January 2018 Open Thread

Welcome to this month’s edition of the open thread, our place for off-topic conversations, news tips, suggestions, discussions of stories no one has bothered to post (at least yet), etc. As 2017 ends and 2018 begins we remind you that the President has said that the war on Christmas is now officially over, so Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and please for the love of the Son, the Father and the Holy Spirit no more debates about whether to wish people a “Happy Festivus” or a “Merry Festivus”, mmmkay?

Speaking of the President, to our knowledge, there is no truth that this song is about him:

2017 was a relatively slow year for IPR, especially towards the end, with no signs at this time that 2018 will be anything but slower. So slow, in fact, that a reader this morning asks:

Is IPR officially dead?

My reply:

It’s as dead as people want it to be. Quite a few people, yourself included, are signed up to post articles and I can sign up others if they are interested, especially if I know them from the comments here or real life or blogs elsewhere or have verifiable proof they are not one of our trolls in disguise. Every once in a while I get inspired to post a bunch of articles myself, but it’s hard to sustain that momentum when no one else is posting much in the way of articles, when I get busy with other things, when I get depressed, or when there is a lot of nonsense in the comments, or any combination thereof.

At the moment it’s pretty dead. I’m hoping it doesn’t stay dead, but I’m not sure whether or when I am up for trying to revive it yet again if I don’t get much help in doing so.

Or, since we do have that pesky video posting tradition in the Open Threads, here is how me and perhaps some of the past active article posters at IPR feel about it now:

No truth, to our knowledge, that Marilyn Manson is any relation to Augustus Invictus.

And it’s not even that 2017 was all bad. In some ways it was very, very good. For one thing I spent the summer in Kentucky…

And for another…

We’ll see if the bubble bursts in 2018 or just keeps on growing but in the meantime I have started cashing out profits slowly allowing me to retire (at least for now, and maybe forever). I thought I would use the opportunity to make what I thought was a very generous offer to work as a volunteer for my state party full time for 7 months, while bringing in major outside investment to get them on the ballot statewide for the first time in 16 years, but elements of my state party connected with the Mises Caucus and the Alt Right disagree heartily. Details in an upcoming article, if I ever get around to writing it.

With so much drama in the LPA it’s kinda hard being Paulie, hey, but I somehow someway ….

Oh, who am I kidding… about the only thing I have in common with Snoop there is the actual gin and juice. Speaking of which, I was sober from June to late November last year, but from one ceremonial drink when I got back around family for the first time since February on Thanksgiving to the aforementioned LPA drama and well, next thing you know…some people call it a problem, I call it a solution…

Also speaking of LPA, there is no truth, to our knowledge, that former LPA member (and current LPNH chair) Darryl W. Perry is actually also country singer Darryl Lix:

And that’s that for 2017. Here’s resolving to try to make 2018 better. Kind of like these guys and gals:

As for me, I’m back in Alabama and with any luck will be out in the woods before too long. Maybe even somewhere with no wi-fi or cell signal…it’s all good!

72 thoughts on “January 2018 Open Thread

  1. robert capozzi

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BiNsALquAQ

    NS does a fine job here, but his narrative is getting old. On some level, he may recognize that the NAPster foundations of the LP simply don’t allow for electoral relevancy, hence his “long run” positioning.

    Perennial chess-club president is cool and all, but the quarterback gets the glory. 😉

  2. Gina

    Interesting post from Conscious Resistance. Apparently Hoppebots are now modifying “1488” to “14888” in “honor” of Hoppe. So cute.

  3. Andy

    “Gina
    January 3, 2018 at 15:48
    Interesting post from Conscious Resistance. Apparently Hoppebots are now modifying ‘1488’ to ‘14888’ in ‘honor’ of Hoppe. So cute.”

    My guess is that some people were trying to be funny, or obnoxious, or perhaps they were trying to smear Hoppe.

    Whatever their motivation was, Hoppe calls for abolishing all taxation, and abolishing the state. He also supports secession and decentralization while states exist, which is the exact opposite view of Nazis.

    Also, don’t forget that Hoppe was good friends with Murray Rothbard, who was Jewish. Calling Hoppe a Nazi is an anti-intellectual smear.

    Hans-Hermann Hoppe: THE ECONOMICS OF FASCISM, The Economic Doctrine of the Nazis
    Recorded at the Mises Institute, 7–8 October 2005.

    https://mises.org/library/economic-doctrine-nazis

  4. Gina

    Nice try, but they didn’t say anything about Hitler. The original “1488” only refers to Hitler in the last “8” and even then only in one of two accepted interpretations of “88” as that stands for David Lane’s “88 precepts” in addition to “Heil Hitler”. The “14” seems to be common ground for Hitler and Hoppe and for followers of both. “888” in the Hoppean meme stands for Hoppe’s initials and if we add the “Heil” that becomes 148888. Aside from that, you should read the rest of the Conscious Resistance article.

    “Also, don’t forget that Hoppe was good friends with Murray Rothbard, who was Jewish.”

    And don’t forget that Murray Rothbard endorsed David Duke. Also don’t forget the rest of the information about Hoppe and his cohort in the article linked above.

