Why I Am Against Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians

I’ve been stating that I am a socialist. I am a member of various groups on Facebook and when I attack Trump, I am called a “socialist Democrat.” I am not a Democrat. Democrats are capitalists just like Republicans, but the public is uneducated and don’t know the distinction. I used to think I was Libertarian, but they’re just extreme Republicans. I thought I’d lay out why I am against the Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians.

Republicans

Republicans are capitalism’s biggest defenders. Their pro-corporate, anti-worker policies directly clash with my goals. As someone who leans toward libertarian socialism, the GOP’s obsession with deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and union-busting infuriates me. Trump, especially is a major problem, and Republicans have embraced him fully. I think they have split off into two factions: Republicans and MAGA. MAGA is just Republicanism pushed to the extreme. MAGA is a natural enemy to what I’m against. On another note, Republicans push policies that promote population growth, and being an anti-natalist I am wholeheartedly against this. It completely goes against my ethics

Democrats

My opposition to Democrats comes from their failure to actually challenge capitalism and make meaningful change. While they talk about fairness, they ultimately uphold the same capitalist system I want to disrupt. They’ll tweak the edges, sure, but won’t challenge the core of the problem. They campaign on progressive ideas but rarely follow through in ways that matter. Medicare for All? Green New Deal? They talk big, but cave to corporate interests. They also take money from the same corporations and billionaires that Republicans do. They talk about progressivism but won’t truly take on the rich. Furthermore, even as Republicans become more extreme, Democrats often respond with weakness instead of fighting back aggressively. Their strategy of “let’s be reasonable” isn’t working.

Libertarians

Libertarians are more defenders of capitalism and they are against collective action. They worship the free market and want fewer regulations which make things worse for the working class and the environment. They reject collective solutions in favor of “personal responsibility,” which is useless when fighting systemic problems like wealth inequality or climate change. While I’m an anti-natalist and don’t give a shit if there are future generations, you’d think they’d give a little more of a shit about their future generations. I’ve said before that I used to worship Ayn Rand, but I learned the error of my ways. I saw through her selfish philosophy, but Libertarians never grew out of it. I especially hate their rejection of solidarity.

In summation: Republicans openly serve the rich, push corporate control, and embrace authoritarianism. Democrats pretend to care about change but protect capitalism and avoid real action. Libertarians worship the free market, reject collective solutions, and would let corporations run wild.

At the core, all three prioritize profit over people and resist the kind of radical change I believe is necessary.

TikTok Ban in the U.S.

I’ve been using TikTok since the pandemic in 2020. It’s been a fun little app for me. It was something to do while everyone was stuck inside and not able to go anywhere. It’s fun to watch silly little videos and educational videos when I’m in bed and can’t sleep. It’s just fun to watch, much like YouTube.

I think another ban is coming up on April 5th? I think that’s the day. I can’t remember. So I suppose I’ll go back over to RedNote, which is another Chinese-owned app. I wonder why exactly the U.S. government wants to ban TikTok though. Well, I’ve done some reading and read some comments and such on the matter and here’s what I’ve gathered:

The U.S. government claims it wants to ban TikTok because of data privacy and national security, but that’s not the real reason. They claim that the Chinese government could force TikTok to hand over user data, but they don’t give a shit about that. What they really care about is another country influencing public opinion. They want to suppress information that doesn’t align with their own interests.

The U.S. doesn’t want China to have any potential influence over Americans, whether through data collection, algorithimic control of content, or possible political manipulation. The irony, of course, is that Google and Facebook already influence Americans in similar ways, but because they’re American companies, the government is less concerned. It’s less about protecting people from surveillance or manipulation in general and more about who gets to do the influencing.

The U.S. doesn’t want China shaping political opinion, culture, or political discourse in a way that would challenge American geopolitical dominance. If China can control narratives, push propaganda, or even just collect some data, it gives them leverage in a global power struggle. TikTok is one of the few platforms where the U.S. doesn’t have control over the algorithm or data. It’s not about whether TikTok is actually doing anything nefarious. It’s about the potential for China to use it as a tool in the future.

The U.S. government doesn’t want us thinking negatively of them. They don’t want a foreign power controlling a platform that could shape public perception against them. If an app like TikTok starts amplifying anti-government sentiment, exposing U.S. corruption, or promoting alternative ideologies, that’s a threat to America’s control over the narrative.

