Can't have conversations without drugs:
View attachment 4322972
source (
a)
It's always weird to me how many bluechecks follow and reply to her tweets including people like e-celeb Alexandra Botez. The top replies here are all bluechecks (actual bluechecks, not Twitter Blue subscribers):
View attachment 4322985
For a rationalist it's funny that she seems to think she has normal conversations when under the influence. She, of course, provides no evidence of any kind let alone anything that allows outside observers to evaluate the claim. When Razib Khan disagrees, she declares the conversations to be not-normal.
Some weird thing about having two dicks?
View attachment 4323055
source (
a)
This isn't really a weird thing and not really "radical honesty" either. Everyone wants to be uniquely the best, what matters is when and how you realize that perfection (notice how Aella shifts the "vibe" from having something truly and objectively unique, two dicks, to how others will subjectively think about her) is an impossible goal you will always fail to meet and that you are innately special and unique and what you're actually feeling compelled to do is conform and adopt for numerous reasons. (Otherwise you would go live in a shack in the woods or wander Alaska or something.) I've been trying to get at the phony aspects of her libertarian persona since the rationalist stuff has been pretty well covered but this is a pretty good example though it may require some insight into libertarian thinking that's more than surface level. Aella doesn't express a want to be an individual existing on their own grounds, she wants to simply be acknowledged as the best by everyone else. Narcissism can often seem like individualism/libertarianism but a distinctly core principle of the latter (and absent from narcissism) is that others are free to pursue their own ends as long as they don't infringe on others because we don't truly know what's best for others. The infringement in the two dicks example is that nobody else gets to have two dicks but since in reality nobody gets to have two dicks it's more about adding a trait to a single person that the single person values, so we could say the infringement if we want to claim one exists is pretty low. In Aella's case, a single person at any time in human history being hotter
or smarter upsets the "vibe" and would require her to infringe on them
and others to maintain the
status being valued. Obviously, she doesn't say she'd have the state enforce this, and it's merely a hypothetical desire anyway, but you can see how far she's drifted philosophically from the "ideal" libertarian view leaving aside how she changed the example of the "vibe" dramatically.
This isn't to say that you can't be a libertarian without accepting more stringent libertarian ethics, let alone dissenting from any single part of them, two of the most famous libertarians Ron Paul and Ayn Rand reject libertarian ethics but remain libertarians because they were adamant about the role of the state. But if you want to be considered a libertarian
thinker I think it becomes something you have to deal with. Ron Paul was foremost developing his thought for an electoral political audience that crossed over into libertarian-adjacents and more general Republicans so it seems fine to excuse him. Ayn Rand was trying to create a cult where she was worshipped and could force people into sex so it also seems fine to excuse her. I think one of these is more likely for Aella than a true pursuit of exploring the libertarian ethos from a rationalist point of view but I will refrain from saying which.