  5. Thane Eichenauer

    Great open thread post. Now if only Kid Rock would pursue the Democrat nomination for POTUS 2020 I would be really amused.
    Any word if PredictIt has opened betting (OK, OK, a predictions contract) on “Will Roy Moore be elected POTUS in 2020?”

  6. robert capozzi

    Gina,

    Are you sure MNR actually “endorsed” DD? I’m not finding that, although I did find some quotes where he found supportable in that his positions were inoffensive to paleo-Ls and -Cs.

    I am a critic of MNR, but I like to keep the record straight.

  7. DJ

    1488 is a FM (Farm to Market road) between Houston and Conroe, Tx. which is north of Houston. The north can only be far right if east is the top of the map and you’re north of Conroe. LOL morons. Good Lord!

  8. Gina

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism

    Paleo-libertarianism developed in opposition to the social progressivism of mainstream libertarianism.lol The ideology was presented in Murray Rothbard’s essay “Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement”, in which Rothbard reflected on the ability of paleo-libertarians to engage in an “outreach to rednecks” founded on social conservatism and radical libertarianism. He cited former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke and former U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy as models for the new movement.[2]

  9. Gina

    https://beinglibertarian.com/dear-tom-woods-murray-rothbard-indeed-suck/

    “The first person Rothbard ever endorsed was Strom Thurmond, and the last was David Duke. Can you say with a straight face this was a good political practice?”

    https://thejewishlibertarian.com/tag/david-duke/

    Murray Rothbard wrote about Duke’s political program:

    “It is fascinating that there was nothing in Duke’s current program or campaign that could not also be embraced by paleoconservatives or paleo-libertarians; lower taxes, dismantling the bureaucracy, slashing the welfare system, attacking affirmative action and racial set-asides, calling for equal rights for all Americans, including whites: what’s wrong with any of that? And of course the mighty anti-Duke coalition did not choose to oppose Duke on any of these issues. Indeed, even the most leftist of his opponents grudgingly admitted that he had a point. Instead, the Establishment concentrated on the very “negative campaigning” that they profess to abhor (especially when directed against them). (Ironic note: TV pundits, who regularly have face lifts twice a year, bitterly attacked Duke for his alleged face lift. And nobody laughed!)”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/02/where-did-donald-trump-get-his-racialized-rhetoric-from-libertarians/?utm_term=.d1b9e5a51fd9

    “These and many other controversial views advocated by Mises writers make sense from a fanatical libertarian viewpoint. But they also originate in a political calculation Rothbard revealed in a 1992 essay lamenting the defeat of Republican white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke in the 1991 Louisiana governor’s race by a bipartisan coalition.

    Expanding on themes raised two years earlier by his longtime partner and friend Llewellyn “Lew” Rockwell, an editor and fundraiser for libertarian causes, Rothbard argued that Duke’s candidacy was vitally important because it made clear that the “old America” had been overthrown by “an updated, twentieth-century coalition of Throne and Altar” and its “State Church” of government officials, journalists and social scientists.”

  10. Gina

    “1488 is a FM (Farm to Market road) between Houston and Conroe, Tx.”

    Yes and de Nile is a river in Egypt.

    “LOL morons. Good Lord!”

    Not as dumb as you want everyone to be apparently.

  11. dL

    1488 is a FM (Farm to Market road) between Houston and Conroe, Tx. which is north of Houston. The north can only be far right if east is the top of the map and you’re north of Conroe. LOL morons. Good Lord!

    1337 is a street address for dozens, if not hundreds, of businesses and firms within the US. However, if you are a hacker, or familiar with the hacker scene, you know 1337 is also slang for “elite”(leet).

    Likewise, 1488 is a known slang for white power, or some derivative thereof. However, unlike 1337, which I learned 1st hand back in the day, 1488 is something I learned second hand fairly recently.

  12. dL

    Are you sure MNR actually “endorsed” DD? I’m not finding that, although I did find some quotes where he found supportable in that his positions were inoffensive to paleo-Ls and -Cs.

    Bob, in “Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement”
    http://rothbard.altervista.org/articles/right-wing-populism.pdf

    Rothbard certainly did enthusiastically endorse Duke as a model for libertarian strategy. It’s an old canard for someone to spend lots of intellectual effort and time evangelizing someone to converts and defending the same from detractors and then try to BS qualify it with, “well, I actually didn’t say go out and vote for the guy.” It’s the exact same tired modus operandi Rothbard protege Justin Raimondo tries to pull off with Trump.

    Note: as has been said before, the difference between Rothbard and Hoppe is that for Rothbard, paelo was strategic. For Hoppe, it is theoretic. It’s the difference between saying that appealing to redneck republican voters is the best way to advance libertarianism at this point in time vs white supremacism is a necessary condition to advance libertarianism, period. Hoppe is an unabashed white supremacist.

  13. robert capozzi

    Gina and dL,

    So, there was no formal “endorsement” of DD’s candidacy, but there was support for DD from MNR, it sounds like.

    I certainly believe that the paleo offshoot of NAPsterism is a cautionary tale. DD and other Haters should be avoided like the plague, and yet the late Pope of NAPsterism lacked the judgment to do so.

    My hope is non-paleo NAPsters — seeing just how fucked up MNR was — use the example to rethink NAPsterism.

