WATCH: Adam Kokesh vs. #BlackLivesMatter

Adam Kokesh was repeatedly attacked, and had racist comments lobbed at him by Black Lives Matter protesters at a mall in downtown Seattle. He had started off trying to help them as, Adam explains in the video. He saw a large group of cops and wanted to record them as he approached, and when the cops turned out to not be as interesting he turned his attention to the activists in the hopes of helping them get their story out.

Quick Reminder. It’s Cyber Monday! If you’re shopping at Amazon, please do so through my Amazon Affiliate link.

WATCH: Adam Kokesh vs. #BlackLivesMatter

WATCH: Adam Kokesh vs. #BlackLivesMatter

On the basis of his skin color, and the fact that he was recording, they were instantly hostile. They demanded him to stop recording, and in an all too common display of profound ignorance insisted they had a right to not be recorded in a public space. As fools ignorant of the law often do, they took this as an excuse to resort to violence and repeatedly swatted at his camera. Previous reports of an “assault” while technically accurate, may have been a bit ginned up.

When asked what happened with the cops one demonstrator said “they care more about property than about people” in reference to the police stopping their demonstration. Later, when Adam spoke to police, they said the demonstrators intended to cause property damage, corroborating the suspicion implied by the comments of the demonstrator. Once again we see, the BLM antagonists are more interested in perpetuating crime, than in holding police accountable for their abuses.

Property of course, is an extension of a person. To take or destroy one’s property is to take from that person the effort they took to procure it. It is no different than enslaving them, but the BLM protesters don’t oppose slavery, quite clearly. They are a left wing group of violent criminals who favor greater government intervention in all of our lives, even as they purport to condemn the violent tactics of the State. This sort of violent incoherence is not only anti-libertarian, not only anti-freedom, not only anti-white – but anti-human – and profoundly dangerous when embraced by the political establishment and freedom oriented groups.

In video commentary after the interaction, Adam seems to reconsider the nature of the demonstration, but isn’t quite willing to throw them under the bus just yet. He says the freedom movement welcomes everyone. One might speculate this has to do with his political aspirations to run for the presidency in 2020. While one who seeks political office would be wise not to rack up enemies in activist groups, I highly doubt a group spawned in reaction to the death of a violent criminal, and hell bent on the destruction of private property, will be voting Libertarian any sooner than the establishment cuck hacks at the National Review.

Check out the video below.

 

 

 

This effort is made possible by donors like you. You can also help by shopping through my Amazon affiliate link. Without that support, this site will cease to exist.

Subscribe via email and never miss another post!

 

  • “They … favor greater government intervention in all of our lives, even as they purport to condemn the violent tactics of the State. This sort of violent incoherence is not only anti-libertarian, not only anti-freedom, not only anti-white – but anti-human – and profoundly dangerous when embraced by the political establishment and freedom oriented groups.”

    Gee. That sounds like a description of Hans Herman Hoppe and the “new” Lew Rockwell.

    • Coralyn Herenschrict

      Ouch!

    • Mortado

      You’ve either never read Hoppe and Rockwell or are too stupid to comprehend what they’re saying.

      • Read what I have written and published before rushing to such judgements.

        [2006-09-10]“More arguments for Open Borders—this time (unbeknownst to him) from the pen of Hans-Hermann Hoppe!”

        Links to this article:

        tinyurl (dot) com/Hoppe-border

        • Mortado

          Not only is that not a good argument, it has nothing to do with you’re comment here.

          • It was the kindest response I could make to your ad hominem.

          • Mortado

            Do you understand what an ad hominem is? Pointing out that you’re either ignorant of or misunderstanding the positions of Rockwell and Hoppe is not an ad hominem. Harsh language doesn’t make something an ad hominem. Yes I made a typo, not like it matters.

          • “You’ve either never read Hoppe and Rockwell or are too stupid to comprehend what they’re saying.”

            An ad hominem. (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem., is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly.

            I provided you with proof that I was not ignorant (if you bother to read the article). Calling me “too stupid to comprehend” certainly qualifies as ad hominem. It would appear that by deliberately skipping the last part of your post that YOU are now being disingenuous.

          • Mortado

            In order for it to have been an ad hominem, you would have had to made an argument instead of just a dumb comment that shows that you have completely misunderstood the position of Hoppe.

          • Read what I have written and published before rushing to such judgements.

            [2006-09-10]“More arguments for Open Borders—this time (unbeknownst to him) from the pen of Hans-Hermann Hoppe!”

            Links to this article:

            tinyurl (dot) com/Hoppe-border

          • Mortado

            You linked that after my supposed ad hominem.

          • You keep repeating that I “misunderstand Hoppe”. I thought that perhaps you could not read. I now see that indeed you can.

