Tom Woods: Why the Race for Libertarian Party Chair Is So Contentious

75 thoughts on “Tom Woods: Why the Race for Libertarian Party Chair Is So Contentious

  1. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2018/05/tom-woods-why-the-race-for-libertarian-party-chair-is-so-contentious/

    How about some truth in advertising. This is an interview with Joshua Smith AGAIN. OK, I listened, took notes, and replied.

    Smith says we can ask any question. I still haven’t gotten two answers on FB specifically to him:
    * is it ok for LP Vet caucus guys to make joke threats to shoot LNC member Arvin Vohra at 2018 national convention?
    * will he oppose war on Iran and a military draft if there is a war? (Saying “I’m big antiwar” without sounding like he even knows what the heck the issues are and who is pushing for that war and why is pretty feeble.)

    Smith says LP focuses too much on identity politics. (CM: Like what? Taking too much – pro or con – about white nationalism?? Too much immigration and pro-“La Raza” talk? Too much female supremacy talk? Too many flagrant LGBTs? Please be specific.

    Someone mentions that Heise endorsed Weld on Tom Wood’s show previously!! Wood’s gets upset about it. Smith prefers to find someone better than Weld. (CM: Good point and I agree with that one.)

    Woods: As Chair do you believe in scolding? Or just scolding the right people.

    Smith: I don’t want to purge people, which my initial platform sounded like. (CM: another good point! One of his running mates who at one point looked like “they” wanted to purge me with big lies might be unhappy about that!)

    Smith describes the orderly fashion in which he would – as I’ll put it – herd LNC cats. How many LNC meetings has he been too?

    Smith: “Let’s be loud about nonintervention and tell Americans their money going to pay for killing brown people overseas.” (CM: Yes, it would be nice to hear that loud and clear!!!!)

    I don’t know why he worries about LNC helping grass roots, when LNC easily can revert to a position of NOT being able even to pay the rent – or the mortgage – or even salaries. And enough LNC members know it that they aren’t going to put much more money into grass roots than they are currently.

    When Smith loses he should run for At Large to replace Starchild who admits he might have been there long enough for now.

    If Smith wins, I wish him luck!!

    Then comes the real excitement: Woods is coming to convention with “top notch, super successful people.”

    Jeff “blood and soil” Deist will be there. https://mises.org/wire/new-libertarian
    I wonder, to apologize for ranting about “blood and soil” two weeks before Nazis marched in Charlottesville and inferring that every libertarian woman should have six kids for the revolution? (Or will they just recruit non-libertarian women. Assuming these guys can raise enough money to woo a woman and support even one child!)

    Woods beats chest about his successful friends vs. LP loser ideologues. Bleah…

    Smith will welcome Woods and friends into party if he’s elected. And then he jokes about the great hurricanes they have in New Orleans. Tin ear??

    Well, change can be interesting. Time will tell…

  2. Andy

    Carol, i just reposted the title of the video on YouTube. If you do not like the title, take it up with Tom Woods (the title likely came from Woods, or perhaps somebody who works with him). Maybe Tom Woods, or somebody who works with him, thought that this title would get more hits than calling it Interview with Joshua Smith.

    Michael Heise never endorsed Bill Weld. There was a rumor that he had endorsed Ted Cruz, and that is also completely false. Heise supported Ron Paul in 2008 and in 2012, and he was supporting Rand Paul until he got knocked out of the Republican primary (note that he is a bigger fan of the father than the son). Heise did end up supporting Gary Johnson for President in 2016, but he would have preferred that the LP had nominated somebody else, and he supported Johnson more because of a lack of viable options, and because he had hoped that getting more votes for the LP’s ticket would help set the party up for future success. He did not think that Johnson was a good candidate, and he strongly dislikes Bill Weld.

    I interviewed Joshua Smith at the LP of California State Convention, which is posted here at IPR, plus I talked to him off camera, part of which was when I drove him to get lunch. He sounded like he is strongly opposed to military imperialism/interventionism.

    Your comments about Jeff Deist are ridiculous exaggerations. His speech where he made the “blood and soil” comment at the end was about decentralization. This was not a “Nazi speech,” as Nazis supported a strong centralized state, and Hitler was in fact a fan of Abraham Lincoln (as was Karl Marx), because he was opposed to secession and he opposed the decentralist concept of “state’s rights” in favor of a strong national central government. Deist made the comment that while a lot of Libertarians do not care about things like culture and religion, that a lot of people do, so rather than trying to get people to stop caring about things like this, which Deist believes is a losing strategy, that libertarians would be better served selling people like this on the concept of decentralization. He said that the libertarian ideal is that all 7.5 billion people in the world should each be their own country, but if we can’t have that, that a world broken up into smaller states, like Lechtenstein and Luxembourg would be better than what exists now. His comment about libertarians not having enough kids was not suggesting that people should be forced to have kids, as he waa pointing out that there are not enough libertarians in the world, and that one way to possibly increase the number of libertarians in the world would be if libertarians had more kids. Libertarians having kids does not guarantee that their offspring will be libertarians, but it increases the odds, particularly if their parents engage in peaceful parenting, and if they home school them.

  3. Anon-Tipper

    is it ok for LP Vet caucus guys to make joke threats to shoot LNC member Arvin Vohra at 2018 national convention?

    I almost forgot about that. That’s horrible.