  14. Andy

    “Gina
    January 4, 2018 at 04:44
    Nice try, but they didn’t say anything about Hitler. The original ‘1488’ only refers to Hitler in the last “8” and even then only in one of two accepted interpretations of “88” as that stands for David Lane’s “88 precepts” in addition to ‘Heil Hitler’. The ’14’ seems to be common ground for Hitler and Hoppe and for followers of both. ‘888’ in the Hoppean meme stands for Hoppe’s initials and if we add the ‘Heil’ that becomes 148888. Aside from that, you should read the rest of the Conscious Resistance article.”

    The 14888 comment was clearly an attempt at tying Hans-Hermann Hoppe in with Nazis, which is a smear, and a lie.

    As for common ground, you can find common ground between all kinds of people who may otherwise have lots of disagreements, including left libertarians and communists.

    How about an article about purging leftists?

    Gina, you seem to have a great interest in the Libertarian Party. Can you tell us what state party where it is that you are a member? I have never heard of you.

  15. Andy

    dL said: “Hoppe is an unabashed white supremacist.”

    This is another lie. Hoppe is not seeking to rule over anyone. He advocates that the state be abolished and a voluntary society emerge.

    The way that some people misrepresent Hoppe shows their lack of intellectual capacity, and/or lack of intellectual integrity. Hoppe correctly points out that a libertarian society would have private property and freedom of association. This means that people would be free to associate, or not associate, with whoever they want, for whatever reason, and that they could invite onto or exclude whoever they wanted from their property. He points out that this would solve a lot of conflicts that arise in society as like minded people could form covenant communities, and he even says that people would be free to exclude Germans like himself, if they so desired. Hoppe gets attacked over his “physical removal” concept, but this is no different that a hotel kicking out an unruly guest, as a person would only be “physically removed” if they violated the contract with the property owner and/or covenant community. He correctly points out that you aren’t going to have a libertarian society if you are surrounded by communists or democrats, or other people hostile to liberty. If you disagree with him, as in if you think that you can have a libertarian society, and fill it with lots of communists, democrats, and theocrats, then how about inviting a bunch of people like this to the Libertarian National Convention next year and see what the results are (this is sort of what happened at the last three presidential nominating conventions, as in there were a good number of people there who were not even really libertarians, and/or who were just extremely naive, voting to select the party’s presidential ticket, which is why the last three presidential tickets for the LP have not been plausibly libertarian).

    Hoppe says that if people want to live in a very left wing type of community in an anarcho-capitalist society, they’d be free to do that, so long as they don’t infringe on the rights of people who chose to live differently. He does not believe that a left wing type of community would be very successful in an anarcho-capitalist society, but he believes that people have the right to form such communities so long as they do so on a voluntary basis.

  16. Andy

    As for Murray Rothbard’s comments about David Duke, I don’t think that they were an outright endorsement of Duke.

    On the flip side of this, there are some libertarians out there that did outright endorse Bernie Sanders for President (or at least to win the Democratic party’s primary). Steve Kubby and IPR’s very own Warren Redlich come to mind.

    Also, what about libertarians who made positive remarks about Ralph Nader?

    If Rothbard is to be demonized for a comment he made about Duke, how about demonizing libertarians who made positive comments about socialist Sanders and socialist Nader? Or does is there are double standard here where it is OK for self professed libertarians to make positive comments, and even outright endorse, left wing socialists, but not anyone who is associated with the political right?

    Oh, and at one time, Rothbard did in fact pursue a left wing strategy by working with people on the left. Should he be criticized by that too, or should be only be criticized for pursuing the right wing “paleo” strategy?

  17. DJ

    Andy: Or does is there are double standard here where it is OK for self professed libertarians to make positive comments, and even outright endorse, left wing socialists, but not anyone who is associated with the political right?

    Me: Yes right wing politics is verboten (LOL) here because, apparently, the leftist here won’t recognize the left as it’s recognized in ‘this’ country as being anti-freedom.

  18. DJ

    Gina: Not as dumb as you want everyone to be apparently.

    Me: Morons. Notice the difference in spelling?

    mo·ron
    ?môr?än/
    nouninformal
    noun: moron; plural noun: morons

    a stupid person.
    synonyms: fool, idiot, ass, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, imbecile, cretin, dullard, simpleton, clod;
    ……………..

    dumb
    d?m/
    adjective
    adjective: dumb; comparative adjective: dumber; superlative adjective: dumbest

    1.
    temporarily unable or unwilling to speak.
    “they stood dumb while the attacker poured out a stream of abuse”
    synonyms: mute, speechless, tongue-tied, silent, at a loss for words; taciturn, uncommunicative, untalkative, tight-lipped, close-mouthed;
    informalmum
    “she stood dumb while he shouted”
    2.
    resulting in or expressed by speechlessness.
    “they stared in dumb amazement”
    synonyms: mute, speechless, tongue-tied, silent, at a loss for words; taciturn, uncommunicative, untalkative, tight-lipped, close-mouthed;
    informalmum
    “she stood dumb while he shouted”
    3.
    datedoffensive
    (of a person) unable to speak, most typically because of congenital deafness.
    “he was born deaf, dumb, and blind”
    synonyms: mute, speechless, tongue-tied, silent, at a loss for words; More
    taciturn, uncommunicative, untalkative, tight-lipped, close-mouthed;
    informalmum
    “she stood dumb while he shouted”
    (of animals) unable to speak as a natural state and thus regarded as helpless or deserving pity.
    4.
    North Americaninformal
    stupid.
    “a dumb question”
    synonyms: stupid, unintelligent, ignorant, dense, brainless, mindless, foolish, slow, dull, simple, empty-headed, stunned, vacuous, vapid, idiotic, half-baked, imbecilic, bovine; More
    informalthick, dim, moronic, dopey, dozy, thickheaded, fat-headed, birdbrained, pea-brained;
    daft
    “he is not as dumb as you’d think”
    antonyms: clever
    5.
    (of a computer terminal) able only to transmit data to or receive data from a computer; having no independent processing capability.

