Kokesh and Cult of Personality in Liberty Circles
On Friday, October 28th, 2016, an ex of voluntaryist activist Adam Kokesh's posted a video explaining their relationship and breakup. In the video Macey Tomlin opines his relationship abuse comes from his sociopathy.
View this public video on her Facebook profile here (warning: expletive language): https://www.facebook.com/macey.tomlin/videos/10154578641607180/
It seems every year or two there is a libertarian figure who is outed for being anti-libertarian. Sometimes it seems like justice, sometimes it comes off as a witch hunt, and other times it is hard to decipher which.
In either case, one thing is abundantly clear: there is a cult of personality that is immune to no group of people. It is common knowledge authoritarians have this propped up authority, but even libertarians have the same "charismatic authority."
For more on charismatic authority, read Austrian-school economist and sociologist Max Weber's essay "Politics as a Vocation:" http://anthropos-lab.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Weber-Politics-as-a-Vocation.pdf
Adam Kokesh was an Iraq War veteran who was disillusioned about the very government he served. He illustrated that frustration by supporting then-congressman Dr. Ron Paul's presidential run in 2008, by running for Congress himself in 2010, and by becoming an independent journalist.
His Adam v. the Man show became successful on Youtube, even having a short run on RT (Russia Today). His journalist style went from political libertarianism to confrontational diatribes to voluntaryism. Those styles often reflected his physical appearance - in the first and third styles, he looked like a suit and tie, while in the middle he looked like a body-building bouncer.
Above all, what earned him respect in liberty circles was his civil disobedience activism. From dancing at the Jefferson memorial to shooting a shotgun on federal government "property." Not to mention his confrontational journalism against politicians. It is easy to see why libertarians flock to him.
The Macey video aside, is does not make sense some libertarians see him as some authority. He is no different, activism wise, than the average libertarian. But because he has a cult of personality, some people will automatically take his side and probably harass his ex.
On the other hand, some people will automatically take her side. Either out of their own bias against Adam or their sympathies toward the video. Neither side will join the usually-minority of people who withold judgement until the facts are presented.
Other libertarian figures, such as Christopher Cantwell, Jeff Berwick, John Mcafee, and the folks at FreeKeene.com have gone through similar episodes. They are either vilified or sanctified as a result.
Some argue this damages the "liberty movement," "liberty mission," or otherwise liberty circles. They have a point insofar as it shows how some libertarians do not live up to their own standards of law and justice. But every group has this cult of personality.
In the case of Adam, if the accusations in the video are true, he is not libertarian in his personal life. If he tries to control his personal relationships, guilt-trips people into doing things for him, or get upset with the details of others, then he is not this great voluntaryist he proclaims he is.
The "commitment contract" that Adam and Macey agreed upon is also anti-libertarian. Side note: it is also anti-BDSM. The contract, which includes six things the "benefactress" must do for the "recipient," is not legitimate in either liberty or kink circles. Those who wrote it and accepted it do not take contracts seriously (whether it be one of them or both of them).
For more information about BDSM contracts: check out this Steemit article: https://steemit.com/bdsm/@kennykelly/slave-contracts-or-how-they-should-be-taken-seriously
On the other hand, what if Adam is right and she is just crazy? Libertarians will never know if they look at Adam with this charismatic authority.
If Adam is to be respected, then it does not do him justice to look at him like Alex Jones fans sees their guy - via cult of personality. If he is not to be respected, then the opposite (hating him impulsively) should also be rejected.
This "dramatarian nonsense," as Adam Kokesh calls it, would not happen if libertarians would stop holding their liberty heroes on a pedestal. Truth is everybody, libertarians and statists included, has character flaws. Spend a few weeks on a campaign or project of your libertarian idols and you will see they are not perfect.
If activists are going to treat libertarianism like a religion, similar to how government advocates treat statism, then admitting even activists are sinners will be a huge first step in healing the divide.
Is Adam telling the truth? Is Macey? These questions would not have to be asked if libertarians stop holding "celebritarians" to such a high regard. Maybe it is time to abandon that concept and become the voluntaryists that libertarians claim to be about.
It takes two to sustain a toxic relationship. If either of them were healthy, they would of got the fuck away from one another at the first hint of toxicity. Now that "it's over", best thing for each party to do is take personal responsibility for what transpired rather than blaming the other. You'll find much more opportunity for quality of life improvement in taking personal responsibility vs crying that you're the victim of someone else's doing. Empower yourself!
This assumes one can easily walk away. Being a friend to a lot of abused women it's not so easy.
I encourage folks to acquaint themselves with a fraud Kokesh orchestrated in 2013 that resulted in the disappearance and misappropriation of tens of thousands of donor dollars.
http://shieldmutual.com/2013/09/adam-kokesh-longer-customer/
A fascinating read, never heard of this one. Although when the frat-house got busted I suspected as much would be likely.
Anytime you put someone on a pedestal you are asking for trouble. It's so much worse when they encourage you to put them there.
I completely agree.
