The Jack News: ‘Libertarians vs the Alt-Right: Here’s Where Hans-Hermann Hoppe Gets It Wrong’

The Jack News:

Excerpt:

The podcaster Tom Woods, for example, has called the German-American Hoppe “one of the most significant libertarian thinkers in the world today.”

And yet in a September 2017 speech of his own on “Libertarianism and the alt-right,” Hoppe endorsed prohibiting immigration of most non-whites, called for a police crackdown on minorities, and expressed enthusiasm the basic tenets of racial separatism and ethno-nationalism.

These themes are touchstones of the subterranean “alt-right” thinking that appears to animate racialists, and who are some of Donald Trump’s most loyal followers.

And hence the question: What does any of this have to do with the “anything that’s peaceful” philosophy of libertarianism?

Read full article

170 thoughts on “The Jack News: ‘Libertarians vs the Alt-Right: Here’s Where Hans-Hermann Hoppe Gets It Wrong’

  1. Kevin

    I read the article but couldn’t find a direct quote from HHH on immigration policies. I had to listen to his long speech to understand what he is saying.

    A merit-based policy would probably screen out higher proportions from ethnic groups other than Europeans, European Jews, and Chinese. Multiple studies have shown ethnic-correlated differences in IQ. Whether for genetic or cultural reasons or both.

    Beyond proving ability to be self-supporting, immigrants should be screened for cultural affinity, good neighborliness, and political ideology. East Asians tend to be more skilled and have higher IQ, but still they tend to vote as an ethnic bloc, in favor of increased government intervention into the economy. In a free society, property owners, not the state, would make those decisions.

    For example, a single mother on welfare, a muslim from Somalia, might in theory be a libertarian. But in reality, the odds are overwhelmingly against that. While a white couple from Europe, highly skilled/educated are much more likely to be libertarian.

    There is a type of self-described “libertarian”, whom he calls “Liberalala libertarian” that views all humans to be born with a blank slate, and equivalent in ability; and all cultures as equivalent in merit.

    Concerning the LP, the old Ron Paul crowd has rightly been pushed aside, but replaced by worse–social justice warriors–who falsely claim that to be a libertarian, one must be free of prejudice or bias, and presumably 100% rational (although the SJW falls well short of perfect rationality). Both the irrationally prejudiced, and the “every person and every culture is of equal merit” crowd exhibit a form a mental illness. Yet, the role of the liberty advocate is not to be a “prejudicer” or “leveler” but to speak truth about justice.

  2. Andy

    I have not read the entire article yet, but the Jack News is an appropriate name for this site, as it is a propaganda arm forvtge Gary Johnson/Bill Weld infiltrators who don’t know Jack shift when it comes to libertarianism, and who Jack off to statists.

    Hoppe calls for completely abolishing coercive government and forming a private property anarcho-capitalist society. He says that such a society could see the formation of covenant communities of like minded people who agree to live under a set of rules via contract (people who violate the contract could be “physically removed” from the covenant community, much like an unruly tenent can get kicked out of an apartment or motel). It is his opinion that those who live under a more socially conservative social order would be more successful than those who live under a more hedonistic/libertine social order, but since he advocates for abolishing the state, those who embrace hedonism/libertinism would be free to form their own enclaves.

    Really pathetic to see Jack Off Gary Johnson/Bill Weld supporters taking shots at Hoppe.

  3. Caryn Annn Harlos

    Let me guess. “Centrism” (codeword: “moderate” and “compromising” libertarianism) is the saviour? Pffft. The leaps this article makes in its attempts to connect Woods and Paul is ridiculous and completely un-nuanced. But since it is an internal factional site, it is not surprising. I just wish it were upfront about its agenda.

    Hoppe is a thick libertarian ironically, just thick on the right with different gross errors than thick leftists.

    Bake the cake and celebrate anything but traditionally conservative lifestyles v. keep the degenerates (everyone but WASP married couples with 3 kids) out of their neighborhood, I mean “covenant community from hell.”

    They both are awful. One violates property and personal rights in an attempt to be selectively tolerant and liberal and the other violates the heart and soul of classical liberalism in an attempt to protect (and grossly characterize as virtuous) the property rights to be exclusionary.

    BOTH are wrong in that they are trying to make libertarianism a system of morality. It isn’t.

    The fact is that libertarianism does entail the “right” of people to be off in their exclusionary little hells. It’s not flourishing, just like the right to take every drug under the sun isn’t.

    BUT libertarianism does NOT entail a right to the labour of others. For nuptial deserts or not.

    Rather than looking to Trump perhaps the thick left needs to look closer to home for the impetus of Hoppean dystopia. It is a reactionary movement.

    Out of all of the figures cited, Tucker is the great example. I have grown to love him.

  4. paulie Post author

    Centrism isn’t mentioned in the article, except as a link to a separate article in the series. Neither is thick libertarianism or anything that “violates property and personal rights in an attempt to be selectively tolerant and liberal” unless I missed something. If so, what?

  5. Caryn Ann Harlos

    The separate link is their conclusion to the series, which means the earlier items are intended as a build-up for centrism to save us all. You don’t have to mention thick libertarianism in order to promote. Hoppe is thick AF but never says he is. The fact is that this is a Johnson/Weld centric site and that they favoured violating rights in order for an enforced tolerance is not a secret. And while bigotry is repugnant, the fact is that libertarianism qua libertarianism allows for it to exist without initiatory force. And the others want to stamp it out with initiatory force. The Hoppean Hells are a reaction to that. Like night follows day.

  6. paulie Post author

    I think it works well as a stand alone piece, and that its criticism of Hoppe is completely correct. That doesn’t mean that I have to agree with the rest of the series, much less everything else on the site where it’s published, and never mind every single statement ever made by the candidates who the site’s owner worked with.

  7. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I am getting malware pop-ups from IPR and IPR only. Not opening this site until that gets resolved. It is happening only in Chrome.

  8. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Still getting it after running a mac-specific malware cleaner. It only happens on IPR. And auto-play video ads appearing which are annoying AF.

  9. Andy

    This is from the Tom Woods Show.

    Video description from YouTube: “Hans-Hermann Hoppe is one of the most significant libertarian thinkers in the world today. Murray Rothbard could not say enough about his brilliance. Unfortunately, his detractors (and even many of his supporters) have never actually read him. So Stephan Kinsella and I devoted this episode to discussing his body of work. Trust me, this is fun and punchy — especially as it goes along.”

    Against the Haters: The Brilliance of Hans-Hermann Hoppe

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVSnNSCcrT0

  10. Thomas L. Knapp

    No Chrome malware warnings for me.

    Caryn Ann, you write:

    “he leaps this article makes in its attempts to connect Woods and Paul”

    Why would any “leaps” be needed to connect Woods and Paul? They’ve been openly connected for years.

  11. Thomas L. Knapp

    Kevin,

    If I’m the Thomas whose “one thought” you’re asking for, that one thought is the only thought possible around Hoppe supporters: What the blue fuck, people?

    The guy is an openly avowed Marxist whose supporters like to smirk about giving his type free helicopter rides, an openly avowed “race realist” (“race realism” is to racism as “creation science” is to creationism — that is, the same thing with lipstick) whose supporters pretend to be rational thinkers, an openly avowed authoritarians whose supporters pretend to be libertarians. His career has been one long, parlor-trick-filled troll of the freedom movement.

  12. itdoesntmatterttomuch

    One of the biggest stories online right now that’s getting a lot of criticism on social media and on mainstream blogs is a NYT piece about Tony Hovater, a Neo-Nazi from Ohio, and how the reporter humanizes and “normalizes Neo-Nazism”. I am reading it right now (I don’t need to drop a link, this story is everywhere and you can find it easily). And sure enough, not only did he come to fascism from “ardent libertarianism” but

    “He name-drops Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, architects of “anarcho-capitalism,” This is in response being asked why he moved “so far right.”

  13. itdoesntmatterttomuch

    Kevin
    November 25, 2017 at 21:47

    For example, a single mother on welfare, a muslim from Somalia, might in theory be a libertarian.
    ——————–
    Who are all these Somali welfare queens? Have any data? I admit I don’t, but I at least have personal experience with these human beings who for the most part aren’t scary aliens looking to crash HHH’s (who is an alien himself, doesn’t live in America, and has nothing to contribute when it comes to American culture or values) cocktail parties.
    I live in an area actually in the United States with a large Somali population. The people I know are for the most part college-educated and many have professional jobs. The ones that don’t have cushy gigs work hard labor jobs in warehouses and similar occupations that pay above the cut off for food stamps and other benefits. I doubt there are even many single moms, and a couple working entry level labor jobs would have a combined income of over $60,000 and pretty good lifestyle here. And they certainly aren’t stealing any jobs from the uneducated and soft white folks who can’t keep up with Muslim women in restrictive clothing. I’m sure the white Europeans would make better guests at dinner with Jared Taylor or whatever.

  14. itdoesntmatterttomuch

    Caryn Ann Harlos
    November 25, 2017 at 23:22
    ” And while bigotry is repugnant, the fact is that libertarianism qua libertarianism allows for it to exist without initiatory force. ”
    ——————————
    There’s a huge difference between allowing something to exist and endorsing it and using it as your leading message that defines your brand. Perception is reality and if you don’t get that as a political activist, you don’t get it – at least as it relates to electoral politics.

    When people think of “Libertarian” I don’t want them to think of HHH and nazis. HHH chooses to go out of his way to embrace that, and so do many of the LRC/LVMI crowd who care more about getting attention for being “anti-pc” and appealing to populist authoritarians (who HATE liberty) than principled libertarianism.

  15. Thomas L. Knapp

    My experience matches itdoesntmatterttomuch’s.

    The immigrants I’ve known fall into two classes:

    – Upper middle class professionals. Doctors. Lawyers. Academics. Granted, some of them are receiving government paychecks, but those checks are for work. They’re not welfare checks. The fields they work in tend to be dominated by government in most or all countries; if the state was eliminated, they’d be doing the same things in the private sector. I can think of one immigrant whom I don’t personally know who answers to that government employee description. His name is Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who worked at, and is still Professor Emeritus of Economics at, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

    – Blue collar workers, often in jobs that native-born Americans aren’t inclined to take if they can find anything at all that pays better and has nicer conditions. If you’ve never been in a poultry plant, trust me, you don’t want to be. The one I applied for a job at back in the 1990s smelled so bad that I prayed I’d get another offer before they called me back. Fortunately, I did. The vast majority of the workers there were 1) Latinos and 2) local jail inmates rented out to the facility on a daily basis.

  16. robert capozzi

    cah: Let me guess. “Centrism” (codeword: “moderate” and “compromising” libertarianism) is the saviour? Pffft.

    me: Possibly/probably a counter-un-nuanced interpretation here. Whenever I’ve discussed what a centrist lessarchist approach with other centrist lessarchists, there was no religious/savior tone to it. Instead, most centrist Ls I meet believe that:

    1) NAPsterism has clearly failed to build a large enough cadre in 50 years to consider it a viable approach. It may well feel good for the individual NAPster to hold high the banner, but the experiment has failed as a strategy of social change.