    verb
    verb: dumb; 3rd person present: dumbs; past tense: dumbed; past participle: dumbed; gerund or present participle: dumbing

    1.
    informal
    simplify or reduce the intellectual content of something so as to make it accessible to a larger number of people.
    “critics have accused publishers of dumbing down books”
    become less intellectually challenging.
    “the need to dumb down for mass audiences”
    2.
    literary
    make dumb or unheard; silence.
    “a splendor that dazed the mind and dumbed the tongue”
    ………………

  19. Cody Quirk

    Since Sessions declared war on state sovereignty & individual liberty today, I’ve reconnected with my inner Irish rebel and am getting back into active politics now.

    I’m also never casting my vote for ANY GOP candidate again; I’d rather abstain from voting in a race where there are no Libertarians or independents running.

  20. DJ

    CQ: I’m also never casting my vote for ANY GOP candidate again; I’d rather abstain from voting in a race where there are no Libertarians or independents running.

    Me: I determined that when BO was running. I noticed (finally) there is no difference between Left/Right Party hierarchy, i.e. POTUS and congress critters, except the rhetoric they use to sell their BS. Our monetary policy determines foreign policy which determines domestic policy and they do not enhance, or protect Individual Rights, and neither side has historically done their job in that arena, which I believe is their main job according to the oath they take when elected.

    Obama running against Romney caused me to look at Ron Paul (fueled by my oldest son and a couple acquaintances one of whom I call friend), as well as my personal beliefs which led me to calling myself libertarian, not to be confused with Libertarian.
    I look at the Libertarian representation here on IPR and it validates my personal belief about the collective mind set. With the exception of Andy (whom I don’t agree with on borders) most everything and everyone here is a representation of the lefts hysteria where anything Republican is evil. Though I don’t subscribe to Republican anything the hysteria displayed on IPR by Libertarians (except Andy) is frighteningly close to that of college kids and paid protesters.

  21. paulie Post author

    As for Murray Rothbard’s comments about David Duke, I don’t think that they were an outright endorsement of Duke.

    They were.

    On the flip side of this, there are some libertarians out there that did outright endorse Bernie Sanders for President (or at least to win the Democratic party’s primary). Steve Kubby and IPR’s very own Warren Redlich come to mind.

    Also, what about libertarians who made positive remarks about Ralph Nader?

    If you don’t recognize that Duke is far more politically toxic than Nader or Sanders, you don’t belong anywhere near practical politics. Being associated with white supremacists, white nationalists, the KKK and neo-nazis is the political equivalent of rolling around in nuclear waste and walking around with a Geiger counter going nuts around you all the time. It’s like advertising that you are HIV-positive and still won’t use condoms on a dating site. Sure, Nader and Sanders are horribly wrong on some issues, especially economic issues, but being associated with them is not nearly the kiss of death that being associated with far right extremist bigots is.

  22. paulie Post author

    Or does is there are double standard here where it is OK for self professed libertarians to make positive comments, and even outright endorse, left wing socialists, but not anyone who is associated with the political right?

    It’s not a double standard, it’s a qualitative difference. And extremist bigots are not “anyone who is associated with the political right.” David Duke isn’t Romney, Bush, Dole, Kemp or Reagan.

    Oh, and at one time, Rothbard did in fact pursue a left wing strategy by working with people on the left. Should he be criticized by that too, or should be only be criticized for pursuing the right wing “paleo” strategy?

    He was at his best when he pursued a left-friendly strategy and at his worst when he allied with the bigoted far right. Unfortunately he died in one of his far right stages and his followers have been to some extent stuck in that repulsive gutter, and most recently have taken a sharp turn for the even worse, severely sullying anyone and anything branded as libertarian in the process. IMO it’s an existential crisis for libertarianism.

  23. paulie Post author

    The 14888 comment was clearly an attempt at tying Hans-Hermann Hoppe in with Nazis, which is a smear, and a lie.

    Nope, follow the CR link. The “14888” pic was put up by a Hoppe supporter. 14 words + HHH and HHH does appear to be a fervent believer in the “14 words” based on numerous statements he has made.

    As for common ground, you can find common ground between all kinds of people

    It depends on what that common ground is. If their common ground is the white nationalist “14 words” regardless of whether they are nazis or white nationalist anarcho-capitalists they are still the same kind of slime and should both be ostracized, for the same reasons.

    How about an article about purging leftists?