  • Chris McManus

    bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah (breathe) bahahahahaha!
    1 – “Cracker go home” – Perhaps the BLM movement should work with their local coordinators a little better on their message
    2- Seriously they don’t know “the white guy from RT”? (quoting my wife)
    3 – Kokesh is in my backyard? Holy shittards I gotta get to Seattle more often.
    word.

  • Richard Patrie

    #BLM is a passing fancy comprised of spoiled, privileged black youth shakedown artists. If the dude was in my face and following me with with a camera, I may take issue. He stuck around until one of these retards said something stupid. You call that an attack? Was he hurt by their words? What a fucking pussy. Why give them any attention at all?

  • Memphis Sheboons would have ripped his eyes out.

  • Tranny Nanny

    I’m beginning to wonder if there is any standard, any activity to which Adam would call the BLM out for what they are: violent Marxist agitators?
    All that evil needs in order to win is for good men to stay silent, or appease with a cam.

  • Hyram Goldstein

    You people know blacks can’t be racist. Derp…

    • Richard Chiu

      Naw bro, you done told it wrong. It’s like “you dumb cucking white cunts, nigga’s can’t never be racist”.

      Okay, I guess I can’t tell it right either.

  • Coralyn Herenschrict

    Property of course, is an extension of a person. To take or destroy one’s property is to take from that person the effort they took to procure it. It is no different than enslaving them, but the BLM protesters don’t oppose slavery, quite clearly. They are a left wing group of violent criminals who favor greater government intervention in all of our lives, even as they purport to condemn the violent tactics of the State. This sort of violent incoherence is not only anti-libertarian, not only anti-freedom, not only anti-white – but anti-human…

    This gem is super-well articulated. I wish you could set aside the vitriol from your writing and instead endeavor to make these concepts plain and accessible to the common man in common sense terms. I think that would have a lot more impact and garner you more readers.

    • Richard Chiu

      Cantwell probably could set aside the vitriol.

      But we are entering a time when high-minded idealism just isn’t going to cut it. Nor will mere anger, of course, but anger wakes people up and forces them to pay attention, and we are running out of time for that to happen.

      • Coralyn Herenschrict

        Writing is not an either-or choice between spleen-venting vitriol and abstract academic discourse. Neither of those styles appeals to the common man much less will change his mind.

        Newspapers must grab attention and sell to the common man to stay in business, so let’s look at how a good newspaper op-ed is constructed. Concise language appealing to common sense. Fresh perspectives. Thought provoking in a grounded way. Opinionated without including personal choices. Laser focused on a specific issue relevant to ordinary people. Dignified in expression even if scandalous in content and scathing by implication.

        Chris would do well by his blog and his cause to elevate his writing to this level. Flashes of such brilliance in his work show he has it in him.

        • Richard Chiu

          No. Newspapers work by distracting the common man from the reality of our situation. We want to wake him up.

          Not to sell him anything, let alone our own personal dignity and authority. Not to maintain “business as usual”. Not to exclude the bigger picture.

          In the hope that he will be able to save himself, because nobody else can.

          • Coralyn Herenschrict

            So you are saying:

            – Because some newspapers use effective techniques of engaging people in order to lead them down false paths, we must reject the use of effective techniques of engaging people.
            – Because selling people on the quality and merit of our ideas requires appealing to ordinary human values as part of convincing them, we must not do so. Instead we must spurn politeness, respect, and credibility, and instead demand that others accept our ideas as we insult them.
            – If someone doesn’t respond to our message, that’s all on him and has nothing to do with how we present ourselves and our message to him.

            Can’t say I think that approach will get far. In fact, I think it more likely to cement others’ embrace of statism.

          • Richard Chiu

            Not what I’m saying.

            I’m saying that we’re entering a different stage of the conflict, and we need to realize that appeals to civil discourse aren’t going to cut it.

            Like it or not (and frankly I’d be willing to tolerate a State that was self-interested enough to avoid imploding civilization), we are going to war. And while the elevated, civil, reasoned dialog is still important, we can no longer afford to decline appeals to raw anger.

            There are plenty of libertarians out there who cut the vitriol (well, not plenty, but they aren’t absent). But we need vitriol to reach some people. I’m not fond of it either, but I won’t discard a chance to wake some who could still save themselves because it involves a manner of expression I dislike.

            And think what you like, my experience is that, at this stage of the proceedings, getting vitriolic doesn’t cement anyone’s embrace of statism. There are a few (a very few) who seem unshaken, but most are shaken up and I see some people changing their minds (I know, that supposedly never happens in an internet argument, but I see it all the time). People who would have yawned and scrolled past if not for the vitriol.

  • Randall Stevens

    Niggers gonna nig…