    2) A centrist L approach is more likely to be impactful, that is, to change the conversation and therefore political outcomes than NAPsterism. This is simply because the largest numbers of people are in the center, so engaging them where they are is more likely to get their attention and possibly persuade them in a lessarchist direction.

  17. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    The next person I meet who makes serious use of the term “NAPsterism” will be the second, so I doubt that there’s any crowd of people reaching the conclusions you posit.

  18. Thane Eichenauer

    Thomas,
    Could you give a reference or supporting comment for your claim: The guy (HHH) is an openly avowed Marxist. I remember asking before. I may be a dense student on the topic.
    His supporters don’t use that term to describe him not that I don’t see plenty of people I would tag as Marxists that don’t publicly use the term.

  19. robert capozzi

    TK,

    I get the sense that you understand what I mean when I say NAPsterism. So in that sense it is a perfectly serviceable term. But, once again, I am open to an alternative term, as I have asked you and other NAPsters for numerous times. Sadly, you have yet to offer a valid alternative for my use.

  20. wredlich

    Caryn,
    I just sent you an e-mail. I’m not seeing the problem you describe with pop-ups. Could be Chrome extensions. Check them at chrome://extensions/

  21. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I am using a different browser right now and will check what you said Warren.

    And brief comments, though I prefer not to respond to people who won’t use their name – not necessarily their government name, but a consistent name across platforms to know someone.

    ==There’s a huge difference between allowing something to exist and endorsing it and using it as your leading message that defines your brand. Perception is reality and if you don’t get that as a political activist, you don’t get it – at least as it relates to electoral politics.==

    And please cite where I ever said to endorse it as a leading message. The amount of misrepresentation and emotionalism is staggering. I can’t stand HHH’s dystopia and said so clearly. But I also am not a fan of holding the state gun to people’s heads to make them violate religious convictions for instance – even if I don’t agree with those convictions – as I am rapidly am doing with most religions.

    ==When people think of “Libertarian” I don’t want them to think of HHH and nazis.==

    Me either. I made that clear. Why you think that has to be said to me is unknown. I also don’t want people to think BAKE THE DAMN NAZI CAKE either.

    ==HHH chooses to go out of his way to embrace that, and so do many of the LRC/LVMI crowd who care more about getting attention for being “anti-pc” and appealing to populist authoritarians (who HATE liberty) than principled libertarianism.==

    That’s not me. And there are populist authoritarians on the far left which an awful lot of Libertarians seem to love playing footsie with.

    I can’t stand either.

    If you’re going to respond, I am sure we know each other, perhaps you can identify yourself, otherwise this seems like a game.

  22. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Thomas:

    (“race realism” is to racism as “creation science” is to creationism — that is, the same thing with lipstick)

    Amen to that.

  23. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Back to Thomas:

    ==Caryn Ann, you write:

    “he leaps this article makes in its attempts to connect Woods and Paul”

    Why would any “leaps” be needed to connect Woods and Paul? They’ve been openly connected for years.==

    My comment was to connect Woods and Paul to the things that we all pretty much agree are awful. Woods does not hold that thing. He thinks HHH is a great thinker and doesn’t go out of his way to bend over backwards to say Hitler is bad m’kay. Would I prefer that? Yes, but I am much more – he would call it – PC. He doesn’t feel like he needs to be forced to utter the right mantra when he has never advocated such a thing, and it is an outright smear to say he does. Would I like that he really go after the League of the South? Yes. But I am not the behaviour police that someone must distance the same way I do. As for the Celtic/South thing in the beginning – we are all guilty at times of loving one particular aspect of a group and being willing to overlook other parts that we don’t share. Woods is fanatical about secession. I can see why he might overlook or ignore the other elements, but THAT DOESN’T MAKE HIM AGREE WITH THEM. He refuses to ask how high when we say jump, and I have a respect for that. I also think HHH is a great thinker. So was Marx. And both of them mixed in with the bad had some really good insights. With HHH, argumentation ethics is a gem. There are things he gets rights about libertarianism. Most of the objectionable things are his prejudiced preferences. Just like some prejudiced preferences of some on the far left. I see such a mirror image.

    With Paul again – I am open borders. I don’t agree with his immigration policy but it is not animated by the prejudiced preferences that he is being linked to here. Again, we don’t think he handled the two newsletter from years ago right, but that doesn’t mean he agrees with them, and the witch hunt is old. Paul has done more for libertarianism than any of us will.

    I see too much how cherry-picked things here and there are woven into a narrative that the original subject would never recognize as being about them. Don’t believe me? Read certain commentary by a certain person obsessed with a pair of things I have. I don’t know who that person is that is described, but it sure as hell ain’t me. That nonsense has made me very crotchety about people doing that to others. Woods is not a racist. Paul is not a racist. That crap is false, and needs to stop.

  24. Thomas L. Knapp

    It wasn’t that Woods “doesn’t go out of his way to bend over backwards to say Hitler is bad m’kay”

    It was that Woods threw a public temper tantrum over the idea that anyone might EXPECT him to say that Hitler is bad m’kay, because who would possibly leap to the conclusion that someone listed as a founding member of one of the groups carrying torches and yelling “the Jews will not replace us” just might be soft on Hitler, after he had, a decade before, quietly mentioned that he wasn’t 100% in favor of everything that group might happen to do?

    If he didn’t want to discuss the subject, all he had to do was not bring the fucking subject up. He was just doing the paleo version of virtue signaling.

  25. Caryn Ann Harlos

    And I will say I saw this same nonsense (and I bought it into it for a bit) when the Mises Caucus was formed. I hang out there. It is not that misshapen image that it was painted here. In the beginning some “race realists” tried to join and they were booted out on their asses.

    This Pavlovian reaction is not a good look.

    The far right sucks. The far left sucks. I don’t think there is any chance that the LP will be connected with the far right. But we are getting connected with the far left. I talk with a lot of people outside of my general circle because with 9 states, it is a wide variety. And the overwhelming opinion amongst the rank and file members in western states (excluding CA) is that the LP is becoming way too cozy with the far left. And that drives people to the far right as a reactionary result.

    I.CAN’T.STAND.BOTH.OF.THEM.

  26. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ==It wasn’t that Woods “doesn’t go out of his way to bend over backwards to say Hitler is bad m’kay”===

    That is how he sees it. And understanding people requires trying to see things from their perspective. Which I am generally decent at doing.

    ==It was that Woods threw a public temper tantrum over the idea that anyone might EXPECT him to say that Hitler is bad m’kay,===

    He’s a libertarian. He doesn’t like to be told what to do, and is being really stubborn. I don’t agree. But I understand.

    == because who would possibly leap to the conclusion that someone listed as a founding member of one of the groups carrying torches and yelling “the Jews will not replace us” just might be soft on Hitler,==

    A group he left. A decade ago I might have been a founding member of some really nutty fundamentalist Christian thing. I wasn’t – but it could have happened. If I left, I left. I probably would resent people demanding I reject in the way they demand. I used to believe some screwed up things. I don’t any more. I didn’t take out a billboard.

    ==after he had, a decade before, quietly mentioned that he wasn’t 100% in favor of everything that group might happen to do?==

    He didn’t distance the way we would like. I would rather see PROOF THAT HE BELIEVES WHAT HE IS BEING ACCUSED OF.

    ==If he didn’t want to discuss the subject, all he had to do was not bring the fucking subject up. He was just doing the paleo version of virtue signaling.==

    And this is version of reading into things because people don’t act like we would so they must be monsters.

    I would like to see proof that he himself is a racist. All I got is that he didn’t distance himself the way you and I would like. Okay. That is a thin reed to keep smearing his reputation with.

  27. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ===Libertarianism is the far left. If the LP isn’t connected with the far left, the LP is not connected with libertarianism.
    ===

    We don’t agree there. And I can’t tell you that the western state parties didn’t sign up to be part of the far left. And I certainly didn’t. I reject the far left and the far right utterly.

  28. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I would rather see PROOF THAT HE BELIEVES WHAT HE IS BEING ACCUSED OF.”

    And I would like to see evidence that anyone has ever accused him of believing what you seem to be hinting at (Nazism). The next time I see him accused of being a Nazi or anything like it will be the first time. Which is why he comes off as protesting waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much.

  29. Caryn Ann Harlos

    This is likely all the time I am going to spend on this. Other things to do. Unsubbing.

  30. Jill Pyeatt

    . And the overwhelming opinion amongst the rank and file members in western states (excluding CA) is that the LP is becoming way too cozy with the far left.

    There are a few of us in CA combating the awful alliance with the Looney Left (called far left here on IPR). I am one of the loudest and most active at it.

  31. Jill Pyeatt

    I don’t read Breitbart, but the yearbook has been found to be forged. There is a lot of info our there. The “DA” by Roy Moore’s signature are the initials of his office worker who signed it. It doesn’t mean “District Attorney”.

    This isn’t to say I support Roy Moore. I do try to learn the truth about each situation, though.

  32. dL

    Here’s Where Hans-Hermann Hoppe Gets It Wrong’

    Wrong question. What does he even get right?

    These themes are touchstones of the subterranean “alt-right” thinking that appears to animate racialists,

    Extremist is the more accurate term. Radicalism implies getting to the root of the problem. How exactly does race realism get to the root of the problem of state power?

    Both at the Students for Liberty event and in their other writings, Palmer, Boaz, and Tucker defend libertarianism’s place not on the right, but embedded within a classical liberal tradition and its spirit of egalitarianism, toleration, and pluralism.

    If libertarianism is presented as a false dilemma between the alt right and the beltway crack pipe, I’m not sure who wins. But I know what loses.

    The referenced Hoppe video is about 2 months old. At the time, I had to laugh at Hoppe’s “we will crush the ant-fascist mob.” Well, “we” ain’t crushing anything. My dead grandmother could kick that pencil-necked geezer’s ass.

  33. wolfefan

    Some Moore apologists claim “The yearbook has been found to be forged.” Others bleat “Why won’t Allred give up the yearbook for examination.” Both can’t be true. (I know you’re not a Moore apologist, Jill, but the Breitbart stuff is nonsense.)

  34. dL

    He didn’t distance the way we would like. I would rather see PROOF THAT HE BELIEVES WHAT HE IS BEING ACCUSED OF.

    Well there is certainly indisputable proof that by proselytizing Hoppe he is proselytizing christian white supremacy and the alt-right. In the name of libertarianism.

  35. Kevin

    Both HHH and CAH are libertarians is that category is defined broadly. They are close enough that I agree with most of what they say.

    On “open borders”, advocates assume that political borders should and always will exist. While “anarcho-capitalists” [sic] like HHH are correct when they oppose political borders. Instead, they would have all real estate divided by property lines that are not political borders (even if enforced politically).

    Naturally, owners of real estate should have the right to exclude visitors, for whatever reason; except of course if such owners have violated the rights of others by initiating force, and defenders of such victims wish to arrest to offending property owner.

  36. paulie Post author

    I don’t think there is any chance that the LP will be connected with the far right.

    It’s being connected to the far right constantly all the time all over the place. You said you read my article about that.

    But we are getting connected with the far left.

    When and where?

    And the overwhelming opinion amongst the rank and file members in western states (excluding CA) is that the LP is becoming way too cozy with the far left.