    I prefer the one I already linked. Purge the fascists and work on finding ways to work together with leftists and bring over the persuadable ones to libertarianism while making libertarian outreach rhetoric more left-friendly. It’s the only way for libertarianism to not go down the drain along with fascism and racism.

  24. paulie Post author

    So, there was no formal “endorsement” of DD’s candidacy, but there was support for DD from MNR, it sounds like.

    I don’t know what definition of “formal endorsement” you are splitting hairs over.

    1992 essay lamenting the defeat of Republican white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke in the 1991 Louisiana governor’s race by a bipartisan coalition.

    Expanding on themes raised two years earlier by his longtime partner and friend Llewellyn “Lew” Rockwell, an editor and fundraiser for libertarian causes, Rothbard argued that Duke’s candidacy was vitally important

    When you have a person lament Duke’s defeat in one of his runs for office, say his candidacy was “vitally important” and claim there is “there was nothing in Duke’s current program or campaign that could not also be embraced by paleoconservatives or paleo-libertarians” what more do you need to call that an endorsement?

    DD and other Haters should be avoided like the plague

    Yes, very much agreed.

  25. paulie Post author

    Since Sessions declared war on state sovereignty & individual liberty today, I’ve reconnected with my inner Irish rebel and am getting back into active politics now.

    I’m also never casting my vote for ANY GOP candidate again; I’d rather abstain from voting in a race where there are no Libertarians or independents running.

    Yes, Sessions is doing exactly what he has promised and what I predicted all along. I hate to see my predictions coming true like this. Much more to come from where that came from.

  26. paulie Post author

    Rothbard certainly did enthusiastically endorse Duke as a model for libertarian strategy. It’s an old canard for someone to spend lots of intellectual effort and time evangelizing someone to converts and defending the same from detractors and then try to BS qualify it with, “well, I actually didn’t say go out and vote for the guy.” It’s the exact same tired modus operandi Rothbard protege Justin Raimondo tries to pull off with Trump.

    Exactly.

    Note: as has been said before, the difference between Rothbard and Hoppe is that for Rothbard, paelo was strategic. For Hoppe, it is theoretic. It’s the difference between saying that appealing to redneck republican voters is the best way to advance libertarianism at this point in time vs white supremacism is a necessary condition to advance libertarianism, period. Hoppe is an unabashed white supremacist.

    Yes, Hoppe is the worst sort of bigot. Utterly disgusting.

  27. paulie Post author

    Jeffrey Tucker, who currently has a book, Right wing collectivism, the other threat to liberty,” out on Amazon, has suddenly attached himself to Trump’s jock. Cognitive dissonance….

    Very unfortunate, especially since his book is right on the money and he had Trump pegged to a “T” in his articles during the campaign as an authoritarian, would-be dictator.

  28. paulie Post author

    Any word if PredictIt has opened betting (OK, OK, a predictions contract) on “Will Roy Moore be elected POTUS in 2020?”

    Dunno, but I’m willing to make a bet against that.

  29. dL

    most everything and everyone here is a representation of the lefts hysteria where anything Republican is evil.

    Hmmm… I would counter that the American libertarian movement actually exhibits a broad leftist derangement syndrome . The consequence of 70 years of conservative fusionism. I can guarantee you that if an elected Clinton had matched Trump’s current bluster on trade, Amazon, foreign policy, drugs and press freedom, you wouldn’t be seeing anyone pontificating about Clintonian libertarianism or bothering with penning articles disputing the merit of such vapid nonsense. Nor would anyone be demanding a fairness doctrine to give equal criticism to the republicans.

    Indeed, if an elected Clinton had barked aloud about Amazon needing to raise shipping prices to better compensate the victimized US Postal service–all because of her butthurt over bad press from the Washington Post–then any dupe still clinging to a Clinton libertarian bent would have metaphorically, if not literally, been taken out behind the woodshed for a tar and feathering.

    Not so with Trump. There is still a healthy libertarian enterprise out there bent on selling a Trump deregulatory prosperity. If you think there is a leftist libertarian slant against Trump here, well it’s not necessarily the norm elsewhere.

  30. dL

    And he was 100% correct.

    Unabashed refers to not even bothering with the dog whistle. He comes right out and says it in the clearest possible language in his essay, “(Race) Realistic Libertarianism.”

  31. paulie Post author

    Hmmm… I would counter that the American libertarian movement actually exhibits a broad leftist derangement syndrome . The consequence of 70 years of conservative fusionism.

    Most indubitably. And large segments of it have strong alt right tendencies where the slip and slide into outright fascism somehow makes sense. It’s sickening, and so far beyond counterproductive that words don’t truly express it.

  32. Anon-Tipper

    I’ve found a weird moral relativist tendency with the lvmi crew. Which leads them to idolize people like Pinochet and support David Duke, they really seem to just care what the end result “might” be, like the market reforms in Chile under Pinochet, they don’t care that thousands were killed and tortured, just that the market was “freed.” They’re like libertarianism’s version of tankies.

    I’m not surprised by Tucker, he didn’t have a problem writing a eulogy for anti-semite Sobran. And someone else from from FEE made a post joking about Pinochet recently.

    On a more positive note, I’ve noticed some of the alt righters getting pushed out of some of the libertarian reddit subs lately. I think there’s more “good” libertarians than it seems at at times.