  4. Andy

    I do not believe that Joshua Smith thinks that anyone should shoot Arvin Vohara. Also, keep in mind that Vohara made a comment which many. (myself included) considered to be inappropriate when he said that school board members should be shot. I do not have a problem with the concept of violent revolution against a corrupt and abusive government, but targeting school board members does not strike me as being necessary or appropriate, even though I agree that the education system sucks. Vohara did say that he meant it as a joke, but some people did not take it that way.

  5. Anon-Tipper

    Andy,

    You won’t see me making excuses for Vohra’s statement, I posted his latest “nazis are better than teachers” posts in the open thread because I think it’s getting out of hand with him. It was a horrible thing to say.

    Still doesn’t detract from what was said in the Vet Caucus.

  6. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Andy WROTE: May 21, 2018 at 08:51
    Michael Heise never endorsed Bill Weld. There was a rumor that he had endorsed Ted Cruz, and that is also completely false.

    CM: Those are contemporaneous notes above. Re listen, maybe around the middle. I guess Woods is more likely to err on who said what on his show than Smith.

    ANDY: Your comments about Jeff Deist are ridiculous exaggerations. His speech where he made the “blood and soil” comment at the end was about decentralization. This was not a “Nazi speech,”

    CM: The phrase is a key NAZI slogan. Americans use it now as was proved in Charlottesville. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_and_Soil

    ANDY: Deist made the comment that while a lot of Libertarians do not care about things like culture and religion, that a lot of people do, so rather than trying to get people to stop caring about things like this, which Deist believes is a losing strategy, that libertarians would be better served selling people like this on the concept of decentralization. He said that the libertarian ideal is that all 7.5 billion people in the world should each be their own country, but if we can’t have that, that a world broken up into smaller states, like Lechtenstein and Luxembourg would be better than what exists now.

    CM: He says that libertarians must focus on defacto ethno states as a strategy, as opposed to focusing on a diversity of types of decentralized communities/cities/regions. I strongly object to that.

    ANDY: His comment about libertarians not having enough kids was not suggesting that people should be forced to have kids, as he waa pointing out that there are not enough libertarians in the world, and that one way to possibly increase the number of libertarians in the world would be if libertarians had more kids.

    CM: IF he’s a pro-life anti-choice prohibitionist he’s all for forcing women to have unwanted children. In any case, good luck alt-right povertarians in getting married, not to mention supporting kids.

    Andy: May 21, 2018 at 09:41
    I do not believe that Joshua Smith thinks that anyone should shoot Arvin Vohara.

    CM: Who cares what you think? Why doesn’t he answer? Because 100 “libertarian” veterans would get pissed if he broke the bond of blood brothers (of military supremacy??)

    Is this what military guys REALLY think of us civilians? Which side ARE the vets on? Smith should let us know what side HE is on!!
    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/john-kelly-and-the-language-of-the-military-coup
    We don’t look down upon those of you who haven’t served,” he said. “In fact, in a way we are a little bit sorry because you’ll have never have experienced the wonderful joy you get in your heart when you do the kinds of things our servicemen and women do—not for any other reason than that they love this country.”

    I made a meme:
    https://www.facebook.com/hardcorelibertarianmemes

  7. Andy

    Carol, there is nothing unlibertarian about people self segregating by any criteria they desire, including by ethnicity, race, religion, economic class, life style choice, or etc… Many people already do this as their natural preference.

    Libertarianism is about property rights and the Non-Aggression Principle, and that’s it.

  8. Paul

    So Smith doesn’t want to purge the alt-right anymore? That’s entirely unsurprising.

  9. Anon-Tipper

    So Smith doesn’t want to purge the alt-right anymore? That’s entirely unsurprising.

    Why would he purge his base? lol That’s why he keeps going on about identity politics, but doesn’t give any specifics.

  10. Andy

    What Alt-Right is there to purge? I am not aware of any large Alt-Right contingent. How is this even defined? Other than possibly this Ryan Ramsey character, I do not know who these people are. A much larger and influential contingent of “Libertarians” (] use this term loosely,
    especially when it comes to anyone who’d support Bill Weld) who are screwing up the LP and who deserve to be purged are the Johnson/Weld supporters. The Johnson/Weld contingent were also some of the people who brought us Barr/Root.

    Who is this Paul character? What State LP are you a memberof and how long have you been a member? I assume this is not the Paul who has been posting here since the beginning since he posts as Paulie. I am asking due to the large number of troll posts that have popped up over the years.

  11. Thomas L. Knapp

    When Deist made the “blood and soil” remark, I took it as a joking poke at Jeffrey Tucker, who had (the week before Deist’s speech) used the phrase negatively in an essay.

    That the slogan came up again in Charlottesville the following week strikes me as an unlucky coincidence.

    BUT: Woods is his own, and Deist’s, worst enemy. When asked to sign a “libertarians don’t support fascism” letter, he made a big public deal of “why should I need to do anything like that?” when, as a founding member of the group screaming that slogan in Charlottesville, he would probably have done his reputation more good than most of the people who DID sign. Instead he got all butthurt and indignant about it, and decided to challenge Nick Sarwark on the subject. Always a bad idea. Nick figuratively dragged him down the hall and gave him a swirlie, and Woods and his followers haven’t stopped whining about it since. He’s essentially been pulling a supposedly libertarian version of Al Sharpton style victim posturing for the better part of a year now.

  12. Paul

    Andy, your latest comment honestly came off as creepy.