    If anything that’s a bad reflection on who the LP has brought in as members, and/or what information sources they give credence to.

  37. paulie Post author

    I prefer not to respond to people who won’t use their name – not necessarily their government name, but a consistent name across platforms to know someone.

    That’s a reasonable choice, although I don’t think it is a secret that you used to post in some places as Dee Dee Warren. My apologies if it is.

  38. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    “I prefer not to respond to people who won’t use their name” means the same thing as “This is likely all the time I am going to spend on this. Other things to do. Unsubbing.”

    In English, both mean “I made up my mind and now you’re bogin’ my high. Will you get out of my face with the facts already?”

  39. paulie Post author

    I don’t read Breitbart, but the yearbook has been found to be forged.

    No, it hasn’t.

    The “DA” by Roy Moore’s signature are the initials of his office worker who signed it. It doesn’t mean “District Attorney”.

    It does mean District Attorney. He skipped the Deputy part because he was trying to play the big shot and figured teenage girls would not know the difference. His office worker’s initials are a coincidence. It would be uncharacteristically stupid for Allred to allow her client to lie and introduce forged evidence when she knows full well it is likely to wind up in court and/or senate hearings under oath and subject to perjury. Not that this is by any means the only evidence against Moore.

  40. Kevin

    Concerning Somali immigrants, I didn’t say they draw welfare proportionately more than others; I gave a hypothetical example of a single mother on welfare who is also a Muslim from Somalia. I make a logical point, and you (“itdoesn’tmatter much”–what a silly nom de plume) respond with a factual refutation. Of course such a person would likely not be libertarian, surely you concede that point, correct?

    Now as to the factual basis:

    IQ and sustainable economic development are positively correlated:
    https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/77055/1/MPRA_paper_77055.pdf
    “Based on our findings we may conclude that intelligence is a robust predictor of
    sustainable development. Departing from related studies we may argue that there are two
    reasons explaining positive link between intelligence and genuine income, a change in the
    rate of income adjusted for depletion and environmental degradation. First, higher-IQ
    population focuses on long-term rewards rather short-run benefits, thus economic
    development in these countries is associated with lower pressure on resources and
    environment. Also, countries with higher general intelligence are associated with patience,
    have longer time horizons thus build institutions that prevent informal activities and punish
    rent seeking behavior. ”

    This article explains that IQ is the critical factor, not democracy:
    https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/65716/1/MPRA_paper_65716.pdf
    “Empirical studies have long conjectured that intelligence and institutional arrangements such as democracy are potential determinants of economic growth. Our theoretical predictions,
    supported by econometric results, lead to a substantial reconceptualization of heterogeneous
    association between political regimes, intelligence and economic development. Most cross
    -country literature on the impact of democracy on economic growth has yielded contradictory
    results. Most studies of intelligence investigate its overall effect on growth and report a positive
    effect. We believe that the relationship between these antecedents of economic development is
    more complex. Particularly, we argue that the effect of democratization is mediated by the
    degree of the approval to such policies, and that intelligence may alleviate or weaken the
    negative effect of weak democratic institutions on economic growth. Specifically, it is the social
    capital, civic culture and political behavior that is linked to intelligence seems to alleviate the
    insignificant effect of democracy on economic growth. For example, many non
    democratic countries, those have high levels of cognitive abilities, maintained superior growth rates over the past decades (China, Singapore and Republic of Korea).

    Our econometric findings show that the link between democracy and economic growth varies with a nation’s level of cognitive abilities. In particular, the interaction between democracy index and national IQ is negative indicating that weak democratic institutions are harmful for economic development only in countries with low level of social capital and short-term horizon of economic agents, measured by intelligence. Another casual feedback may be that intelligent economic agents put in place mechanisms that restrict rent-seeking behavior and market failures.

    Finally, our estimates produce novel evidence into the link between political regimes and economic growth. In addition to documenting a positive effect of democracy, we find that intelligence has robust benefit to economic development -mitigating the negative effect of weak
    political institutions. Considering that rampant levels of corruption and weak rule of law has
    growth-impairing effect on financial development, innovative activity and macroeconomic
    stability in developing countries, investing in cognitive skills within them may not only increase
    the stock of human capital, but also promote market-oriented policies.”

    [K] Of course, Somalia is an economic basket-case and this can be explained by studies which have shown average IQ in Somalia is 68:
    https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country/so-somalia

    [K] Obviously, Somalia immigrants disproportionately use welfare:
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/24/islamist-terror-groups-target-minnesota-somali-ref/

  41. robert capozzi

    CAH: I don’t think there is any chance that the LP will be connected with the far right.

    PF: It’s being connected to the far right constantly all the time all over the place. You said you read my article about that.

    ME: It would take a tremendous effort not recognize the former LP candidate, noted NAPster Chris Cantwell is now a notorious, infamous far-right figure.

  42. paulie Post author

    “Alliance” was a poorly chosen word. Substitute “coziness with” or “identification with”, and I’m a little closer to my point

    I haven’t seen any of that either. Can you provide examples?

  43. dL

    On “open borders”, advocates assume that political borders should and always will exist.

    Incorrect…In actuality, the use of the term “borders” to to apply to private property boundaries is an expression that statist borders should always exist.

    While “anarcho-capitalists” [sic] like HHH are correct when they oppose political borders. Instead, they would have all real estate divided by property lines that are not political borders (even if enforced politically).

    umm, I assure you any piece of private real estate already has a recorded deed and property survey. You don’t need anarcho-capitalism to achieve what is already commonplace . Besides, that actually is not Hoppe’s property theory. Hoppe’s invited trespass theory holds the property owner liable for the actions of the invitee, a condition that makes any non trivial market economy unfeasible. If the sine qua non of Obama was: “you did not build that,” the Hoppean version is: ” you did not steal that.”

    Indeed, in the case of Hoppe, anarcho-capitalism is a complete misnomer. Amish propertarianism(i.e, stranger aversion by property custom) would be more accurate. It’s baffling to me that anyone with an IQ above freezing can’t see right through such transparent BS. Unless, of course, the entire thing is simply an intentional expropriated gobbledygook over a social theory that is barely distinguishable from what one would find in something like the Turner diaries.

  44. dL

    Now as to the factual basis:

    (1) reject the premise that somehow ties freedom of movement and association with a progressive state education measurement like IQ
    (2) nonetheless, question the raw intelligence of anyone who takes a crank like Hoppe seriously. So, where does that leave you, Keven? You fail the libertarian civics test. No freedom of movement for you, brah.

  45. Thomas L. Knapp

    dL,

    Hoppeanism seems like sort of progressive con. In the same way that anyone who can be taken by three-card monte will likely also be gullible to bigger scams, anyone who takes the “Argumentation Ethics” parlor trick seriously will presumably not see through more complex cons. Once he managed to get THAT through the door at Mises, he knew he could package any old turd as prime rib in the certain knowledge that the most pushback he’d likely get on it was a request for more horseradish.

  46. Jill Pyeatt

    Paulie, it’s hard to explain without you knowing the people involved, and the stagnant atmosphere in our state. There isn’t a huge influence from the right here. Everyone just seems to accept that the liberal/progressive agenda is the correct one. It’s very difficult to convince people there are two ways to do things, let alone more than two ways. Critical thinking and questioning anything is met with a stare, like the listener is totally blown away with what was just said. Libertarians even buy into it some.

    For example, Libertarians need to be more outspoken about the many incredibly awful legislators from our state. We should write opinion pieces, and communicate with the legislator’s office about what we think about the choices they make. It’s rare that anyone does that, I think. I tried to start an “Get Diane Feinstein to Retire” campaign a couple years ago, but no one thought I was serious.

  47. paulie Post author

    Paulie, it’s hard to explain without you knowing the people involved, and the stagnant atmosphere in our state.

    I’m sure I know some of the people involved. I’ve spent at least a couple of years in CA (over the course of various trips) and have attended at least 2-3 state LP conventions there and any number of local meetings around the state, including yours. I also spend time online in various groups (first on yahoo, later facebook) including CA groups. There have been lots of CA people on IPR over the years and CA issues discussed in articles and comments. I served with some Californians on the LNC, Ballot Access Committee, and various other committees and groups in the past.

    Everyone just seems to accept that the liberal/progressive agenda is the correct one.

    Honestly I did not see that when I was in CA. I remember one state convention I went to there was a so-called debate on the Iraq war and both sides of it were to the right of me, one worse than the other, but there was no Q & A. I tried to interject the actual libertarian antiwar position and was told I was heckling which was total BS. I also encountered a lot of right wing attitudes on immigration.

    I tried to start an “Impeach Diane Feinstein” campaign a couple years ago, but no one thought I was serious.

    I’ve never gotten the sense that CA Libertarians are enamored of the state’s Senators. I seem to remember Mark Hinkle getting in some hot water for spelling Boxer’s name with a swastika instead of an X.

    On what specific issues have California Libertarians been improperly progressive or leftist? Is there a big pro-single payer faction of the party? Lots of gun control advocates? What are we talking about here?

  48. robert capozzi

    jp: Libertarians need to be more outspoken about the many incredibly awful legislators from our state.

    me: Sounds like a full-time job everywhere. Consider the Michelangelo counsel: Criticize by creating. An aspirational-yet-practical message might be in order.

  49. Andy

    Some people have alleged that people at the Mises Institute hate/don’t like black people. Check out what That Guy T (aka-Taleed Brown) has to say about his experience at the Mises Institute’s summer program earlier this year.

    Hint: He had a great time and would love to go back. Oh yeah, T is also a fan of Hoppe!

    That Guy T: Mises University | A Review of #MisesU

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYF_gIrSMlU&t=354s

  50. Andy

    “robert capozzi
    November 26, 2017 at 22:40
    Token?”

    That is kind of a nasty allegation to make. That Guy T is not the only black person to have ever gone through a Mises program, or to have been affiliated with the Mises Institute.

  51. paulie Post author

    That is kind of a nasty allegation to make.

    Truth hurts?

    That Guy T is not the only black person to have ever gone through a Mises program, or to have been affiliated with the Mises Institute.

    Well I guess that proves they can’t harbor any prejudice then.

  52. Andy

    “paulie Post author
    ‘November 26, 2017 at 22:57
    That is kind of a nasty allegation to make.
    Truth hurts?'”

    The same thing could be said about any libertarian group/organization, including the Libertarian Party, and including self identified left libertarians and their various groups.

    Every libertarian group/meeting/event/rally/conference/gathering I have ever attended, it has mostly consisted of white males.

    So if you are going to point the finger of shame at the Mises Institute, and refer to That Guy T as “Token”, you can do the same with every other libertarian group/organization.

    “That Guy T is not the only black person to have ever gone through a Mises program, or to have been affiliated with the Mises Institute.
    Well I guess that proves they can’t harbor any prejudice then.”

    That is ridiculous to equate That Guy T with black totalitarians.

  53. Andy

    “Jill Pyeatt
    November 26, 2017 at 20:33
    Paulie, it’s hard to explain without you knowing the people involved, and the stagnant atmosphere in our state.”

    Jill, as I have said here before, back when I was involved in the LP of CA, which was from the late 1990’s to the mid 2000’s, the LP of CA was actually a more vibrant organization that was moving ahead. Years of internal dysfunction derailed that, and then Top Two Primary passed, and made a bad situation into an even worse situation for the LP of CA.