  33. dL

    I’ve found a weird moral relativist tendency with the lvmi crew. Which leads them to idolize people like Pinochet and support David Duke, they really seem to just care what the end result “might” be, like the market reforms in Chile under Pinochet, they don’t care that thousands were killed and tortured, just that the market was “freed.” They’re like libertarianism’s version of tankies.

    Well, Tucker is no longer associated with LvMI, and I would contend there is a difference between Mises and say, FEE, the last place Tucker worked at. FEE, like a lot of libertarian economic publications, essentially have substituted “prospertarianism” for libertarianism.

    Bastiat, in his work, Economic Sophisms, wrote that the only practical use of economics was the identification of plunder. Indeed, absent plunder, the social science becomes a superfluous study(as plunder –>0, the social order–>perfection).

    Prospertarianism, on the other hand, has as its chief aim the identification of “prosperity” and is often quite selective with what it identifies.

    E.g, the Trump tax cut and the Trump Admin’s repeal of Obama’s net neutrality rules==the case for the Trump prosperity and the Trump libertarian drift. The prospertarian will dissect certain reductions in marginal rates as evidence of coming prosperity boom whereas the libertarian might skeptically view the entire thing at best as a zero sum game(the sheer volume of the passed law is sufficient to guarantee that it is at best zero sum). The prospertarian will proclaim the repeal of Net Neutrality as a deregulatory boon for internet freedom whereas the libertarian might view net neutrality as a war between two rent-seeking, self-serving interests.

    While I don’t think prospertarianism is rooted in an advancement of white identity politics, it nonetheless is more than willing to overlook quite a bit of that stuff if there is, say, a marginal tax rate cut being dangled at the end of the stick. It leads to the old saying, “a libertarian is a republican who likes to XXX.” Obviously, I don’t think that is an accurate statement vis a vis libertarianism, but there is some to truth to that when it comes to the prospertarians.

  34. dL

    NAPsters square off:

    Actually, that was a debate between a libertarian and a property-grabbing, gun-grabbing bigot…

  35. dL

    I’m not surprised by Tucker, he didn’t have a problem writing a eulogy for anti-semite Sobran. And someone else from from FEE made a post joking about Pinochet recently.

    On a more positive note, I’ve noticed some of the alt righters getting pushed out of some of the libertarian reddit subs lately. I think there’s more “good” libertarians than it seems at at times.

    RE: Sobran. Sobran was syndicated by my local newspaper when I was in middle school/high school. I read him every week, and I would have to credit him to some extent for my conservative skepticism at the time. Though internet publishing would later identity him to be a paleoconservative, I don’t recall that con cultural stuff, other than abortion, dripping from his newspaper columns . IIRC, the real crawl up his ass was Shakespeare.

  36. Andy

    “dL
    January 7, 2018 at 00:57
    NAPsters square off:

    Actually, that was a debate between a libertarian and a property-grabbing, gun-grabbing bigot…”

    You are being a bit hard on Adam Kokesh. Adam put forth a weaker argument, but I would not call him a bad guy. I think that Adam is sincere when he says that his end game is for a private property anarcho-capitalist society, but I don’t think him wanting to use the guns of the state to force integrate large numbers of people from other countries (many of whom are hostile) into the democratic welfare state in which we live is a realistic way of achieving a free society. Fortunately, Adam’s presidential campaign platform bypasses this and other political issues, by kicking everything back to the state or local level, as he wants to completely shut down the federal government, so under a hypothetical President Kokesh, immigration/migration would go back to the states, as under this scenario, the 50 states would all become independent countries, and I don’t think that most states would implement an “open borders” mass welfare statist migration program, or at least I think that there’d be several states that would not do this, so there’d be options available for those among the current US population who don’t like being overwhelmed by large numbers of “immigrants” with hostile ideologies.

    Adam Kokesh and Stefan Molyneux both say they have the same end goal, as in both ideally want a private property anarcho-capitalist society. The private property anarcho-capitalist society that Adam says that he wants would not have “open borders” as it would have private property borders, so to achieve a society like this, all land and infrastructure would have to be privatized, and coercive government would have to be completely abolished. “Open borders”, which should be more accurately called government relinquishing control over land to private property owners (which means that private property owners would have the right to discriminate, and would not have money extracted from them for Marxist wealth redistribution via taxation), will not work under any context that does not include abolishing coercive government and establishing a private property anarcho-capitalist society, and Stefan Molyneux eloquently pointed out reasons why it would not work under our present democratic welfare state paradigm.

    I do not really agree with Stefan Molyneux for supporting Donald Trump in the 2016 election (but of course he did so from the sidelines since he’s a Canadian citizen and does not even live in this country), but I also don’t fully agree with what Adam Kokesh advocated last year, as Adam correctly pointed out that Gary Johnson and Bill Weld were not really libertarians, but that people should vote for them anyway, just so a vote gets recorded for the Libertarian Party. Blind support for an organization is not a good thing. If the Libertarian Party can’t nominate candidates that are plausibly libertarian, and Adam himself admitted that Gary Johnson and Bill Weld were not libertarians, then I dob’t think that it is a principled action to vote for candidates who do not even come close to adhering to the principles of the organization for which they were supposed to have been representing, the Libertarian Party. Voting for Johnson/Weld sent the message of, “Hey Libertarian Party National Convention delegates, we don’t care who you give us as candidates, or how far they stray from your party’s platform, we will just go vote for them anyway, just because they have an “L” next to their names.” The only argument that I could see for voting for Johnson/Weld, was if you lived in one of the few states where ballot access for 2018 was dependent on the presidential vote. This was not nearly as many states as some people thought it was, but there were some states where this was this the case (like Kentucky and Oklahoma, for a couple of examples), so I can excuse people who were in these states for voting for Johnson/Weld for this reason, but even with this, I’d say that the slim majority of 2016 national convention delegates certainly did create a crappy situation where people in some states had to vote for such an unprincipled presidential ticket if they wanted the party to retain ballot access for 2018.