    Smith originally took a middle-of-the-road approach on his calls for purging. He wanted to purge both the alt-right and the libsocs. I’m guessing he got support and friendship from one of those groups. He’s not the first person to do this. Remember when Steve Scheetz, who is running for vice chair (and holds positions in the radical caucus), endorsed a Hitler-loving “not a Nazi” for Senate in Florida? Scheetz isn’t alt-right, but he easily befriended and helped folks who are. Such people should not be elected to positions of trust.

    I wonder if he is now okay with the surprisingly tame libsoc caucus.

  13. dL

    When Deist made the “blood and soil” remark, I took it as a joking poke at Jeffrey Tucker, who had (the week before Deist’s speech) used the phrase negatively in an essay.

    The commentariat didn’t take it as a joke.

    That the slogan came up again in Charlottesville the following week strikes me as an unlucky coincidence.

    Yeah, but the shit hit the fan over that remark(Horowitz’s rebuttal screed ignited the backlash) before the tiki torch parade.

  14. Andy

    Tom Woods is more popular than ever, and his YouTube channel has many times more subscribers and viewers than LP national’s YouTube channel, and this does not even include the people who follow his show via podcast.

    I have heard that the LP Mises Caucus is going to have an event that is going to be held in New Orleans during the same time frame as the LP National Convention, and I have heard that Tom Woods is going to be there. I would bet that Tom Woods would be willing to debate any of his detractors in person, and to have it put on video and posted online.

  15. Anon-Tipper

    Nick figuratively dragged him down the hall and gave him a swirlie, and Woods and his followers haven’t stopped whining about it since. He’s essentially been pulling a supposedly libertarian version of Al Sharpton style victim posturing for the better part of a year now.

    Queue the podcast download bragging and Ron Paul based purity tests.

    (Hopefully this works)

    He definitely has me beat in podcast episodes downloaded. You got me there, kiddo. https://t.co/IQYImyLZNm— Nicholas Sarwark (@nsarwark) August 15, 2017

    https://twitter.com/nsarwark/status/897282927943274500

  16. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Andy May 21, 2018 at 22:55
    Carol, there is nothing unlibertarian about people self segregating by any criteria they desire, including by ethnicity, race, religion, economic class, life style choice, or etc… Many people already do this as their natural preference.

    CM: I didn’t say it is unlibertarian to want to do it. I think it is unlibertarian to insist that it is the first and best way to organize libertarian decentralist means of breaking up the nation states. Especially those already extremely cosmopolitan like the US. Because then you are encouraging people to purge their communities, counties, cities of whatever minorities are least liked. An non-libertarian demogues will do that of course for their own profit, stealing their property and businesses as they drive them out. Guess that point was not as obvious as I thought and will add from now on!

  17. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Thomas L. Knapp May 22, 2018 at 09:36
    When Deist made the “blood and soil” remark, I took it as a joking poke at Jeffrey Tucker, who had (the week before Deist’s speech) used the phrase negatively in an essay.

    CM: Unfortunately since a lot of that happened on twitter/facebook or some other truncated venue, there doesn’t seem to be a clear timeline of what happened when. So of course people interpret the timing differently and then waste a lot of time fighting about it. Though it does seem to me Woods was far more in the wrong.

  18. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Here’s one reply to Sarwark: “He definitely has me beat in podcast episodes downloaded. You got me there, kiddo.” https://t.co/IQYImyLZNm— Nicholas Sarwark (@nsarwark) August 15, 2017

    “guys like Tom Woods, Scott Horton, Austin Petersen, yourself make me want to be a part of the liberty movement. Guys like Sarwark dont.”

    The problem is, just about any one who enters the party and starts that struggle for power ends up getting disliked and even hated by a lot of people. Look at Rothbard, Paul, Mary Ruwart, Aaron Russo, Michael Badnarik, Gary Johnson, Bill Weld (who was a cool republican but shit libertarian), etc. So join, Woods, join. See how many fans he loses. ha ha ha

  19. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Just as a recap of whether Deist meant it as a joke here https://mises.org/wire/new-libertarian — here’s last three paragraphs of article:

    Quote:
    We probably wouldn’t fight for bitcoin, or net neutrality, or a capital gains tax hike, by the way.

    How about an abstraction, like fighting for “your country” or freedom or your religion? This is where things get more tenuous. Many people have and will fight for such abstractions. But if you ask soldiers they’ll tell you that in the heat of battle they’re really fighting for their mates, to protect the men in their units–and to fulfill a personal sense of duty.

    In other words, blood and soil and God and nation still matter to people. Libertarians ignore this at the risk of irrelevance.

    End quote.

  20. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Per Anthony and RE: Nukes. Arguing about private nukes is dumb (unless some terrorist group privatizes one?) However, given Trump might yet nuke North Korea and/or Iran, nuclear weapons and strategy and how to stop nuclear war SHOULD be a top three LP issue. And at least Woods and Smith agree on LP taking stronger anti-war stand.

    For that reason alone, much as I might nit pick them on other things, I won’t quit the party as soon as Smith’s elected. Of course, if he turns around and pushes to make it the anti-abortion party …. where is the HQ in VA and how topless can I get protesting outside it?? ha ha ha OOOH, and I have GIANT chalk for sidewalk painting. What’s a bit more permanent without being vandalous??

    DL wrote on Deist end of June blood and soil quote: “… but the shit hit the fan over that remark(Horowitz’s rebuttal screed ignited the backlash) before the tiki torch parade.”