    I think that the LP of CA is going to have a difficult time ever bouncing back as long as Top Two Primary is on the books.

    We’ve discussed a ballot initiative here before that is currently filed and approved for circulation for the 2018 general election ballot in California to Repeal Top Two Primary. Has any progress been made on getting this initiative on the ballot? I think that it needs approximately 565,000 or so valid petition signatures within a 6 month period after it was approved for circulation. My contacts in the California petition business have told me that this petition is currently not being circulated by paid signature gatherers. How is the fundraising going for this initiative? What have California Libertarians done to get this initiative on the ballot? Have any California Libertarians donated money to it, or gathered volunteer signatures on it? Have any California Libertarians even signed this petition? Has the LP of California officially endorsed this initiative?

    Repealing Top Two Primary should be a top priority for the LP of CA (as well as for the Green Party of CA, as well as for all supporters of minor party or independent candidates in general in CA).

    One would think that a lot of Republicans in California would be jumping on the Repeal Top Two Primary bandwagon now, since the 2016 US Senate race in California ended up with Democrat vs Democrat in the general election. I have heard that this year’s California gubernatorial race is likely to end up with Democrat vs Democrat in the general election.

    Are enough people going to wake up and repeal this dreadful election law?

  54. dL

    anyone who takes the “Argumentation Ethics” parlor trick seriously will presumably not see through more complex cons

    The “Argumentation ethics” argument is circular reasoning. If one asserts that NAP is a premise of every argument, then so too for AE. So the conclusion of the argument is a premise==circular reasoning. These type of arguments may be logically valid in the sense that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true; but you haven’t actually demonstrated or proved anything.

    Once he managed to get THAT through the door at Mises…

    You may be right. The argument, I believe, was first introduced in a 1988 paper, The Ultimate Justification of the Private Property Ethic, wherein he manages to sneak in the language of “private property borders.” If you had read it at the time, you may not have paid much attention to that language. But you would pay attention to that language now.

    And it should be noted: the argument relies on a recognition of the dreaded universalism of norms, at least as it pertains to propositional exchange and argumentation. So he was playing the good Misean at the time. Of course, as a Frankfurt School Cultural Marxist, he actually denies that. So he was a duplicitous fuck even then.

  55. dL

    There goes any shred of credibility you are trying to give him.

    Well, it is more like if the HoppeBots ever gained complete political power, he would have to attribute his success and sustainability to racial white patriarchy. Failure to do so would result in his expulsion…or face being lined up against the wall. Of course, given that the Mises Institute originally invited him, they too would be rounded up for a shared liability in crimes against the racial state. Which brings us to an immutable historical truth. If the sewer Mises is swimming in actually gained complete political power, the Mises contingent would be the first to be lined up against the wall and shot. All of them.

  56. Hmm.

    “The Hoppean Hells are a reaction to that. Like night follows day.” -CAH

    Yeah, I was totally going to be a principled libertarian, but then Gary Johnson gave a bad answer about Nazi cakes, so I decided to be a Nazi instead.

    Good thing Hans Hoppe had the foresight to start “reacting” three decades before that happened.

  57. paulie Post author

    The same thing could be said about any libertarian group/organization, including the Libertarian Party, and including self identified left libertarians and their various groups.

    Not with nearly as much truth to it.

    Every libertarian group/meeting/event/rally/conference/gathering I have ever attended, it has mostly consisted of white males.

    The issue isn’t how many black people are there, it’s the agenda of the organization.

    That is ridiculous to equate That Guy T with black totalitarians.

    Not if he admires Hoppe.

  58. paulie Post author

    Yeah, I was totally going to be a principled libertarian, but then Gary Johnson gave a bad answer about Nazi cakes, so I decided to be a Nazi instead.

    Good thing Hans Hoppe had the foresight to start “reacting” three decades before that happened.

    Excellent point.

  59. Andy

    Paul said: “‘That is ridiculous to equate That Guy T with black totalitarians.’
    Not if he admires Hoppe.”

    This is complete crap. T is a good dude.

    Andrew Napolitano and Tom Woods also like Hoppe. Are they not libertarians either? Was the late Murray Rothbard not a libertarian?

    Even Adam Kokesh likes some of Hoppe’s stuff (although he disagrees with Hoppe on how immigration should be handled while the state exists), and I don’t think Adam can be accused of being “too conservative”.

  60. Anon-Tipper

    Damn, I don’t think I’ve ever heard someone associate the LP with the far left, love to know who. Who even is the far left in the U.S.’s political landscape? Are socialists getting elected? Do people think the LP and Antifa are in cahoots?

    “And there are populist authoritarians on the far left which an awful lot of Libertarians seem to love playing footsie with.”

    Who? Why is this never answered?

    “But I am not the behaviour police that someone must distance the same way I do. As for the Celtic/South thing in the beginning – we are all guilty at times of loving one particular aspect of a group and being willing to overlook other parts that we don’t share. Woods is fanatical about secession. I can see why he might overlook or ignore the other elements, but THAT DOESN’T MAKE HIM AGREE WITH THEM.”

    In the article below, which is supposed to Tom’s repudiation of them he states several “interesting” things:

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/in-case-you-were-wondering/

    “why should every group except Anglo-Celts be allowed to preserve their culture?”

    “I met a great many figures of importance there. (One of them, Clyde Wilson, who sits to this day on the League’s board of directors, is the editor of the Papers of John C. Calhoun and has been called one of the top ten Southern historians in America by Eugene Genovese.)”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clyde_N._Wilson

    This person has worked at LvMI. How many other LoS-ers have worked/currently work at the LvMI?

    “For these and for no other reasons, and in this context, have I had an intermittent membership in the League over the years.”

    Hopefully he finally stopped this since they are now in a coalition with neo-nazis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_Front_(United_States)

    ” As for the Celtic/South thing in the beginning – we are all guilty at times of loving one particular aspect of a group and being willing to overlook other parts that we don’t share. I can see why he might overlook or ignore the other elements, but THAT DOESN’T MAKE HIM AGREE WITH THEM.”

    This is the stupidest excuse. You can’t simply “overlook” white nationalism.

  61. Luke

    “Damn, I don’t think I’ve ever heard someone associate the LP with the far left, love to know who.”

    Same here. Sounds like BS to me.

    “Who even is the far left in the U.S.’s political landscape? Are socialists getting elected?”

    Bernie Sanders I guess but he is more of a centre left in European terms, he is only far left in the US and really only nominally a socialist. A few city council people in Seattle and Minneapolis may qualify as far left and that’s about as far as it goes.

    There’s a miniscule socialist caucus in the LP but it is truly tiny and insignificant.

    “Do people think the LP and Antifa are in cahoots?”

    A few LP members do consider themselves to be antifa, but not as the term has come to be defined by its opponents. LP antifa(scists) are not violent communists like some other antifa are.

  62. Luke

    “And there are populist authoritarians on the far left which an awful lot of Libertarians seem to love playing footsie with.”

    Who? Why is this never answered?

    Because it’s fake news/BS.

  63. Luke

    “why should every group except Anglo-Celts be allowed to preserve their culture?”

    Of course they should be allowed to preserve their culture. What they should not be allowed to do is to use force to prevent people from crossing regime borders, to prevent “race-mixing,” etc. They also don’t need to use government property to “preserve their culture” or glorify their symbols. If they want to maintain museums, genealogy archives, historical websites, historical libraries, private collections, meetings of enthusiasts and reenactors, even form small 100% voluntary communities where no one is forced to join or remain – by all means, have at it.

  64. Anon-Tipper

    “but not as the term has come to be defined by its opponents.”

    Yeah, I meant it the same way the people that think there’s far-left groups infiltrating the LP do. I’m so used to that usage, I forget that lots of groups are involved.

    “Because it’s fake news/BS.”

    Looks like it!

  65. Luke

    “This person has worked at LvMI. How many other LoS-ers have worked/currently work at the LvMI?”

    It depends on what you mean by worked. They don’t actually have a lot of staff members and as far as I know Clyde Wilson has never been an employee of theirs either, but they have a lot of people who have been associated with them in some form or another over the years and in many cases given titles of various sorts, and many of those swim in neo-confederate nostalgia and “racialism.” Hoppe is among many examples.

  66. Luke

    “Hopefully he finally stopped this since they are now in a coalition with neo-nazis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_Front_(United_States)

    Since he and LvMI are doubling down in their disingenuous defense of the Blood and Soil BS (and not just the one speech which ended with it either) the connections still remain and it’s still valid to point them out. Even if they have a few token black guys around now and then, LOL (Andy).

  67. Luke

    ” As for the Celtic/South thing in the beginning – we are all guilty at times of loving one particular aspect of a group and being willing to overlook other parts that we don’t share. I can see why he might overlook or ignore the other elements, but THAT DOESN’T MAKE HIM AGREE WITH THEM.”

    This is the stupidest excuse. You can’t simply “overlook” white nationalism.

    Agreed. And the evidence is even more overwhelming with Hoppe, he is not exactly subtle in his bigotry as the examples of him coming right out and saying it abound. It’s far from being only immigration either.

  68. Anon-Tipper

    “Since he and LvMI are doubling down in their disingenuous defense of the Blood and Soil BS (and not just the one speech which ended with it either) the connections still remain and it’s still valid to point them out.”

    “Agreed. And the evidence is even more overwhelming with Hoppe, he is not exactly subtle in his bigotry as the examples of him coming right out and saying it abound. It’s far from being only immigration either.”

    Agreed!

  69. dL

    why should every group except Anglo-Celts be allowed to preserve their culture?

    that is a code expression for preserving an absolute white racial majority in the US.

  70. dL

    Agreed. And the evidence is even more overwhelming with Hoppe, he is not exactly subtle in his bigotry as the examples of him coming right out and saying it abound. It’s far from being only immigration either.”

    Yep..there is no dog whistling when it comes to Hoppe. He comes right out and says it.

    [Race Realistic Libertarianism]
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/09/hans-hermann-hoppe/smack-down/


    More specifically, he realistically notices that libertarianism, as an intellectual system, was first developed and furthest elaborated in the Western world, by white males, in white male dominated societies. That it is in white, heterosexual male dominated societies, where adherence to libertarian principles is the greatest and the deviations from them the least severe (as indicated by comparatively less evil and extortionist State policies). That it is white heterosexual men, who have demonstrated the greatest ingenuity, industry, and economic prowess. And that it is societies dominated by white heterosexual males, and in particular by the most successful among them, which have produced and accumulated the greatest amount of capital goods and achieved the highest average living standards.


    In light of this, as a right-libertarian, I would of course first say to my children and students: always respect and do not invade others’ private property rights and recognize the State as an enemy and indeed the very anti-thesis of private property. But I would not leave it at that. I would not say (or silently imply) that once you have satisfied this requirement “anything goes.” Which is pretty much what ‘thin’ libertarians appear to be saying! I would not be a cultural relativist as most “thin” libertarians at least implicitly are. Instead, I would add (at a minimum): be and do whatever makes you happy, but always keep in mind that as long as you are an integral part of the worldwide division of labor, your existence and well-being depends decisively on the continued existence of others, and especially on the continued existence of white heterosexual male dominated societies, their patriarchic family structures, and their bourgeois or aristocratic lifestyle and conduct. Hence, even if you do not want to have any part in that, recognize that you are nonetheless a beneficiary of this standard “Western” model of social organization and hence, for your own sake, do nothing to undermine it but instead be supportive of it as something to be respected and protected.