    \
    It should be acknowledged that Stefan Molyneux never claimed that Donald Trump an ideal candidate, and he has criticized some things that Trump has done post election, like the missile attack against Syria. The fact of the matter is that the circumstances of the 2016 presidential election was situation where there were no good choices. I know that this is a painful reality check to some people out there who claim to be Libertarians, but casting a vote for Gary Johnson/Bill Weld was not a principled thing to do, and even if I were to give Gary Johnson the benefit of the doubt for being a lesser evil as compared to Trump and Clinton, it should be pretty clear to anyone who does a rational analysis of the facts that Bill Weld could not be trusted, and that he’s a ruling establishment shill, and given his obvious great influence over Gary Johnson, we probably would not be any better off if the unlikely scenario of Gary Johnson had won the presidential election, and given how goofy and unprincipled Gary Johnson is, him not winning the election was a good thing, as if he had won, it would have permanently discredited libertarianism. Molyneux did not get behind Trump because he thought that he was a really principled candidate, or because he believed that Trump was going to move the USA into an ideal libertarian ancap society. He got behind Trump because Hillary Clinton was a dreadfully horrible candidate who was going to destroy what is left of Western Civilization, so he, and some others from the libertarian quadrant, like Walter Block, got behind Trump because they wanted to block (pun with Walter Block’s name intended) Hillary Clinton from winning the White House, and to delay the destruction of the USA (even though Stefan lives in Canada, Canadians are facing a lot of the same problems as the USA, and what happens in the USA effects Canada). Whether or not this was a sound strategy is open to debate, but it should be pretty apparent that the Libertarian Party did not offer the public a strong or principled choice, and that there were no good choices in the 2016 presidential election that was on enough state ballots to have had a theoretical chance of winning the election.

    I am really glad to see that Stefan and Adam were willing to come together and have an adult conversation on this issue. I think that both of these men have made important contributions to the liberty movement, and I applaud them for engaging in open civil discourse.

  37. Thane Eichenauer

    Those folks interested in Libertarian James “Free me from all this clothing” Weeks can read a tiny bit about his campaign against US senator from Michigan Debbie Stabenow. The long article also mentions several other non-R, non-D candidates including a couple of Green party candidates and an independent running against Justin Amash. All candidates in this article are running for federal office. The article includes links to some campaigns.
    http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/01/see_whos_running_for_congress.html

  38. Thane Eichenauer

    James Weeks has a campaign domain name that sadly does NOT include any campaign positions interpreted into dance moves.
    http://weeksforsenate.com

    It does forward to a podcast which I might flatter as being Vermin Supreme-esque 0.2 as if Weeks did not exist in a world with pervasive video recording. We all know the future of politics is male interpretive dance [Adam Kokesh is proof of this. One of his best arrests was for politically incorrect dancing.]
    http://podcasttitlesareaspook.com/episode-3-making-the-lolberts-into-podcast-titles-are-a-spook-to-fulfill-my-ego/

  39. Anon-Tipper

    dL: “Well, Tucker is no longer associated with LvMI, and I would contend there is a difference between Mises and say, FEE, the last place Tucker worked at. FEE, like a lot of libertarian economic publications, essentially have substituted “prospertarianism” for libertarianism.”

    I should give Tucker more credit for leaving. Thanks for the “prospertarianism” explanation, seems to be a pretty accurate description of what’s motivating some people.

    “RE: Sobran. Sobran was syndicated by my local newspaper when I was in middle school/high school. ”

    Sobran was fired from National Review in 1993 for anti-semitism and in 2002 spoke at the Institute for Historical Review, and in 2001 and 2003 spoke at conferences organized by David Irving.

  40. dL

    Sobran was fired from National Review in 1993 for anti-semitism

    Well, I didn’t read The National Review, and it’s unclear from accounts whether the offense at the time was for anti-Zionism or antisemitism.

    and in 2002 spoke at the Institute for Historical Review, and in 2001 and 2003 spoke at conferences organized by David Irving.

    Well, I was no longer even reading the local newspaper by that time. In other words, I’m not going to condemn the fact that I read his newspaper columns based on what he did a decade or so later. From my recollection, his columns back in the day were usually quite good, even if I didn’t always agree with him, particularly wrt abortion.

  41. DJ

    dl: If you think there is a leftist libertarian slant against Trump here, well it’s not necessarily the norm elsewhere.

    Me: most everything and everyone HERE is a representation of the lefts hysteria where anything Republican is evil. (verbatim except the use of upper case for clarification).