    Lot’s of people didn’t hear about it til AFTER Charlottesville – I didn’t. So again getting timelines straight and when something erupts from commentariat to proletariat (or whatever) is relevant.

  21. Thomas Knapp

    “Unfortunately since a lot of that happened on twitter/facebook or some other truncated venue, there doesn’t seem to be a clear timeline of what happened when.”

    The essential timeline went like this:

    – Jeffrey Tucker wrote an article titled something like “nations are ideas, not blood and soil.””

    – About a week later, Deist made the remark you quote above, which in context was pretty clearly poking at Tucker’s idea.

    – Shortly after THAT, Charlottesville.

    – And shortly after that, instead of just admitting he was taking a poke at Tucker, Deist went on Woods’s show and tried to defend the expression.

    The Mises folks aren’t always wrong. But when they are wrong, they quickly turn into their own worst enemies if called on it. They seem hardwired to throw their hands in the air, start screaming “smear!” and turning into a gaggle of mutant Social Justice Warrior snowflakes.

  22. dL

    Per Anthony and RE: Nukes. Arguing about private nukes is dumb

    Obliging an argument with the troll caucus is dumb. Engaging the minority of libertarians who in good faith think prohibiting ownership of nukes is a moral violation is not. After all, debate/argument is why you have a message board.

    DL wrote on Deist end of June blood and soil quote: “… but the shit hit the fan over that remark(Horowitz’s rebuttal screed ignited the backlash) before the tiki torch parade.”

    Lot’s of people didn’t hear about it til AFTER Charlottesville – I didn’t. So again getting timelines straight and when something erupts from commentariat to proletariat (or whatever) is relevant.

    The commentariat refers to (i) the comments to the speech/article posted at Mises (ii) external posts/articles referring to the posted article at Mises.

    The timeline of the shit fan is:

    (i) Tucker published an article in early July last year entitled
    “The West Is a Portable Idea, Not Blood and Soil”
    https://fee.org/articles/the-west-blood-and-soil-or-portable-idea/

    that criticized Trump’s Poland speech from a few days before that defined “the West” as a people, not an idea.

    (ii) Deist gave a speech a few weeks later entitled “For a New Libertarian”
    https://mises.org/wire/new-libertarian

    that basically argued that libertarianism as an idea is not enough(ironically, Mises in “Liberalism in the classical tradition” devoted quite a bit of space rebutting the notion that liberalism as an idea was not enough). Deist probably did use the term “blood and soil” as a verbal jab of sorts to Tucker, but contra Knapp, it was not meant as a joke. Indeed, the term is entirely consistent with Hoppean social critical theory. The commentariat certainly did not take it as a joke. Now, not everyone agreed with Deist, but no one took it as jest.

    (iii) Horowitz in early August published a rant, “The Rhetoric of Libertarians and the Unfortunate Appeal to the Alt-Right,” at Bleeding Heart Libertarians
    http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/08/rhetoric-libertarians-unfortunate-appeal-alt-right/

    which equated “Blood and Soil” with Nazism. This triggered a social media war.

    (iv) The Unite the Right March, Charlottesville, Aug. 12th
    Lo and behold, Nazis and Nazi wannabes marching around chanting blood and soil presented a spectacle of two parts horror, one part farce. Needless to say, the “blood and soil” agitprop disappeared from the paleo lexicon and retreated back to the Stormfront gutter.

    (v) Libertarians Against Fascism Pledge
    On the same day as the Unite The Right Rally, some libertarians(in a rather prescient move, it turns out), put up a pledge to disavow any libertarian association with the event that featured “former libertarians” on the card.
    https://libertyagainstfascism.wordpress.com/

    When the rally blew up nationally, a Sarwark-Woods splat flared on social media over signing the pledge. As Knapp pointed out:

    [Woods] he made a big public deal of “why should I need to do anything like that?” when, as a founding member of the group screaming that slogan in Charlottesville, he would probably have done his reputation more good than most of the people who DID sign

    Woods played the victim card. Soon thereafter, an organizational effort began–under the auspices of a Mises Caucus–to change party leadership.

    My Conclusion:
    Although the ideas of Mises the historical figure are compatible with a libertarian party, the reinvented Mises perpetrated by the likes of Deist is not. It’s a fraud. Viewed in a void, the platform of the Mises Caucus appears compatible with a libertarian party, but if caucus leaders are palling around with the likes of Deist, it’s hard not to see it as anything than “blood and soil” entryism.

  23. Thomas Knapp

    “Although the ideas of Mises the historical figure are compatible with a libertarian party, the reinvented Mises perpetrated by the likes of Deist is not. It’s a fraud.”

    Bingo.

  24. dL

    Bingo.

    Reading Mises’ “Liberalism in the classical tradition” reads today like a rebuttal of the “reinvented” Mises(in particular, the chapter “The Psychological Roots of Antiliberalism”). Of course, the primary target of that book when written was the totalitarianism of the Prussian/German “blood and soil” variety. To claim that Mises was a “blood and soil” libertarian is mind boggling. It’s an indictment that people simply do not bother with reading the source material.

  25. Anon-Tipper

    To claim that Mises was a “blood and soil” libertarian is mind boggling. It’s an indictment that people simply do not bother with reading the source material.

    Or, he’s used as a front to hide their bullshit.

