I guess asking questions/criticizing certain points about a presidential hopeful’s platform—and one who claims to be an anarchist, no less—automatically renders one an “annoying troll.”
This is exactly why I have been telling voluntaryists to watch out. Sadly, to the wide-eyed Kokesh and other celebritarian devotees, no amount of logical argument seems to hold sway, and any and all criticism of their can-do-no-wrong heroes typically falls on deaf ears.
Instead of providing an answer to the concerns I have (this is the second time I have raised them, by the way), like a thinking man running for president, who cares about libertarian property norms might, I get this:
Wait a minute. My “motives and credibility”? What do any of my criticisms and/or questions let him know about my motives?What motives is he imagining I have? Asking questions hurts my credibility? Since when do voluntaryists think like this?
Well, what was your personal attack and incendiary comment, Graham? It was as follows:
For the information of this “future president,” I have written you an open letter here on the platform, specified my concerns in detail with the centralized planning implicit in your platform (which yes, I have read) time and time again, watched several of your videos, and even asked you about this personally and directly on your Facebook livestream. Your reply there was something along the lines of:
“If you have a better idea, step up to the plate!”
This isn’t a sports competition, man. Jesus. We’re talking natural law and libertarian property ethic. No one is trying to “beat you” or “compete.”
Several people are pointing out parts of your plan that would violate libertarian property norms and all you can come up with is a sports metaphor and attack people’s credibility and motives? That actually seems to speak volumes in the reverse direction, does it not?
Is this a voluntaryist trying to make a change by running for president, or a cult of personality? Isn’t self-ownership important?
If that was actually Kokesh answering me there, then thank you. This just confirms what I suspected. The online presence is basically a persona to be upheld, with questioners and critics brushed off as unimportant. Hell, it impedes the forward march of the FREEDOM! machine, right? If it was one of Adam’s flunkies who posted this BURN!!!! of a comment response, then maybe some campaign team management is in order.
Either way, I hope some of you planning to pour precious time, money and other resources into this run for “anarchist president” will do your own research. I don’t understand how any voluntaryist can take any other human being seriously when they tell them they “need a leader,” but hey, what do I know, right? I guess the whole of libertarian theory over the past hundreds and hundreds of years could be all wrong. Maybe I do “need a leader.”
To see the whole conversation, including my “ignorant” and “annoying troll” comment (where I never attacked Adam but only some of his ideas), you can view the original post here.
Finally, 
TL;DR: I didn’t attack Adam Kokesh personally, but made some criticisms and asked some questions about his ideas/platform. The response: get called an “annoying troll.” You know what, on second thought Adam, it seems like you’d make a great president after all. They have a knack for brushing people off like that and being smugly dismissive, don’t they?
*
~KafkA
Graham Smith is a Voluntaryist activist, creator, and peaceful parent residing in Niigata City, Japan. Graham runs the "Voluntary Japan" online initiative with a presence here on Steem, as well as DTube and Twitter. (Hit me up so I can stop talking about myself in the third person!)