They don’t mind when American companies do this because those companies can be pressured, regulated, or even use for political purposes. However, when a Chinese-owned platform is involved, they can’t control what’s being shown, what’s being suppressd, or who’s benefiting from it.

America frames it as a national security issue, but at its core, it’s about controlling public perception and limiting competing narratives. The government isn’t trying to protect people from manipulation, they’re trying to make sure they’re the ones doing the manipulating. If this were purely about data privacy, they’d go after Facebook, Google, and other companies that harvest just as much (if not more) user data. Those companies are American though, meaning they can be influenced, lobbied, and used when needed.

In summation, it’s not about our privacy. It’s about the American government controlling the narrative. The American government wants to be the one to shape public perception, not a foreign entity. They justify their actions by calling it “national security,” but at the end of the day it’s about controlling the narrative and making sure people aren’t exposed to ideas or information that could weaken faith in the American system.

They’re not against manipulation. They just want to be the ones doing it.

So, if TikTok goes bye-bye again, be sure to catch me on RedNote where I’ll be chilling with the communists. Join me, comrades!

Borders Are Peak Absurdity

Borders are one of the more absurd human constructs. They’re just imaginary lines that people violently enforce to keep others in or out, usually for the benefit of those in power. There’s no natural reason why one side of a river or a mountain should “belong” to one group of people and not another—it’s all about control, resources, and maintaining systems of power.

It’s wild how people will fight and die over borders, even though they only exist because some long-dead rulers or colonizers decided they should. It’s even wilder how most people just accept them as some kind of universal truth rather than a completely arbitrary system designed to divide and exploit.

Borders are peak human absurdity. We literally drew invisible lines on a planet that was just sitting here, existing just fine without them, and decided that stepping over those lines without permission is a crime. Then we built fences, walls, and armies to enforce those lines—often with deadly force.

It gets even more ridiculous when you look at history. Half the time, borders were drawn by some random guys in a room with no connection to the land or the people living there (looking at you, colonialism). Sometimes, entire countries were created or erased by the stroke of a pen, with no regard for the people actually living there. The Middle East? Carved up by Europeans who didn’t even live there. Africa? Sliced into pieces at a conference table in Berlin.

Even within so-called “stable” countries, borders shift. The U.S. stole half of Mexico. Poland has been shuffled around like a deck of cards. And yet, people act like today’s borders are sacred and eternal, as if they weren’t just violently imposed or changed a hundred years ago.

And don’t even get me started on how some borders are enforced for some people and not others. If you’re rich, borders barely exist—you can buy citizenship, get special visas, or just own enough property to move freely. But if you’re poor? Good luck. You could be running from war, climate disaster, or starvation, and still, some bureaucrat will tell you, “Sorry, wrong side of the line.”

At the end of the day, borders are just another tool to maintain inequality. They protect wealth, resources, and power, not people. They’re imaginary lines with real-world consequences, and the fact that we still take them seriously in 2025 is honestly embarrassing.

Why I Became a Socialist

I was raised in a Republican family. For the longest time, that’s just what I thought I was supposed to be because that’s what my family was. I supported George W. Bush up until he invaded Iraq. I was all about “rah! rah! guns for everybody!” in my youth. While I still own guns, I think there need to be stricter laws, closed loopholes, and no, not everyone needs to have a fucking gun. “But the Second Amendment!” Yeah, yeah, yeah. Look up the definition of “amendment” and get back to me.

As a teen I was obsessed with Ayn Rand. Maybe it was just me being an edgy teenager, but I was all “Yeah! Every man for himself! To hell with everyone else!” I’ve grown and matured and after re-reading Atlas Shrugged eight years ago. I learned that her philosophy is self-serving and does no one any good. Not to mention, she turned toward government help later on in her life so what a hypocrite. It’s funny. Every time capitalism spirals into crisis, socialist-inspired policies step in to save it. The same people who attack socialism are often the first to demand government help when capitalism crashes. If capitalism actually followed its own “sink or swim” logic, it wouldn’t have survived this long.

To be honest, I didn’t care much for politics until the rise of Donald Trump. His presidency made me more engaged. His corruption, authoritarianism, and the broader failures of the system reinforced my belief that capitalism and electoral policies alone won’t fix anything. I used to think no matter what party the President aligns himself with, they have the good of the country at heart deep down. After both of Trump’s wins, I no longer believe that. Just like Ayn Rand, Trump is self-serving and in it for Trump and his brand.