  71. Kevin

    “The “Argumentation ethics” argument is circular reasoning. If one asserts that NAP is a premise of every argument, then so too for AE. So the conclusion of the argument is a premise==circular reasoning. These type of arguments may be logically valid in the sense that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true; but you haven’t actually demonstrated or proved anything.”

    (K) Amazing how much was lost with the fall of Rome. Nowadays, very few know that Greco-Romans solved the problem over 2000 years ago. Instead of deducing from assumptions (axioms), the common law system proceeds inductively. Those laws in common with all governments, was held to be the common law (“Jus Gentium”), which approximates natural justice (“Jus Naturale”).

  72. dL

    (K) Amazing how much was lost with the fall of Rome. Nowadays, very few know that Greco-Romans solved the problem over 2000 years ago. Instead of deducing from assumptions (axioms), the common law system proceeds inductively. Those laws in common with all governments, was held to be the common law (“Jus Gentium”), which approximates natural justice (“Jus Naturale”).

    A complete red herring, given that Hoppe’s argument is not an inductive one. Your statement is also erroneous, given that inductive reasoning, a principle component of the modern scientific method, was certainly not abandoned with the fall of the Roman Empire.

  73. Kevin

    ( K) Amazing how much was lost with the fall of Rome. Nowadays, very few know that Greco-Romans solved the problem over 2000 years ago. Instead of deducing from assumptions (axioms), the common law system proceeds inductively. Those laws in common with all governments, was held to be the common law (“Jus Gentium”), which approximates natural justice (“Jus Naturale”).

    dl “A complete red herring, given that Hoppe’s argument is not an inductive one. Your statement is also erroneous, given that inductive reasoning, a principle component of the modern scientific method, was certainly not abandoned with the fall of the Roman Empire.”

    (K) My point was not that HHH used inductive reasoning, but that you wrongly assume all who disagree with you, do so on deductive grounds. This should not be about any one individual, with faults and virtues; but what reality is.

    The reality that would be created if you had your way, would be that property owners would have to take on boarders, who swarm after resources (common and private alike) without proportionate regard for returning value for value. As the “refugees” from Muslim conflicts do contribute disproportionately to welfarism and common law crime.

    Which you would realize, if you removed the cracked lens which distorts your view of reality. Contrary to your pretentions, your worldview is utterly deduced from counter-factual assumptions. Such as the delusion that we can get a good result by allowing in swarms of third-worlders, who will utterly change voting demographics for the worse, and permanently.

    Not all cultures or people are of equal value. Some create problems that undermine a relatively free society.

  74. Thomas L. Knapp

    Kevin,

    Here are a couple of your own delusions:

    1) The existence of some unitary “we;” with

    2) A power to “allow” (or forbid) others to move around at will on property said “we” has no valid ownership claim to.

    It’s true that not all cultures or people are of equal value. The culture you advocate, and therefore the people who make up that culture, set out with the explicit goal of undermining a relatively free society.

    Authoritarianism is not libertarianism, and no amount of sophistry on your part or Hoppe’s will make the two compatible.

  75. dL

    (K) My point was not that HHH used inductive reasoning, but that you wrongly assume all who disagree with you, do so on deductive grounds. This should not be about any one individual, with faults and virtues; but what reality is.

    You assume incorrectly. I don’t have a particularly high opinion of the HoppeBots faculty for making valid and sound deductive arguments. My experience is that they often proceed from a vulgar inductive fallacy…e.g, clicking on sensationalized hyperlinks from the drudge report or some other source from the right wing noise machine concerning a specific occurrence to make general conclusions. A practice that merely is actively seeking to confirm one’s own bias.

    Not all cultures or people are of equal value. Some create problems that undermine a relatively free society.

    That may be true. But one might have a difference in opinion on which culture is the inferior culture vis a vis liberty. For example, my inductive reasoning regarding the HoppeBots is that they extrapolated their own social awkwardness and inadequacies w/ women into a comical but toxic (online) social movement that reinforces the worst stereotypes about libertarianism. Perhaps I’m wrong. But hitherto there has been little to dissuade me of that view. What was Charlottesville but a gathering a unfuckable dorks operating under a delusion that carrying tiki torches and shouting white victimhood was somehow “bad boy” sex appeal. lulz.

    And I certainly do view, say, “A Night at the Polka Festival” as a threat to a nightlife w/ an active female population. But one doesn’t need a dictatorship of the sexually non-repulsive to quarantine the invaders to reddit on friday nights.

  76. DJ

    You people spend way too much time arguing about whose brand of libertarian is actually libertarian and who is smarter than whom. It’s amazing with the amount of intellect displayed here that not a one of you can see what’s happening. It seems you can’t see the forest for the trees, which is what happens when you stand in the forest. Try looking at yourselves by standing outside the forest.

    Borders will never go away in our life time or our immediate descendants, or their descendants. Deal with it. That’s a euphoric belief that has very little to do with where we are as a society. It doesn’t matter what another thinks or claims to be correct in that regard. It serves one purpose and one only; Create strife and factions. See IPR for confirmation.

    Individual rights to pursue Life, Liberty and Happiness in a manner the individual *chooses* is where energy would be better directed. Win hearts, minds will follow. Lead by example, not dictate. Sow seeds they will produce fruit. Instant gratification is short lived. Truth is constant, education evolves.

    And guess what, paulie, ignoring me won’t change the facts or anyone’s mind.

  77. Thomas L. Knapp

    DJ,

    You write:

    “Borders will never go away in our life time or our immediate descendants, or their descendants.”

    The facts are inconvenient to your claim.

    Borders have gone away in significant respects in our lifetimes (e.g. the Schengen Area).

    The US border in particular has historically always been open, is open now, and will remain open for as long as the United States, as currently constituted, exists. The choice there is between acknowledging that, or erecting a police state on the pretense of “securing” it, which is what’s been happening for decades.

    Libertarians don’t favor building police states for any reason.

    It’s reasonable to assume that those who advocate building a police state to do something that even a police state can’t do are more interested in having a police state than they are in accomplishing the un-accomplishable with it.

    The former are not the latter, nor, no matter how much they doth protest, are the latter the former. The fight of the former against the latter is a worthy struggle.

  78. Luke

    The ignorant Hoppebot propaganda spewed by a few in this thread is too sickening for words. The idea that a police state can and should centrally plan where billions of human beings can, can’t, should and shouldn’t move to and that this is somehow compatible with human freedom and a better world is so ridiculous it shouldn’t even have to be addressed, and yet it keeps cropping up, along with factually false claims about immigrant crime, welfare and voting patterns that have been refuted in past IPR threads too many times to count.

  79. dL

    Borders will never go away in our life time or our immediate descendants, or their descendants. Deal with it. That’s a euphoric belief that has very little to do with where we are as a society. It doesn’t matter what another thinks or claims to be correct in that regard. It serves one purpose and one only;

    The passport, a relic of monarchical feudalism, was largely abolished by liberal states in the 18th and 19th centuries. Unfortunately, the two 20th century global wars reintroduced it. Even so, it wasn’t until the late 1970s that it was illegal to leave the United States w/o a passport. So, no, I do not accept the proposition that the passport/border control is immutable part of the social order. Although I will certainly concede it is an immutable component of authoritarian governments.

    Create strife and factions. See IPR for confirmation.

    Unity of opinion or the appearance of such is not the highest goal of libertarianism. I certainly will not not subordinate the principles of liberty of movement and freedom of association to a necessity of a kumbaya moment.

  80. Luke

    If you were going to Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean you could leave the US without a passport until less than 15 years ago, and for some of those countries more recently than that. You can currently travel all over Europe in the same manner if you are European. A passport is not too different from what slaves and indentured servants got from their masters, allowing them limited permission to travel at certain designated times and to certain designated places. It is in essence the same exact thing.

  81. Anon-Tipper

    “FYI: It appears the HoppeBots will be the ones uniting with ole Bernie. Three fists!”

    I think that was inevitable. In the UK, BNP infiltrated unions and then tried to infiltrate parts of the Labour party.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1442763/Curbs-announced-on-BNP-infiltrators.html
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-contest-party-now-fears-infiltration-by-bnp-supporters-10470069.html

    Steve Davies at IEA had said recently to expect to see these far-left and far-right groups uniting. LePen’s economic platform was very similar to the socialist running.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/marine-le-pen-macron-fillion-french-elections-who-will-win-a7600206.html

  82. Luke

    Nothing new under the sun…it’s why Nazi stands for National Socialist and why Hoppe is a Marxist. George Wallace as Governor, aside from socially reactionary racism (first explicitly, later in the guise of “law and order”) was also well known for lots of social spending and government-financed construction projects all over the place. It’s why Reagan, both as Governor and President, grew spending faster than the Democrats before and after him. It’s why there were a lot of Nixon, Reagan, and Trump Democrats and why a not-insignificant number of Sanders primary voters ended up voting for Trump in the general election.

  83. Kevin

    (dl) “The ignorant Hoppebot propaganda spewed by a few in this thread is too sickening for words. The idea that a police state can and should centrally plan where billions of human beings can, can’t, should and shouldn’t move to and that this is somehow compatible with human freedom and a better world is so ridiculous it shouldn’t even have to be addressed, and yet it keeps cropping up, along with factually false claims about immigrant crime, welfare and voting patterns that have been refuted in past IPR threads too many times to count.”

    (K) Such fact-free vehemence indicates “dl” is protesting too loud.

    If existing political borders were to be completely open, that would mean, foreign terrorists, even armies, would be able to arrive anywhere without restriction. Of course, the proposal is ridiculous, which explains why there are no successful examples in history where a nation has done that.

    That immigrants (particularly third-world) vote overwhelming for Democrats is well known, and to deny that indicates an “a priori” counter-factual assumption. Even among Hispanics, Democrats outnumber Republicans by about 5 to 1. The documentation of statistics is overwhelming and to deny them is an act of faith (see the Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States#Political

    As I have previously documented, Somali average IQ is 69. Studies have shown a positive correlation between economic development and IQ. Which indicates, Somali immigrants contribute disproportionately less than more skilled/educated immigrants from high IQ areas such as Europe, Japan, or China.

    Further, Somali immigrants are over 99% Muslim and tend to have larger families, while high-IQ immigrants tend to have fewer children. Many other studies show that Pakistanis practice first cousin or sibling marriage to a high degree, and this increases defects by 10x.

    Thus, Muslim immigration leads in the direction of cultural, political, genetic, and economic dystopia.

    Political borders have become increasingly porous, as left-leaning politicians pander to immigrants in order to gain more votes. Which is one reason HHH proposes that political borders be replaced with property line borders, wherein property owners decide who gets to be on their property.