  26. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    dL wrote: May 25, 2018 at 03:38

    The timeline of the shit fan is: AND HE INCLUDES DETAILED ONE….

    CM: Thanks a lot! I think I might have a few more details in my files if I look. But yours does spell out clearly it might not have been a COINCIDENCE Mises Caucus started right after.

    As I’ve said before, there were some blood and soil apologists on the FB group and those rejecting that view. I got kicked off in December after criticizing Ms. Hamilton (who quit party soon after) and about same time Ms. Harlos started consorting with them, even as she denounced the alt-right aspects.

    So can’t say what the closed group posts look like now. However see a number of friends there who aren’t just lurking and spying so it can’t be TOO bad. Here’s the open group: Which SURPRISE started 8/17/17, right after Charlottesville on August 11-12. I see in my files Sarwark-Wood tweet war was going on August 14 and assume before that. Will research more if necessary. (UGH)

  27. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Has anyone – probably Tucker – done a systematic analysis of how much Mises Institute messes with Mises, or Rothbard, for that matter? Especially since August 2017?

  28. dL

    As I’ve said before, there were some blood and soil apologists on the FB group and those rejecting that view. I got kicked off in December after criticizing Ms. Hamilton (who quit party soon after) and about same time Ms. Harlos started consorting with them, even as she denounced the alt-right aspects.

    Other than for developer purposes, I don’t use Facebook, and I more or less shake my head at people who continue to use it as a platform for political speech.

  29. dL

    Has anyone – probably Tucker – done a systematic analysis of how much Mises Institute messes with Mises, or Rothbard, for that matter? Especially since August 2017?

    No. IMHO, Tucker is more of a stream of consciousness thinker than a systematic one, and while he is not where he was 20 years ago, he still carries around some paleo baggage. He may attack Trumpism but never LRC, and he is only mildly critical of Hoppe from what I can tell.

  30. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    dL: well, I can see someone who does know what the story is needs to do it.

    Or someone who wants to spend 50 hours researching. I don’t volunteer. 🙂 Except on the decentralization issue, if I would just stop pay attention to LP stupid dramas.

    Am I to live the last few years as a dramatarian instead of a systematizer? That is the question I ask myself daily as I beat myself with a wet noodle.

  31. paulie

    Andy, your latest comment honestly came off as creepy.

    Smith originally took a middle-of-the-road approach on his calls for purging. He wanted to purge both the alt-right and the libsocs. I’m guessing he got support and friendship from one of those groups. He’s not the first person to do this. Remember when Steve Scheetz, who is running for vice chair (and holds positions in the radical caucus), endorsed a Hitler-loving “not a Nazi” for Senate in Florida? Scheetz isn’t alt-right, but he easily befriended and helped folks who are. Such people should not be elected to positions of trust.

    I wonder if he is now okay with the surprisingly tame libsoc caucus.

    No, Paul is not Paulie, but Paulie does agree with Paul.

  32. paulie

    BUT: Woods is his own, and Deist’s, worst enemy. When asked to sign a “libertarians don’t support fascism” letter, he made a big public deal of “why should I need to do anything like that?” when, as a founding member of the group screaming that slogan in Charlottesville, he would probably have done his reputation more good than most of the people who DID sign. Instead he got all butthurt and indignant about it, and decided to challenge Nick Sarwark on the subject. Always a bad idea. Nick figuratively dragged him down the hall and gave him a swirlie, and Woods and his followers haven’t stopped whining about it since. He’s essentially been pulling a supposedly libertarian version of Al Sharpton style victim posturing for the better part of a year now.

    Yes, and Smith is squarely on the side of Woods and Deist in this. I also rather doubt that Deist’s blood and soil remark was either a coincidence or a joke. Smith defended it to me personally. He also keeps defending Ramsey. Regardless of whether Smith is just good at hiding his own alt right views or genuinely just completely oblivious to the extent of his alt right entryist support base, he represents an existential danger to the LP. He has serious momentum for chair and I am very concerned with that, to say the least.

  33. paulie

    “Although the ideas of Mises the historical figure are compatible with a libertarian party, the reinvented Mises perpetrated by the likes of Deist is not. It’s a fraud.”

    Bingo.

    +1

  34. paulie

    Reading Mises’ “Liberalism in the classical tradition” reads today like a rebuttal of the “reinvented” Mises(in particular, the chapter “The Psychological Roots of Antiliberalism”). Of course, the primary target of that book when written was the totalitarianism of the Prussian/German “blood and soil” variety. To claim that Mises was a “blood and soil” libertarian is mind boggling. It’s an indictment that people simply do not bother with reading the source material.

    Exactly.

  35. paulie

    To claim that Mises was a “blood and soil” libertarian is mind boggling. It’s an indictment that people simply do not bother with reading the source material.

    Or, he’s used as a front to hide their bullshit.

    So is Joshua Smith, if in fact he is not secretly one of them.

  36. paulie

    Has anyone – probably Tucker – done a systematic analysis of how much Mises Institute messes with Mises, or Rothbard, for that matter? Especially since August 2017?

    It should really be renamed the Hoppe Institute at this point.