I’ve always considered myself a misanthrope. Hell, I even have the word “misanthrope” tattooed on my arm. I don’t want to go so far as to say I hate other people, but I am deeply distrustful of them and the systems they create. No one wants to help others anymore. It’s all “me, me, me!” With socialism, it’s about helping your fellow man. Not everyone is in it for themselves when it comes to socialism. It’s a collective effort to make the world a better place than we found it. Capitalism is nothing but “how can I get richer?” and “I want to get ahead no matter how many people I have to trample underfoot to do so.”

I’ve also been doing more reading and research. People like Albert Camus, Emil Cioran, and Noam Chomsky are people I hold in high regard. Camus’ idea of the absurd is about the conflict between human desire for meaning and a meaningless universe. Capitalism mirrors this: it promises purpose through work, consumption, and success, but ultimately, it’s an empty grind. The absurdity of capitalism is that it demands people dedicate their lives to meaningless labor while pretending it’s freedom. Camus believed in revolt — not in the sense of violent revolution (although at this point, I support that), but in refusing to submit to oppressive structures. When this is applied to capitalism, it means rejecting the illusion that the system is natural or inevitable. Instead, we can challenge it, disrupt it, and refuse to play by its rules.

Noam Chomsky is a relentless critic of capitalism. He argues that real democracy is impossible under capitalism because corporations and the wealthy control political decisions. Elections are a spectacle. Real power is concentrated in unelected institutions such as corporations, lobbyists, and banks. He teaches us to organize outside of electoral politics. Build movements that can apply pressure beyond just voting.

And what could I possibly learn from Mr. “Everything Sucks” Emil Cioran? Cioran believed that humans cling to illusions: progress, meaning, and success to avoid confronting the void. Capitalism sells the biggest illusion: that endless work and consumption lead to fulfillment. In reality, it’s a treadmill of disappointment. No matter how much you achieve or accumulate, it’s never enough. What I get from Cioran is that exposing capitalism means stripping away its illusions and showing people that its promises are hollow.

I’ve become frustrated with online complaining and simply waiting for the next election cycle to make changes. I want direct political disruption. Protests don’t work like they used to so I want new, fresh ideas to challenge capitalism. Ultimately, I’ve become frustrated with the whole capitalist system whether it’s healthcare, economic inequality, or corporate control. I see capitalism as unsustainable and in need of radical change.

Trumpism has taken over and even the Democrats are too chicken shit to do anything about it. Trump is just a belligerent old man who, if he could, rule the world if given enough power. I’m tired of power being in the hands of the wealthy. I want the common people to rise up and fight this oppressive system, and there are more of us than there are of them so what the hell are we waiting for?

Or maybe I became a socialist just because I listened to way too much Rage Against the Machine. Who knows?

Little X

As Musk answered questions from the press, his son X Æ A-Xii proved to be a distraction by pulling faces, clinging onto his dad’s shoulders and interrupting him.

One clip shows X jr. picking his nose and wiping it on the Resolute desk, which was gifted to President Rutherford Hayes by Queen Victoria in 1880 and used by nearly every president since.

Elon’s kid wiping his boogers on the resolute desk is a sight I didn’t really need to see.

The most egregious aspect to Musk’s presser in the Oval Office is how he used his child to obfuscate when asked difficult questions by the press. He used his son to soften and distract from the impact of his hugely controversial policies.

ln Musk’s recent appearance at the White House — accompanied by his young son — is a blatant display of arrogance and entitlement.

Musk — an unelected billionaire — struts into the Oval Office as if he owns the place, bringing his child along as though it’s a casual family outing.

This isn’t a playground; it’s the epicenter of American democracy.

Musk’s actions epitomize the dangerous belief that immense wealth grants one the right to influence and control governmental affairs.

His nonchalant demeanor and apparent disregard for the sanctity of the White House underscore a troubling trend where money and power are perceived as tickets to unchecked authority.

US citizens are seemingly powerless to confront this overreach.

Allowing unelected individuals like Musk to wield such influence undermines the very foundation of democracy.

Musk even defies all of Trump’s rules. The dress code, and no kids allowed in the oval office or at work, proving once again that he is in charge and Trump is not. Musk and his 4-year-old son both interrupted Trump, and Trump looked very angry and turned away from the kid. At one point, X was seen picking his nose. He also “charmed” the room by politely excusing himself, saying, “Please forgive me, I need to pee.”