  84. Luke

    Kevin can’t even successfully identify whose comments he is addressing, much less make anything other than a tired, age-old ignorant know-nothing anti-immigrant argument. Aside from the fact that every long worn out talking point he just spewed has been addressed countless times in past IPR threads I can see why some people have stopped even taking the time to read Kevin’s comments as he has trouble even so much as identifying who he is talking to. Honestly I don’t know why I even still read his comments myself.

  85. paulie Post author

    Honestly I don’t know why I even still read his comments myself.

    I keep telling you, just stop. There are some people like Kevin and DJ whose comments are 100% a waste of time to read and even more so to respond to. I have countless better things to spend my time on and I’m sure you must as well. They don’t deserve your time and attention. It’s not that refuting anything they say presents any difficulty, it’s just that it’s been done before too many times to count and is nothing but a waste of time. If people stopped responding to them it would be good, as that would decrease the chances of me accidentally seeing their ridiculous comments being quoted by someone replying to them. Life is too short for that and it demotivates me from posting new articles here. I’m already having enough trouble finding motivation as it is. It would be nice if they just took their dinosaur worldviews somewhere else, and the sooner others here stop replying to them the sooner that is likely to happen.

  86. Kevin

    Luke and Paulie can’t resist commenting on my comments, but instead of attempting refutation, simply disparage, urging others to ignore. They protest too loudly. Like a “Lady Bountiful” intending to enlighten the masses, their self-appointed mission is rejected at the polls. Fortunately, they don’t have government power, which is one reason I believe that if all “libertarian” candidates won, that could be a disaster.

    Continuing my dialogue with DL:
    “I don’t have a particularly high opinion of the HoppeBots faculty for making valid and sound deductive arguments. My experience is that they often proceed from a vulgar inductive fallacy…e.g, clicking on sensationalized hyperlinks from the drudge report or some other source from the right wing noise machine concerning a specific occurrence to make general conclusions. A practice that merely is actively seeking to confirm one’s own bias.”

    (K) Here, DL doesn’t appear to understand the topic at hand: inductive vs. deductive reasoning. DL accuses others of confirmation bias, but this is more circular than inductive. Because the “bias” to which DL refers, stems from assumptions.

    HHH is an Austrian economist. Austrianism (which i studied in grad school) tends to avoid statistics while favoring philosophizing based on assumptions. Mises justified what he called “Aprioristic Character of Praxeology” by this argument (from page 35 of Human Action): “The fact that man does not have the creative power to imagine categories at variance with the fundamental logical relations and with the principles of causality and teleology enjoins upon us what may be called methodological apriorism.”

    Mises appears unaware of rational empiricism (a popular version of which is now known as “Objectivism”) and does subscribe to the Platonic division of reality into two spheres, one of perfect circles, the other of phenomena.

  87. Kevin

    I always welcome comments from Thomas, an apostate from our former anarcho-capitalist hawk group, whose brilliance provided a major contribution to my ground-breaking treatise, published originally in the Russian academic journal, “Modern Scientific Thought”. Here is the Knappster in his own words (my comments interleaved):

    “Here are a couple of your own delusions:

    1) The existence of some unitary “we;” with

    2) A power to “allow” (or forbid) others to move around at will on property said “we” has no valid ownership claim to.”

    (K) Ideally there would be no political borders. Immigration and trespass issues would be according to property rights to real estate. But lacking that, we have no choice but to vote to determine such policies for the existing political borders of the US. The “we” (or “them”) in the ideal case, refers to owners of real estate (and their agents, such as renters). The “we” in the present case (i.e. reality), refers to US voters.

    (Thomas) “It’s true that not all cultures or people are of equal value. The culture you advocate, and therefore the people who make up that culture, set out with the explicit goal of undermining a relatively free society.

    Authoritarianism is not libertarianism, and no amount of sophistry on your part or Hoppe’s will make the two compatible.”

    (K) Silly me, I had thought myself a libertarian. Now I am said to be “authoritarian”.

    I do accept the moral authority of real estate owners to control who gets to be on their property.

    Notions of liberty and authority are not themselves “culture” but often result from culture. Philosophy or religion are the bedrock of culture, and from them are often derived notions of political theory. Humanism is positively correlated with freedom, while faith is negatively correlated. So, the religion with the highest faith content, tends to be the most anti-libertarian. Examples include Marxism and political Islam; and what we see today is a “red-green” alliance.

  88. Luke

    “I keep telling you, just stop. There are some people like Kevin and DJ whose comments are 100% a waste of time to read and even more so to respond to.”

    When you’re right, you’re right. And you are right on that one. I wish I had all the time I spent reading and responding to their nonsense already back and I am done with them from here on out. Enough is enough.

  89. Thomas L. Knapp

    Kevin,

    I’m not an apostate from any militarist group, unless you count the Marine Corps, which I left in 1995. It took me a few (very few) years to go from jarhead to non-interventionist.

    “Ideally there would be no political borders.”

    Correct. How does voting for politicians/policies who call for “securing” or “strengthening” political boarders lead toward the ideal of no political borders?

    Answer: It doesn’t.

    Furthermore, while it is possible to vote for the “secure borders” rhetoric, a “secure borders” reality isn’t on the table in the US, which has 95,500 miles of border and coastline. There can be open borders, or there can be open borders and a police state pretending to make the borders not open. Those are the two choices. Those are the only two choices.

    Only short borders can be secured, and then only with a police state. The Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart, aka the Berlin Wall, was less than 100 miles long. More than 5,000 people crossed it without permission successfully. The high end of estimates for people who attempted and failed is 200, meaning that less than 4% of those who tried to get through it failed.

    No amount of hand-wringing about the average IQ of Somalis or the voting habits of people who don’t vote is going to stop anyone who damn well pleases from attempting to enter the United States with a near certainty of success. Nor should it, as private property owners are responsible for their own property lines and “public” property is either:

    1) Unhomesteaded property from which a violent criminal gang excludes homesteaders, in which case no respect is owed by anyone to that gang’s proclaimed turf lines; or

    2) Common property in which the citizens of the United States hold undivided interests, in which case my wish to invite people to travel over that common property to come buy from, sell to, work for, or visit me isn’t subject to your veto.

  90. DJ

    Thomas L. Knapp
    November 28, 2017 at 10:56

    DJ,

    You write:

    “Borders will never go away in our life time or our immediate descendants, or their descendants.”

    The facts are inconvenient to your claim.

    Borders have gone away in significant respects in our lifetimes (e.g. the Schengen Area).

    The US border in particular has historically always been open, is open now, and will remain open for as long as the United States, as currently constituted, exists. The choice there is between acknowledging that, or erecting a police state on the pretense of “securing” it, which is what’s been happening for decades.

    Libertarians don’t favor building police states for any reason.

    It’s reasonable to assume that those who advocate building a police state to do something that even a police state can’t do are more interested in having a police state than they are in accomplishing the un-accomplishable with it.

    The former are not the latter, nor, no matter how much they doth protest, are the latter the former. The fight of the former against the latter is a worthy struggle.
    ………….

    No the facts aren’t inconvenient to my claim. Anecdotal evidence is just that. People are tribal and will always (in the life times I stated) separate into groups claiming a border is the point of separation.
    The US border has never been “open”, per-se’, just less controlled. The Army stopped chasing Geronimo at the border. Mexicans stopped at the Rio Grand as did Americans after both discovered (usually the hard way) that things might not happen or be as they had thought. Indians didn’t recognize the border, but, the US did, and does.

    (anecdotally) I’ve lived in Texas all my life (I turn 70 next mo) except for a stint in Ca in the Navy, (in the late 60’s) and there have always been ports of entry manned by some sort of official security, but rarely was anyone (to my knowledge) stopped coming or going. People went back and forth at will, but, ports of entry were manned, meaning a border was there.

    My argument has always been: you can’t stop people from migrating. It’s been happening since man discovered putting one foot in front of the other leads somewhere else.

    That doesn’t mean stopping them isn’t tried and often successful and as we’re all aware there is the “we just haven’t done it my/our way”, which means it will continue for the life times I stated.

    The rest of what you wrote doesn’t address anything else I said, but, I will agree it is a worthy struggle, which means I don’t subscribe to borders. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist or that I don’t have to deal with them. It also means the opposite of what you think I mean if you think I subscribe to a police state.
    What part of individual rights do you not understand? Have I not made it clear that’s what I advocate for? I’ve said it more than once (though paulie can’t recognize it because he ignores me….LOL). I’m not close minded enough for his taste.

    It also doesn’t address the constant arguing about whose brand of libertarian is best, or who is best read, or who is smarter than whom or not seeing the forest for the trees or winning hearts and minds will follow, or truth is constant, knowledge evolves. Libertarians will *never* get a seat at the table, but, that doesn’t mean it’s open season on others who don’t think or act a certain way.
    Or does it?
    Arguing amongst yourselves fixes nor changes anything. Live and let live is a life philosophy, to be lived, by an individual. Period.

    Arguing about which “Libertarian” to follow is nonsense. A [l]ibertarian shouldn’t follow anyone. A [L]ibertarian is not necessarily a [l]ibertarian, regardless of his intellectual prowess. Allowing another to make the case for personal beliefs, or demanding that other is not what he/she should be is shallow, at best, and requires group think which is an antithesis to individual. And boy, it is extraordinarily evident here in this forum.

    It seems to have clout here one *must* subscribe to a particular belief system. That’s fine, but, it’s very close minded, which is disrespectful of individual rights, (which I believed was a core principle of a libertarian), and helps ensure no seat at the table.

    Being close minded means being exactly like those y’all oppose politically, which when I pointed that out to paulie a few weeks back he decided it’s best to ignore me…..LOL.

    Get out of the forest so you can see the trees. KISS. It’s not an intellectual (pseudo or otherwise) endeavor and it shouldn’t be esoteric which y’all try to make it.

  91. Kevin

    “enough is enough” says Luke, as he vows to not comment (on my comments) while he is commenting on my comments. If you don’t want to respond to my comments, simply don’t respond. Instead of making a show of how you don’t want respond. As in “protesting too loudly”.

    Thomas, Thomas…how soon you forgot the pro-military group to which you belonged, and wherein I learned at the feet of the master. There was a Yahoo group I got Tim to run, called “defend liberty”. Don’t worry, though, unlike Jihadists, we don’t execute apostates.

    Concerning your allegation that political borders can’t be enforced, please explain the Great Wall of China or Hadrian’s Wall. The US does have some border barriers, and these do reduce the flow of immigrants. Already illegal immigration into the US has drastically dropped (under the Trump administration, which has stepped up enforcement). Already orchardists are facing a labor shortage.

    I have no problem with granting work visas to Mexicans and similar. Accepting a work visa, or entering illegally, should be a bar to getting full citizenship. Ideally, voting would be restricted to honorably discharged veterans, as in Heinleins’ Starship Troopers. Already many Mexicans have been granted citizenship through that method. Worked for the Romans…

  92. dL

    published originally in the Russian academic journal, “Modern Scientific Thought”.

    Is that you, Bjornson? lol. You know, I had Kevin Bjornson on mental ignore, but not plain Kevin. So, I take back my inductive “Night at the Polka Party” references as it pertains to you. You fit more in the “get the hell off my lawn, you Somalian whipper snappers” crowd.

