’t realize that’s what it is.

  • ッ Kevin Hughes

    I’ve always liked what Larken has had to say but, he has the charisma of Mr. Potato head. I think his dick has taken over his brain. I blame the Pussyarchy!

  • It is sad, but as Jesus Himself said in the Bible, even the elect can be deceived. Likewise, even true libertarians, who have a solid foundation and faith in the core libertarian philosophy that we hold dear, can go wacko in many ways. Stefan Molyneux’s IP hypocrisy, Roderick Long’s own succumbing to the race hysteria fomented by feminazi-in-chief Cathy Reisenwitz, and now Larken Rose’s succumbing to the SJW propaganda of “da evuhl men” are just a few of these examples.

    But take heart, brothers, and let us not throw down the torch of liberty and truth. Let this not motivate us to depart from that which we hold dear.

    • Doofor

      Likewise, as a Santa-ist, let me add that our Father Christmas, who art in the North Pole. Sees Chris, Josie, and Larken when they’re sleeping, and knows when they’re awake.

      Take heart my children whether naughty or nice, and remain of good cheer. Is it not better not to pout? And not to cry? It is our common foe the Statist Grinch who steals our toys, so you’d better not shout amongst yourselves, do I really need to tell you all why?

  • Randbard Von Hayek

    Funny that I never hear it said “Hey that guy had sex after drinking? Oh my, some girl raped him!”. It is only the other way around. This is what happens when movements become government programs.

  • zaqan

    you da man

  • GOD

    In this case, Josie should’ve just stayed in the kitchen making sammiches/babies/etc…FACT

    • Opiate X

      If this idiotic statement isn’t proof that the belief in patriarchy exists, then I don’t know what is.

      • GOD

        Yes, I,as a male, personally control all of humanity in the palm of my hands, and you found me out LMAO XD

  • Coralyn Herenschrict

    Good god, voluntaryists themselves have been duped into in “my personal values are better than yours” warfare. Chris, Josie, and Larken of all people should know these types of conflicts are deliberately fomented for the very purpose of distracting attention from who the real bad guy in the room is and what he is doing.

    “Social justice” or any other “fairness” issue is subjective. Irrelevant to law but for a state trying impose a single set of personal values on all. Sexists and non-sexists, racists and non-racists, theists and atheists alike can all live together in harmony in a voluntary society and just bear the economic costs of any counter productive beliefs they practice. End of story!

    Chris, Larken, Josie, don’t take the state bait. What’s at stake is too important to stray into interpersonal strife over personal values. Your energy has far higher, better uses. Pull up. Celebrate each other in your common cause. Stay focused and united on what matters: fighting aggression.

  • lowell houser

    So cutting through the bullshit on all sides, Chris made a move on Josie and was assholish about it when she rejected him, hence her leaving. Her criticism of Chris is in turn motivated by the assholishness, and Larken is a white knight.


    • Christopher Cantwell

      First warning and only warning, the next time you make up lies, I’ll ban you from the comments here.

      I never “made a move” on Josie, and I was never “assholish” about it. In fact, we were totally cool when she moved out of my house. So get your fucking facts straight or spew your bullshit somewhere else.

  • Revcon

    FIRST of all, I do NOT appreciate people who claim to be righteous or intelligent or educated who have to lace their writings or speech with profanity. This is just releasing THEIR frustration and anger on me. I can know from reading that the content is about various injustice of the world. I don’t need profanity leashed on me to assuage the frustration and unhappiness of the writer, ok? So read above and see how the writer is being very inconsiderate of the reader by using 4 letters words. SECOND, everything I am reading above is a little confusing. It would be helpful if the first paragraph above would make a plain simple introductory statement such as: This blog/article/information is about “so & so” and “so & so” and what happened to/between “so & so” and “so & so”. This blog/article/information will describe/argue/summarize the following information/beliefs/actions/events. Now if such a paragraph were above, it would make it much easier and quicker for the reader to grasp the entire dialogue/presentation being offer. Am I wrong?

    • You are obviously a new reader at Cantwell. Quit while your modesty is still intact. You should have quit before writing the first sentence.

Facebook Censorship

I’m often banned from Facebook

Can I please get your email address so we can stay in touch? If you’re not on my mailing list, our communications are at the discretion of left wing lunatics!