  37. paulie

    Trump is the worst sort of fascist. Hoppe, Woods, the “Mises” Institute, the “Mises” Caucus, “Libertarians for Trump,” the Alt-Right which was literally coined, defined and created by then Ron Paul superfan Richard Spencer and frequent Lew Rockwell writer Paul Gottfried – and whose “official statement” came out of Charlottesville at the hands of Augustus Invictus, Christopher Cantwell and Richard Spencer, now full blown sieg heiling nazis – Jeff “Blood and Soil” Deist, the Ron Paul newsletter crew and their praise for David Duke and Pat Buchanan, Rothbard and his support for Strom Thurmond… it’s all one piece of blood soaked shit leaving an indelible stain and choking the life out of the LP and the libertarian movement.

    Mixing libertarianism and fascism just doesn’t work. It never can. It’s how libertarianism, and liberty, dies. Enough is enough. We are at the point where this cancer is destroying the freedom movement and the party and must be cut out for us to survive if it is not too late already.

  38. dL

    I think Roderick ended his association with the Blood and Soil Institute. I certainly hope so.

    Yes, I think any further association has been permanently untethered. It was a loose one to begin with, other than the coincidental geolocation proximity.

  39. dL

    Mixing libertarianism and fascism just doesn’t work. It never can.

    Isn’t it interesting how fascists always steal the word “freedom”?
    Henrik Vanger, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

    Fascism is an opportunistic parasite that breeds from the injustices of liberal failure. Of course, so too does libertarianism, anarchism and marxism breed from the same failure. Of course, the latter three are not held to be reactionary, but it is hardly unprecedented for people to move back and forth between those 4 ideologies.

    To me, Trump is more Mussolini than anything. “Drain the swamp” is taken directly from Mussolini’s political economic program. People forget(or they don’t know in the first place) that in between his move from socialism to fascism, Mussolini spent time as a Manchester liberal. His early economic program propaganda more or less was to drain the swamp with Manchester liberalism(laissez faire). You can still see remnants of that in the “Program of the Fascist National Party”

    http://www.instoria.it/home/programma_partito_nazionale_fascista.htm


    Foundations
    The Nation is not the mere sum of the living individuals nor the instrument of the parties for their ends, but a body comprising the indefinite series of generations of which the individual are transient elements; it is the supreme synthesis of all the material and immaterial values of the lineage.[Blood and Soil]
    .
    .
    .
    The State
    The state must be reduced to its essential functions of political and juridical order.[Classical liberal]
    .
    .

    Eternal vigilance…

  40. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Paulie wrote: Yes, and Smith is squarely on the side of Woods and Deist in this. I also rather doubt that Deist’s blood and soil remark was either a coincidence or a joke. Smith defended it to me personally. He also keeps defending Ramsey. Regardless of whether Smith is just good at hiding his own alt right views or genuinely just completely oblivious to the extent of his alt right entryist support base, he represents an existential danger to the LP. He has serious momentum for chair and I am very concerned with that, to say the least.

    Carol wrote: He’s definitely after votes, without caring too much where they come from. I think after he talks to a lot of serious delegates and can’t answer or gives wrong answers to a lot of questions, some will reconsider.

    He does have a legitimate issue of LP not being hard core enough and certain isn’t getting the message out in any serious way. And Arvin who was supposed to be in charge of that has been just plain destructive, I must now say loudly.

    But I doubt we can trust Smith’s allies to take the party in the right direction message wise, and they obviously intend to emphasize on messaging. Mushy or probably nasty. Not a great choice for leadership.

  41. paulie

    Carol wrote: He’s definitely after votes, without caring too much where they come from. I think after he talks to a lot of serious delegates and can’t answer or gives wrong answers to a lot of questions, some will reconsider.

    I don’t think enough people will have enough time to dig deeply enough. He is good at answering questions well enough to satisfy most delegates.

    He does have a legitimate issue of LP not being hard core enough and certain isn’t getting the message out in any serious way.

    I used to think so, but honestly all I care about anymore is getting the reich wingers the hell out of the party, movement, and if I could, off this planet altogether. Blast them at the sun, the moon or the stars on a one way trip. The problem with the LP is not being too extreme or not extreme enough; it’s being too cozy with the right wing, especially its most ugly, bigoted, nationalistic, fascistic far right authoritarian elements. But also including the more moderate right. The party and the movement verbally, rhetorically and in its recruiting leans so far to the right that it is in serious danger of keeling over, to the extent that it’s a miracle of sorts that it hasn’t toppled yet and getting worse by the minute. It’s taking on water and ready to sink. To survive, it must cut its right wing ballast.

    To thrive, it must burn all bridges to the right and build new ones to the left. As it is, it treads water at best and takes on water at worst. To really take off we must do one thing first and foremost: jettison the right wing completely, immediately and permanently, in such unmistakable fashion that no one would ever mistake us for right wingers – especially the racist far right – ever again. Until and unless that happens the party and movement is largely useless to counterproductive. Under a “Mises” junta it becomes entirely counterproductive and should be blasted out of the water so hard that not a molecule of it remains intact.

  42. paulie

    And Arvin who was supposed to be in charge of that has been just plain destructive, I must now say loudly.

    Yeah, Arvin has also become far too conciliatory/friendly to the far right invaders, even though like Larry Sharpe he is not what they consider to be white (ie in their eyes not fully human). As long as Arvin, Larry, Adam Kokesh (who is of Jewish ancestry) and anyone else allies with or makes excuses for these reich wing takeover entryists I can’t support them.

  43. paulie

    But I doubt we can trust Smith’s allies to take the party in the right direction message wise, and they obviously intend to emphasize on messaging. Mushy or probably nasty. Not a great choice for leadership.