  93. paulie Post author

    Is that you, Bjornson? lol. You know, I had Kevin Bjornson on mental ignore, but not plain Kevin.

    “There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”

    – George W. Bush

  94. Thomas Knapp

    —–
    Thomas, Thomas…how soon you forgot the pro-military group to which you belonged, and wherein I learned at the feet of the master. There was a Yahoo group I got Tim to run, called “defend liberty”. Don’t worry, though, unlike Jihadists, we don’t execute apostates.
    —–

    I thought you meant an actual group, not an email discussion list. My recollection of that “group” is that I was neither asked to, nor did, attest to any particular agreement with the mostly militarist participant base there. I gave up on militarism before I participated in that discussion list, not during or after.

    “Concerning your allegation that political borders can’t be enforced, please explain the Great Wall of China or Hadrian’s Wall.”

    What’s there to explain? I’ve never heard that either of them were effective as border control mechanisms.

  95. steve m

    “Concerning your allegation that political borders can’t be enforced, please explain the Great Wall of China or Hadrian’s Wall.”

    for both “costly and in effective”

  96. Andy

    “steve m
    November 29, 2017 at 05:17
    ‘Concerning your allegation that political borders can’t be enforced, please explain the Great Wall of China or Hadrian’s Wall.’

    for both ‘costly and in effective'”

    So having large numbers of Marxists, theocrats, welfare leeches, and criminals, flooding into the same land area where you live, driving up the taxes, increasing the crime rates, creating more conflicts and putting a greater strain on public resources, altering the voting demographics toward more statism, and generally making life worse for most people, is not costly?

  97. Thomas Knapp

    Quoth Andy:

    “So [not pretending that it is either moral or possible to control everyone’s travels] is not costly?”

    It might be costly. But not as costly as pretending otherwise.

    The choices are:

    1) Open borders; or

    2) Open borders and a police state.

    If you advocate the latter, you’re not a libertarian.

  98. Andy

    Check out Jefferson Kim (I’m not sure if this is his real name or not, but if it is, that’s a cool name). He’s a Korean-American anarcho-capitalist libertarian who likes Rothbard/Hoppe/Rockwell/Woods/Paul/Molyneux.

    I don’t know if he was born in this country or not, but if he was not, he’d be an immigrant that I would support. If I can ever get my Libertarian Zone idea going (Roger Ver recently started something called Free Society, which is in the ballpark of my Libertarian Zone concept), I’d invite him to be a part of it. Maybe he could open up a Korean restaurant there.:)

    Libertarianism is Dead? Right-Libertarians a Minority? SJW Left-Libertarians Have Taken Over?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWCEagG7W4c&list=PLhhJ_WfiNSZ8-x4PC0rDhD9AfdXwKZWiZ&index=19

  99. Andy

    I actually do not really like the whole “left vs right” debate within libertarianism. I prefer the thin school of libertarianism over thick libertarianism (as in I prefer keeping social preferences/lifestyle choices out of libertarian discussion, as much as possible). Libertarianism is about property rights and the Non-Aggression Principle, and that’s it. Libertarianism is compatible with lots of different lifestyles, some of which a lot of people may find offensive.

    I have never really thought of myself as being on the left or on the right. Recently, I have been accused of being on the right, but a few years back, I had some people saying that I was on the left. The funny thing is that my views have not really changed during the same time period.

    My focus is on what are the best ways to go about rolling back the state. How do you go about achieving a libertarian society, and once achieved, how do you go about maintaining it, as in what defense mechanisms do you have in place to ensure that the libertarian society you are in actually stays a libertarian society?

    Jefferson Kim says in the video above that he thinks that left libertarian Social Justice Warriors are taking over the libertarian movement. I’m not so sure that this is true. There is a vocal group of left leaning SJW’s, but I don’t think that they accurately represent the greater libertarian movement. When I am out talking to the general public, the name I here the most is still Ron Paul, and Ron Paul is more associated with the Mises Institute and the right-libertarians (even though Ron Paul is not as conservative as some of his detractors make him out to be, but of course his detractors are also not among the most honest people out there). Gary Johnson going left wing Social Justice Warrior did not impress many people, from what I can tell after talking to lots of people.

  100. Andy

    Jefferson Kim on immigration and borders. I don’t think that the real debate here should be “open” borders vs. “closed” borders, but rather should be over who controls the land, the state, or private property owners? If the answer is that the state controls the land, which is our present situation in this country, as well as in pretty much all of the rest of the world, then the state’s immigration policy should be one that does not damage (by bringing in non-peaceful people), or overwhelm, the native population that lives under said government. If said government relinquishes the land over the the control of private property owners, who’d have full freedom of association/disassociation, and the state ceases to exist, who migrates/immigrates to what land would be at the discretion of private property owners, unless there was unclaimed land (which there may not be much of considering the population of the world is over 7.5 billion), which would be open for homesteading, but of course one homesteaded, that homesteader would then have control over who comes onto their land.

    Anyway, here’s what Jefferson Kim has to say on this issue.

    Libertarian Closed v Open Border Schism, Heretics vs Tradition, Reason vs Rothbard

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3guXQz8rgIk&list=PLhhJ_WfiNSZ8-x4PC0rDhD9AfdXwKZWiZ&index=18

  101. Tony From Long Island

    Leave it to Andy to turn an abortion discussion to a forum for his xenophobic immigration views . . . . The Constitution Party is calling your name, Andy . . . . Answer them because you are not a Libertarian.

  102. Tony From Long Island

    It does seem that I posted that on the wrong thread . . . my apologizes to Andy . . .and his xenophobic immigration stance 🙂

  103. Tony From Long Island

    Jill

    I don’t read Breitbart, but the yearbook has been found to be forged.

    By Whom? Breitbart? C’mon Jill. You’re smarter than that. You can just post that the yearbook “has been found to be forged” when 1) It has not and 2) you have nothing at all to back that claim up.

  104. Andy

    “Tony From Long Island
    November 29, 2017 at 08:28
    Leave it to Andy to turn an abortion discussion to a forum for his xenophobic immigration views . . . . The Constitution Party is calling your name, Andy . . . . Answer them because you are not a Libertarian.”

    So says a guy who is a Democrat.

    1) I’m an anarcho-capitalist at heart, therefore I do not really believe in the Constitution or in any government (I see constitutionally limited government only as a fallback position if we can’t get an anarcho-capitalist society)

    2) If you read two of my recent posts above, you’d see that I was praising Jefferson Kim, a Korean American. If I am as “xenophobic” as you are claiming (since what you are claiming is false), I would not do that.

    3) Lots of libertarians agree with me, including the late Murray N. Rothbard, whose nickname was “Mr. Libertarian”, and who is widely regarded as one of the most prolific libertarian writers ever.

  105. DJ

    Andy: My focus is on what are the best ways to go about rolling back the state.

    Me: Under the current parameters, the 10th amendment.

    Andy: How do you go about achieving a libertarian society, and once achieved, how do you go about maintaining it, as in what defense mechanisms do you have in place to ensure that the libertarian society you are in actually stays a libertarian society?

    Me: That’s a question I’ve asked myself. The obvious answer is you can’t. But I am open to suggestions.

    My go to is, and has been, sow the seeds of respecting individual rights they will produce fruit. That means *time* which means what I responded to in a previous post is at least 3 generations. Example is the best teacher. Win hearts, minds will follow. Truth is constant, knowledge evolves.
    I’ll add; Any abrupt change will create a catastrophe. It has to, nature dictates it.
    That said, some may want that, the blood of patriots is sometimes needed to water the tree of liberty etc. It’s hard to deny that and Jefferson was a lot smarter than me, but, seeds bearing fruit is more lasting.

  106. Tony From Long Island

    Andy:

    So says a guy who is a Democrat.

    So? What does that have to do with the fact that you are not a Libertarian? On some issues even I am more libertarian than you . . . and I am a . . . gasp . . . Democrat.

    Andy:

    you’d see that I was praising Jefferson Kim, a Korean American.

    Yeah . . .some of my best friends are Korean-American . . . . #sad

  107. Anon-Tipper

    tbh, I’m losing (maybe completely lost?) all sympathy for any of these so-called radicals. I’m looking at the Radical Caucus’ facebook page, there’s pictures and videos of Hoppe, Woods, Rockwell. On their Alaska state page, there’s a 9/11 conspiracy meme and an Eric July video (who posted this vile nonsense recently: https://www.facebook.com/notes/eric-july/hoppes-speech-on-libertarianism-the-alt-right/1534182123315455/) . They protest so much about being associated with the alt-right, claim they don’t support the LvMI’s crew’s views, yet they continue to post their shit.

    I don’t believe anything they say when they claim that no one should worry about the Mises Caucus. It’s getting extremely discouraging that so many people seem to just not care about this.

    The LP needs to take a hard look at who they’re bringing in or we risk becoming the US version of UKIP.

  108. Anon-Tipper

    Tony From Long Island: “Leave it to Andy to turn an abortion discussion to a forum for his xenophobic immigration views . . . . The Constitution Party is calling your name, Andy . . . . Answer them because you are not a Libertarian.”

    Let’s get a gofundme campaign going to refund their LP membership fees and pay for their Constitution Party fees.

  109. paulie Post author

    Anon-Tipper,

    That’s what made me back off from active participation in the Radical Caucus. That and the byzantine nature of the meetings under the new official structure. I was active in the caucus for over ten years, personally created its main facebook group and traveled on its behalf but this new direction has made me lose interest.

    The last straw was when I posted a link to http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2017/09/paul-frankel-why-libertarians-need-to-denounce-the-alt-right-and-white-nationalists-and-dont-need-to-worry-about-libertarian-socialists-and-antifa/ and got not even intelligent debate but dismissive contempt, proud ignorance and overwhelming hostility. Some people were too busy, some have problems with the IPR comment community and didn’t want to engage people here for whatever reason, some were just not willing to consider a viewpoint different from their own because they already know everything. One guy went on about how I was just fishing for clicks, even though I own 0% of IPR and have no monetary interest whatsoever.

  110. paulie Post author

    The LP needs to take a hard look at who they’re bringing in or we risk becoming the US version of UKIP.

    Yep. That and the evidence-free belief that the LP is somehow being taken over by the far left, as exemplified in the comments above. When pressed for examples there are very few ever provided – the tiny Libertarian Socialist caucus or some negative spin on something Nick said – yet the many more examples I keep providing about a far right infestation are continuously ignored.

  111. Anon-Tipper

    Paulie: “The last straw was when I posted a link to…”

    Yeah, I read through the comments a little, it seems like they’re living in an alternate reality. The only thing I can guess for why they believe this is because the LvMI has posts about cultural marxism and similar content. And if that’s the nexus of anarcho-capitalism, then that’s all they’re really going to see.

    “Yep. That and the evidence-free belief that the LP is somehow being taken over by the far left…”

    It’s not a coincidence that the same thing happened to UKIP, which had a thatcherite libertarian wing, that’s happening here. There were a few libertarians that went alt-right in the UK too, the Libertarian Alliance in the UK attends Hoppe’s conferences. I’ve always believed that there’s been “two” libertarians, with the LvMI crew just being neo-confederates cloaking their nonsense as “freedom.”