The only two people who know are Adam and Macey. That said, Macey is upset because Adam suggested a threesome (who hasn't! lol), he masturbated (we should all masturbate more often), she didn't like his driving (turns out they didn't die driving in the snowstorm), and he controlled the purse strings (she came to him with nothing). Say it aint so! What a bunch of crap. She could leave at any time. So she did. BFD. Good article btw.
According to the video she was okay with the threesome, it was the results that she didn't like. They both were irresponsible in that, given he should've known better than to manipulate emotions and she should've laid down boundaries before it happened.
She didn't complain about his masturbation, but the reason why (her emotions, which are normal human behaviors, were unattractive to him). Personally, I see that as far fetched, so either he lied and possibly cheated on her or he was being sarcastic. In either case, he proved to her he didn't plan to be there for her.
Coming into a relationship with nothing means, well, nothing. The thing none of us know yet is the understanding. Was the understanding he was going to control her finances? If so, temporarily or as long as the relationship lasted? Was it that she depended on him until she got on her feet?
You belittling these three points and making it seem like he's innocent shows me you feel like you identify with him. At worst, you're as psychopathic as he might be; at best, you're as heartless in personal relationships as he might be. I'm sorry, but you show traits that show you're no lord and master over free men.
And I won't even touch your last point, except to say, I know from experience it's not so easy as you claim. Which means your knowledge of women is probably non-existent.
Wow, u seem to know so much about me! As I said, the only two who really know are Adam and Macey. So I am not trying to judge. All I am saying is that what Macey is complaining about seems to be NORMAL shit that happens in a relationship. How couples manage money, a loss of romantic interest, driving in snowstorms. Boo fucking hoo! I think Macey threw around the "sociopath" word carelessly, AND she was free to leave anytime she wanted. I don't know Adam all that great, but he is not a sociopath in my opinion. When Macey left, Adam posted some ridiculous shit about how he realizes now that pot contributed to his failures in his relationship. Wow, what made him say that?? Adam is one of the best advocates for liberty of our generation. Sure, it was his show, but that doesnt make him a "textbook sociopath". Have any other girlfriends accused Adam of being a sociopath or (gasp) a control freak? But lemme guess.. you are a friend of Macey's? I was a fan of Maceys when she went on her own. I was like, great, maybe she will post some cool shit which she did. I enjoyed reading about her experiences with drugs and such. What was the point of her "the real Adam Kokesh" video. To "expose" the "real" Adam. BOM BOM BOM! When things don't work out, it's easy to vilify your ex. The REALITY is much closer to 60%/40% blame. Not 100%/0% (unless Adam is really a sociopath!!)... ADAM IS SOCIOPATH AND TRIED TO RUIN A POOR GIRL!!!!!!! Not. Get a grip. Maybe things just fizzled out and they held on to each other too long. The relationship was no longer right for Macey so she left. Good for her (and I really mean that). But be mature enough to understand that each partner in the relationship had a contribution. Life is gray, not black and white. Anything is possible, and I really do not know Adam well, so again, the only two people who know for sure are Macey and Adam. But in my brief encounters with Adam, he does not AT ALL strike me as a "textbook sociopath". Perhaps my s-radar is off. More likely, it was a fairly normal relationship that failed like relationships often do after the infatuation phase. Maybe the blame is more like 60/40 like most relationships. Maybe both Adam and Macey should focus on moving forward instead.
You admit you don't know Adam well, but claim he is or isn't something. Contradiction?
Yeah, showing more affection to the second girl in a threesome is normal - at least for guys who either choose wrong girls for them or have a hard time getting threesomes.
However, risking a life in a snowstorm, holding money over a girl's head, and being emotionally and verbally abusive can be normal, but should be called out on. Had I personally knew her when they were together I would've advised her to leave him just based on that. If you feel he was in the right or only slightly wrong, then you are the same kind of either a) bad boyfriend, at best that he is or b) sociopath, at worst that he could be.
Based on your cavalier attitude regarding the fact it's not easy as it seems to leave, that you know nothing about women. If I felt it was worth explaining women to you, which must be aliens from Venus to you, I would. All I can say, I hope you're gay because know nothing about women.
His words about cannabis has nothing to do with this. Maybe he did too much? Maybe the strands he liked were bad for him? Lots of reasons for him to say that, but he never admitted he was a bad boyfriend while on pot. And he's not a bad communicator, so your false parallel smells like poor rationalization and misdirection.
One of Adam's exes liked Macey's video. If you read the article - my guess is you have not - it doesn't take sides.
Life can be gray, but that does NOT erase the wrongs someone does. For example, the wrong even YOU admit he has done are not gray. Even she admitted wrong - but you don't want to acknowledge that fact because it disproves your theory she's just be opportunistic.
You talk about "textbook sociopath" in the same sentence in your LIMITED meetings with him he COMES OFF as not a sociopath. I'll just leave that here, illustrating your blatant ignorance on this topic.
I shall not reply to your further. It is obvious to me you're just an Adam fanboy who wants to blame victims (notice, I didn't say "the victim"). Thanks for the discussion.
Good! Go away, you wuss! LOL