    I’ve yet to see anything positive about Republicans (elected or otherwise) or anything negative about Democrats (elected or otherwise) HERE.

    It was even pointed out to me in another thread that the leftist slant I see here is reflective of the ‘original’ left of the European tradition. However, I’ve yet to see anything positive about Republicans (elected or otherwise) or anything negative about Democrats (elected or otherwise, who, in this country represents the left) HERE. Add to that that I could care less about anything European (presently or Historically) unless used in reference to; All conflict is caused by one forcing his will on another, which (to me) is indicative of entrenched Anglo superiority belief.

  42. DJ

    To dl: I’m not looking to pick a fight with you. You’re obviously well read and, and I really do appreciate your knowledge, but, I think at times your views are too esoteric. That, to me, turns people off. Most people won’t take the time to absorb, never mind study, the depth you present. And, if I may, a quote (I saw credited to the “evil” Republican William Buckley): Intelligence makes the complicated seem simple.

    The KISS theory works best in today’s world with today’s lack of attention span.

  43. Anon-Tipper

    dL: “Well, I was no longer even reading the local newspaper by that time. In other words, I’m not going to condemn the fact that I read his newspaper columns based on what he did a decade or so later.”

    His views definitely changed, so yes you’re correct, he wasn’t always like that, he started calling himself a “theo-anarchist” around 2002. My problem was that he *was* like that at LvMI and Tucker would’ve known his views. (However, I should give Tucker credit for leaving)

    “Prospertarianism has been a pet peeve of mine for years….”

    I’ll give that a read tonight, thanks again!

  44. dL

    but, I think at times your views are too esoteric.

    nah, I follow Bastiat: the libertarian message is meant for the rift raft; the priests can save themselves.

    The KISS theory works best in today’s world with today’s lack of attention span.

    It is simple. The state is a fickle master that serves itself. Woe to those who think they can use it to vanquish their political enemies or achieve their moral ends. Because that which is done to them will eventually be done to you.

  45. DJ

    dl: It is simple. The state is a fickle master that serves itself. Woe to those who think they can use it to vanquish their political enemies or achieve their moral ends. Because that which is done to them will eventually be done to you.

    Me: Been saying the same thing (with different words) for years. It amazes me how many people can’t recognize that.

  46. dL

    Me: Been saying the same thing (with different words) for years. It amazes me how many people can’t recognize that.

  47. Jonathan Makeley

    So, the Libertarians are up 312 2018 candidates. They still have a ways to go before they can get close to that 2000 goal.

  48. dL

    Apparently Arvin said something else controversial recently. I haven’t seen what it was yet… just allusions to it on the LNC business list.

    Sexual consent laws? Well, I read his latest facebook post on the topic and do not concur with his premise that government involvement in sexual consent laws creates more one night stands. And I say that as a proud participant in countless random acts of fornication. The state had nothing to do with it.

  49. Matthew Cholko

    Arvin said some Libertarian shit. A bunch of FB “libertarians” freaked out (as they always do). Arvin doubled down.

    That’s basically the whole thing.

  50. William Saturn

    “Sure, Nader and Sanders are horribly wrong on some issues, especially economic issues, but being associated with them is not nearly the kiss of death that being associated with far right extremist bigots is.”

    Donald Trump is President.

  51. William Saturn

    Others have said it and the perception exists. Nevertheless, he won the election.

    The same perception existed with Judge Roy Moore. And he would have won election to the Senate had it not been for the underage sex claims.

  52. paulie Post author

    Trump and Moore both denied any association with racism. Are you saying they could have won if they had acknowledged it?

  53. William Saturn

    Trump probably would have lost because he won by such a slight margin in WI, MI, and PA. It probably would have pushed enough people the other way. But with Moore, absent the sex claims, I think he still would have won if he acknowledged an association with racism.

  54. DJ

    Thoughts?

    For two days after his two years in jail, Cliven Bundy’s supporters got to listen, talk and learn from their hero

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/644098b7-a708-36a5-b936-cf01d6286bf2/ss_for-two-days-after-his-two.html

    Not just the article but the whole fiasco.
    Personally, I don’t call very many people a hero, but, will admit “ordinary people doing extraordinary things” is the definition I subscribe to.

    I think/believe he was right, but, it has been a while since I read anything other than his release and why it happened. I do think the judge got it right though.
    I’m all for defeating the gov’t (at any level) and I do admire his tenacity in his attempt.

  55. paulie Post author

    Trump probably would have lost because he won by such a slight margin in WI, MI, and PA. It probably would have pushed enough people the other way.

    I agree.

    But with Moore, absent the sex claims, I think he still would have won if he acknowledged an association with racism.

    I disagree. I think the same primarily suburban and urban, mostly moderate, relatively younger, relatively more female and slightly more racially diverse GOP and GOP-leaning constituencies that tended to go for Strange or not vote in the primary and tended to stay home, write in or cross over for Jones in the general election would have done the same in equal or greater numbers if Moore openly acknowledged association with racism in no uncertain terms. With or without sex scandal.

  56. dL

    That great prospective libertarian hero, Jeff Flake. Fraud..

    oh, and LOL, Boaz. Sad day, indeed!
    https://www.cato.org/blog/sad-day-republic

Leave a Reply

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