    The LP really is the only (large) libertarian source that gives them any time, if you search Reason for Tom Woods, for example, you get this:

    They actually call him a nationalist and a paleo: http://reason.com/blog/2008/08/30/the-coming-apaulcalypse
    “Woods is a bad ally for libertarians”: http://reason.com/archives/2005/06/01/behind-the-jeffersonian-veneer

  112. dL

    tbh, I’m losing (maybe completely lost?) all sympathy for any of these so-called radicals. I’m looking at the Radical Caucus’ facebook page, there’s pictures and videos of Hoppe, Woods, Rockwell. On their Alaska state page, there’s a 9/11 conspiracy meme and an Eric July video (who posted this vile nonsense recently: https://www.facebook.com/notes/eric-july/hoppes-speech-on-libertarianism-the-alt-right/1534182123315455/) . They protest so much about being associated with the alt-right, claim they don’t support the LvMI’s crew’s views, yet they continue to post their shit.

    FWIW, i looked over the LPRC facebook page and didn’t really see what you said I would see. Btw, since facebook is single greatest graph surveillance tool ever invented, I tend to avoid it when it comes to politics.

  113. Thomas Knapp

    “the Libertarian Alliance in the UK attends Hoppe’s conferences”

    The Libertarian Alliance recently changed their name to the Ludwig von Mises Centre, aka “Mises UK.”

  114. Anon-Tipper

    We have to be willing to alienate a bunch of people to get rid of this neo-confederate demographic. It didn’t hurt Cato or Reason or anyone else to ignore these people, the LP can do the same.

  115. Anon-Tipper

    dL

    Rockwell: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/posts/1746006119034141

    Woods: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/photos/a.1534391046862317.1073741828.1521914624776626/1695031937464893/?type=3&theater

    Hoppe: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/photos/a.1534391046862317.1073741828.1521914624776626/1693714917596595/?type=3&theater

    (Hopefully I didn’t mess up the links)

    Alaska page:

    9/11: https://www.facebook.com/LPRCAkChapter/posts/225715477927829

    Eric July: https://www.facebook.com/beingalibertarian/videos/vb.246976735508369/643322579207114/?type=2&theater

  116. Anon-Tipper

    “The Libertarian Alliance recently changed their name to the Ludwig von Mises Centre, aka “Mises UK.””

    Thanks, I had seen their YouTube channel still called that. Are they officially connected with the US LvMI?

  117. Thomas Knapp

    I don’t know whether or not there’s any official connection, but they’re definitely on board with the Hoppean/”paleo” abandonment of libertarianism on e.g. borders and immigration. That, far more than Austrian economics or anything actually related to Mises, seems to be the connecting ideological tissue.

  118. paulie Post author

    How ironic, given that Mises himself was a refugee from European fascism and a lifelong opponent of fascism and authoritarianism. And given how a lot of them are not big fans of Jews in general, and Mises was a Jew…

  119. Thomas Knapp

    Anon-Tipper,

    From its inception, it was reasonable to read “Ludwig von Mises Institute” as “Murray N. Rothbard Institute.” Mises was Rothbard’s mentor in Austrian economics, but outside narrow economics, it was Rothbard’s views, not Mises’s, which informed LvMI’s output.

    Since Rothbard’s death, LvMI has more and more become the “Hans-Hermann Hoppe Institute” ideologically. And these days when an organization uses the name “Mises” in its own name, the rebuttable but obvious first assumption should probably be that that organization will be pushing Hoppean authoritarianism, not Rothbardian libertarianism or Misesian liberalism.

  120. Thomas Knapp

    Paulie,

    I’m not sure if UKLP even still exists for practical purposes (I think they mostly got absorbed by UKIP). But my recollection is that while it existed, there was an ideological gulf between it and the Libertarian Alliance. Perhaps there’s a British reader here who might weigh in?

  121. Anon-Tipper

    “Does this meshuggas extend to the UKLP?”

    I’m not sure, they’re so small, I think they only got a few hundred votes last election. I know that they do not allow any anarchists in the party (I don’t like excluding people for this, but it might deter some of the LvMI crowd). They are for stricter immigration for welfare cost reasons, however. I read through it quickly, but I didn’t see any reference to culture or “voting incorrectly” like the Mises crowd does.

    https://libertarianpartyuk.com/immigration/

  122. Luke

    “We have to be willing to alienate a bunch of people to get rid of this neo-confederate demographic. ”

    Agreed.

    “Since Rothbard’s death, LvMI has more and more become the “Hans-Hermann Hoppe Institute” ideologically. And these days when an organization uses the name “Mises” in its own name, the rebuttable but obvious first assumption should probably be that that organization will be pushing Hoppean authoritarianism, not Rothbardian libertarianism or Misesian liberalism.”

    Agreed again!

  123. Anon-Tipper

    I’m not in the UK, but follow some libertarian over there online, so I just pick up a little of what’s going on.

  124. dL

    dL

    Rockwell: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/posts/1746006119034141

    Woods: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/photos/a.1534391046862317.1073741828.1521914624776626/1695031937464893/?type=3&theater

    Hoppe: https://www.facebook.com/LPRadicals/photos/a.1534391046862317.1073741828.1521914624776626/1693714917596595/?type=3&theater

    (Hopefully I didn’t mess up the links)

    Alaska page:

    9/11: https://www.facebook.com/LPRCAkChapter/posts/225715477927829

    Eric July: https://www.facebook.com/beingalibertarian/videos/vb.246976735508369/643322579207114/?type=2&theater

    hmm, you are digging back into the timeline to find those. I’m generally no going to look that hard on facebook.

  125. Anon-Tipper

    Paulie: “And given how a lot of them are not big fans of Jews in general, and Mises was a Jew…”

    It’s just a cover, tbh.

    Thomas Knapp: “Since Rothbard’s death, LvMI has more and more become the “Hans-Hermann Hoppe Institute” ideologically.”

    Yup, definitely true.

  126. Anon-Tipper

    dL: “hmm, you are digging back into the timeline to find those. I’m generally no going to look that hard on facebook.”

    It didn’t take too long to find it (there’s only 1-3 posts a month), I just was curious to see if they really repudiated Hoppe like they say they do. (And I shouldn’t have been surprised, so I guess they got me)

  127. Luke

    “I just was curious to see if they really repudiated Hoppe like they say they do.”

    Shame on them. Maybe the Libertarian Party needs a Libertarian Caucus?

  128. Thomas Knapp

    Kevin,

    Yes, the Mises Institute has articles quoting Mises. Whodathunkit?

    Here’s the thing: Mises’s views on immigration and Hoppe’s views on immigration are mutually exclusive. And among those vocally associating themselves with the Mises Institute when discussing immigration, there seem to be a lot more Hoppeans than Misesians.

  129. dL

    Yes, the Mises Institute has articles quoting Mises. Whodathunkit?

    And Whodathunk the commentariat for that piece mostly siding with Hoppe…The Miseans are a minority at Mises.org.

  130. Kevin

    Lack of knowledge of history is a big problem:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China

    As Mongol raids continued periodically over the years, the Ming devoted considerable resources to repair and reinforce the walls. Sections near the Ming capital of Beijing were especially strong. … the Liaodong Wall enclosed the agricultural heartland of the Liaodong province, protecting it against potential incursions by Jurched-Mongol Oriyanghan from the northwest and the Jianzhou Jurchens from the north.

    Towards the end of the Ming, the Great Wall helped defend the empire against the Manchu invasions that began around 1600. Even after the loss of all of Liaodong, the Ming army held the heavily fortified Shanhai Pass, preventing the Manchus from conquering the Chinese heartland.

  131. Thomas Knapp

    “Walls are good focal points for military defense against large invading armies” /= “Walls are a good way of stopping or controlling migration.

    The Great Wall itself would never have stopped an invading army, either, without scouting by the defenders to accurately predict where on the wall the invaders would try to come over en masse and an ability to mass large numbers of troops at that point. Because migration is generally an activity taken by individuals and small groups, a wall will never effectively stop it unless it is a very short wall, operated by a very large state that can conscript huge masses of troops to patrol it and then convince those troops to actually enforce its mandate instead of taking the biggest bribes they can get to let the migrants through.

    Could the US border be “secured” if every member of the active and reserve military and every member of all police agencies was put exclusively on “border patrol” to the exclusion of all other duties and if, further, every American was conscripted for two years of “border patrol” service right out of high school? Doubtful — and anyone who wants to try it is insane, a murderous thug, or both.

  132. Kevin

    (TK): “Walls are good focal points for military defense against large invading armies”
    /= “Walls are a good way of stopping or controlling migration.

    (K) Walls or other barriers can more easily stop mass migration than mass invasion. Because with mass invasion, the invaders are armed.

    “(TK) The Great Wall itself would never have stopped an invading army, either,”

    (K) Notice, you use “would” indicating a hypothetical. While history is not hypothetical but actually happened. I already posted evidence that the wall did help protect against invasions.

  133. George Phillies

    The Chinese Great Wall blocked local migration and small raids. The visitors had no way to get their horses over the wall, so they could not pass usefully. Large forces could put a hole in the wall, but this took quite some time, during which the Chinese army could march to the scene. Similarly, the Berlin Wall leaked, but it eliminated the East German demographic catastrophe — catastrophic to the East German commies — in which much of their population was departing.

  134. Chuck Moulton

    So now Andy has evolved from “I’m not racist because 1 black person agrees with me” to “I’m not racist because 1 Korean agrees with me”? Progress…

  135. Thomas Knapp

    That’s the same Ilana Mercer who migrated from South Africa to Israel to Canada to the United States before demanding that the door be slammed shut behind her so that her engineer husband doesn’t have to compete with dirty brown Indians for employment.

  136. paulie Post author

    So isn’t publishing her musing on a UK website cultural appropriation? British websites must be a safe space for British writers with British ancestors! Blood and soil! Write locally, read locally! Save the planet, abolish the airplane!

  137. paulie Post author

    Also, she moved to Israel? Is she Jewish? If so, many (most?) Hoppebots don’t consider her to be white at all.

  138. Thomas L. Knapp

    Yes, she’s Jewish — her father was a rabbi and she grew up in South Africa and Israel. That doesn’t matter to me. I’m fine with someone being born in South Africa, moving to Israel, moving to Canada and moving to the United States. But once someone does that, she shouldn’t stamp her widdew foot and proclaim that she and her husband belong here because her whining in print and his tech work are important, but brown people who underbid him on tech work, or who do utterly unimportant peasant work like farm work, cooking, landscaping, construction, etc. don’t.

  139. paulie Post author

    I’m fine with someone being born in South Africa, moving to Israel, moving to Canada and moving to the United States.

    Of course, I am too. And my ancestry is mostly Jewish. I moved from Russia to the US and spent time in a number of other countries. That’s why I know that racists don’t consider Jews to be white, even those Jews who appear to be just as white as any white person. So when she yaps about “hatred of whites” it is just as hypocritical as when she yaps about immigration, being an immigrant herself…and not what a lot of these white nationalists (racists) consider to be white.

  140. dL

    That doesn’t matter to me

    It doesn’t matter to me either, unless, of course, they start yappin like Pieter Botha. Then I consider past history to be relevant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *