Massa'bator Kanye West 'Blexits' the Mean Cracker Master's Planation [Trump/GOP] & Begins a Search for Friendlier Masters [without Considering Whether he Should Have a Master in the First Place]

From [HERE] It isn’t clear what prompted Kanye West’s tweet storm Tuesday night, in which he declared, “I’ve been used to spread messages I don’t believe in,” and “I never wanted any association with Blexit” — the nascent, fairly niche movement of mostly younger African Americans on the political right who gathered at the White House last week — so soon after his cringe-inducing Oval Office soliloquy with President Trump looking on.

He tweeted “I support creating jobs and opportunities for people who need them the most, I support prison reform, I support common-sense gun laws that will make our world safer.

I support those who risk their lives to serve and protect us and I support holding people who misuse their power accountable.

I believe in love and compassion for people seeking asylum and parents who are fighting to protect their children from violence and war." [MORE] Like most people, he believes in having a master. He believes in “authority.” Undeceiver Larken Rose explains; 

"The belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity…

“To quickly rehash, people cannot delegate rights they do not have, which makes it impossible for anyone to acquire the right to rule (”authority”). People cannot alter morality, which makes the “laws” of “government” devoid of any inherent “authority.” Ergo, “authority”-the right to rule-cannot logically exist. The concept itself is self-contradictory, like the concept of a “militant pacifist.” A human being cannot have superhuman rights, and therefore no one can have the inherent right to rule. A person cannot be morally obliged to ignore his own moral judgment; therefore, no one can have the inherent obligation to obey another. And those two ingredients-the ruler’s right to command and the subject’s obligation to obey-are the heart and soul of the concept of “authority,” without which it cannot exist.

And without “authority;” there is no “government.” If the control which the gang called “government” exerts over others is without legitimacy, it is not “government;’ its commands are not “laws;’ its enforcers are not “law enforcement.” Again, without the right to rule, and a simultaneous moral obligation to obey on the part of the masses, the organization called “government” is nothing more than a gang of thugs, thieves and murderers. “Government” is an impossibility; it’s simply not an option, any more than Santa Claus is an option. And insisting that it is “necessary,” when it does not and cannot even exist, or predicting doom and gloom if we do not have the mythical entity, does not change that fact. To argue that human beings need to have a rightful ruler, one with the moral right to forcibly control all others, and one whom all others are obligated to obey, does not change the fact that there is no such thing, and can be no such thing.” [MORE]