    The party has made some very tentative but encouraging steps in the correct – that is left – direction since Nick Sarwark has been chair. That momentum needs to be kept up and increased, not reversed as Smith will do if he wins – and at this point it is looking highly likely he will win.

  44. dL

    That momentum needs to be kept up and increased, not reversed as Smith will do if he wins – and at this point it is looking highly likely he will win.

    Based on what?

  45. paulie

    My “ears to the ground” observation of discussions among active delegates, talking to various people on the phone who spend a lot of time keeping up with delegate opinions and trends, talking to people who have been travelling to the various state conventions, and so on.

  46. Andy

    Joshua Smith’s father is Jewish. That does not mix very well with Nazis.

    My impression of Joshua Smith after meeting him in Long Beach is that he is a good guy and a fine libertarian.

    As for Jeff Deist’s “Blood and Soil” comment in that speech, there was absolutely nothing wrong with his context, and it was a good speech on libertarian strategy and decentralization. Anyone who thinks that it was a “Nazi speech” is irrational and delusional.

  47. robert capozzi

    pf: To survive, it must cut its right wing ballast.

    me: Good luck with that, given the LP’s stands on economics.

  48. paulie

    Joshua Smith’s father is Jewish. That does not mix very well with Nazis.

    Meh. Lots of Jews and part-Jews have allied with nazis, and vice versa. Hitler may have even been part Jewish, although there is no proof of that. Certainly lots of nazis and neo-nazis alike have been, in whole or in part, of Jewish ancestry. There’s no shortage of Jews working with nazis whether as kapos in the third reich or in any number of capacities. And of course, nazis always made exceptions for individual Jews they could work with – all the way back to the original nazis in Germany. Today, Ryan Ramsey writes openly how stupid it is to not make individual exceptions.

    This applies even to professed antisemites like an alt right leader and “Daily Shoah” host – another former so called libertarian – the fat pimply guy who led the Hitler salute party at the Richard Spencer celebration of Trump’s win. Turns out this guy stayed married to a Jewish woman the whole time and some of his fellow fash allege he is part Jewish ancestry himself. So much for that.

    Joshua Smith may or may not secretly hold some of those views – regardless, or even because of, his ancestry, assuming you are correct about it. But even assuming he does not hold those views himself, he is being used by people who do, and either doesn’t know or doesn’t care. Since when have nazis shied away from using Jews? Do neo-nazis hire Jewish lawyers? Of course they do.

    Functionally, he is being used by fash. It doesn’t matter whether or not he is secretly fash himself or not, whether or not he is part Jewish and whether or not he is a self-hating part-Jew. None of that is relevant.

    Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and say he really is not in any way fash himself, just oblivious to people such as Ramsey being fash. Does that change anything? No. Either way he represent the tip of the spear helping wedge a hole for the fash entryists to enter and take over the party.

  49. paulie

    As for Jeff Deist’s “Blood and Soil” comment in that speech, there was absolutely nothing wrong with his context,

    Bullshit.

    and it was a good speech on libertarian strategy and decentralization.

    No, it wasn’t. Blood and soil was precisely the point of the speech. It made explicit what the paleo/altreich movement has been trying to marry libertarianism to all along. The rest of the speech was window dressing. Anyone who fails to understand that is at best delusional and at worst complicit.

    Anyone who thinks that it was a “Nazi speech” is irrational and delusional.

    No, anyone who fails to realize it is those things. At best.

  50. paulie

    Good luck with that, given the LP’s stands on economics.

    The libertarian stand on economics, properly understood and presented, is not right wing. It’s only come to be seen that way because of the way it is sold and marketed in the last several decades in a misguided attempt to court wealthy donors and bring conservatives over to libertarianism.

    During that same time period conservatives also disingenuously presented their views as free market, so there seemed to be some superficial similarity.

    It was never a good match, as libertarian economic views are economically liberal. This is because people used to understand that a relatively free economy gives people stuck at the bottom a chance to rise up, whereas a heavily controlled economy gets gamed by wealthy interests to protect and further concentrate wealth. Big government and big business and big everything hand in hand at the expense of everyone else.

    No wonder conservatives never actually cut government when they are in power. They may cut some pittances of social welfare, but expand military and police-prison and agribusiness and corporate welfare etc etc, even more than the so-called liberals of today.

    And now with their rising tide of authoritarian braying about immigration and, more and more, international trade, today’s right wingers are giving up even the pretense of any devotion to free markets. Trump doesn’t even pay lip service to free markets, and the right loves Drumpf. They are showing their true colors.

    But make no mistake, it’s nothing new. From the Pat Buchanan to Reagan Democrats to Dixiecrats and Nixon’s Southern Strategy the US right wing has never really been about free markets. It’s really about nationalism, cop-worship, military-worship, mixing church and state, patriarchy, enforced social conformism, sexual repression, and all the things the right has really always been about, worldwide, ever since the terms left and right came to be. The right was the party of monarchy, theocracy, aristocracy, and government-intertwined plutocracy and bureaucracy. Window dressing du jour aside it has never changed in its true essence. The right is about racism too, and always has been. “Blood and soil.” That’s true right wing economics whether in 18th century France, the CSA, nazi Germany or Trump Murikkka.

  51. paulie

    I wasn’t even talking about economics when I said that, but even considering economics we are not right wing, never were and never should be. Until and unless everyone from self-proclaimed libertarians to the general public understands this, explicitly and implicitly, the LP and LM goes nowhere and accomplishes nothing worthwhile – at best.

  52. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Paulie certainly paints a scary picture. We shall see what happens…

  53. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Missed this in the first message in Paulie in his reply to me: “To thrive, it must burn all bridges to the right and build new ones to the left. ”

    CMoore: Easier said that done. Just kick out real alt-right (starting with Andy Jacob after his defense of “blood and soil” as a rally call above?!?). And then go after all those independents who are fed up with the statist Demopublicans. 1/3 plus of voters and/or potential voters. The progressives still believe in the fairy tale that government is good and will solve all our problems.

    There is no doubt that Trump’s disgusting bullying and bigoted way of asserting his “leadership” IS bringing out the worst in whites especially. Thoughts and feelings that were forgotten, often more through education than guilt tripping and bullying, are just resurfacing and it is scary.

  54. Anthony Dlugos

    paulie writes:

    “Regardless of whether Smith is just good at hiding his own alt right views or genuinely just completely oblivious to the extent of his alt right entryist support base, he represents an existential danger to the LP.”

    later, paulie writes:

    … it’s all one piece of blood soaked shit leaving an indelible stain and choking the life out of the LP and the libertarian movement.

    It’s not alt-rightism that’s an existential danger to the LP. That’s just the particular virus that might take it down at this moment in time. In an alternate timeline, it might have been some sort of mangled form of communism instead.

    The existential threat is, and always has been, dogmatism.

    In our Party’s case, it happens to be dogmatic NAPsterism, but make no mistake, be it the Libertarian Party or Islam, dogmatism draws in the dogmatic. It draws in cocksure stupidity (I’ll get elected president and abolish the government on Day One), an obtuseness in relating to the people the organization should be appealing to (gotta make sure the Dallas Accord is intact! wouldn’t want to upset the .000000000001% of the population that is anarchist and votes!) ) and an obliviousness to reality (how policy making occurs, how legislation is crafted, WHO crafts legislation) that ensures a cult-like existence, an organization forever susceptible to takeover by some snake oil salesman offering a cure in a bottle.

    You want to run the alt-right out of the Party? Drop your high-minded insistence on a perfect candidate and get Governor Weld (or someone like him) nominated in 2020. He’s already far better than anything the democrats and republicans will nominate, and that assumes he doesn’t move at all further in a libertarian direction between now and then.

    It’s not Governor Weld’s particular brand of classically liberal philosophy that is the antidote to the alt-right incursion: its his broad-mindedness. That’s kryptonite to the alt-right. Its kryptonite to the dogmatic.

    Of course, we could insist on a party that trots out pointless mantras like “taxation is theft,” ignores how policy is actually created in the real world, vacuously calls experience winning and holding office a “shiny badge,” and denounces any deviation from dogma as “not libertarian.”

    Just don’t be surprised if you later find the sorts of dogmatics YOU don’t like running things.

  55. robert capozzi

    pf: Until and unless everyone from self-proclaimed libertarians to the general public understands this,

    me: Everyone understanding anything requires EXTRA, EXTRA good luck!. IOW, ain’t gonna happen, absent the Frankel Singularity’s onset.

  56. dL

    My “ears to the ground” observation of discussions among active delegates, talking to various people on the phone who spend a lot of time keeping up with delegate opinions and trends, talking to people who have been travelling to the various state conventions, and so on.

    I have no anecdotal info to go on, but I would be surprised if a “blood and soil’er” can walk right into the chairmanship.

  57. itdoesntmatterttomuch

    The modern “Mises people” don’t really support Mises. If anything they worship Hoppe and jackoff to the Ron Paul Survival Report.

  58. itdoesntmatterttomuch

    Also, it’s funny that I could predict that Andy would post a “creepy” response asking for personal information from the first guy who challenged his opinions. That’s Andy’s thing. It’s even been written about on other websites and blogs. If he doesn’t know you personally and you don’t tell him your real name, childrens’ names, entire LP membership history and CV, your arguments are invalid.

  59. Anthony Dlugos

    “1 out of 100 billion, Beavis? Highland High!“

    You are right. It’s probably more like .000000000000000000000000000000001%. And they all post here! lol

  60. dL

    You are right. It’s probably more like .000000000000000000000000000000001%. And they all post here! lol

    Beavis, didn’t your mother warn you about playing with math?

  61. Anthony Dlugos

    You’re not gonna lay one of your insomnia-curing Tulip Auction arguments on me, are you? It’s truly a bore listening to arguments on how a third party should stay a third party.

  62. Andy

    Itdoesn’tmatteranyway hides behind a fake name because he/she is an intellectual chickenshit.

    I am not hiding. I have confidence in my ideas and I put out an open challenge for anyone to debate me in person. I plan to be at the LP National Convention in New Orleans, and I will have my video camera with me, and I will post the video online If anyone has the balls to challenge me.

  63. Andy

    The LP is already infiltrated and fucked up. Look at the last three presidential tickets. We have an open member of the Council on Foreign Relations who thinks that Mitt Romney, the Bush family, and the Clinton family are wonderful, and who was our party’s VP nominee in 2016, and who is currently being booked as a speaker at LP conventions, and who is being taken seriously as an LP presidential nomination contender for 2020 by some people in the party. There were three Freedom of Information Act requests that I have heard about from several sources done back in the 1980’s and early 1990’s that revealed that the LP was infiltrated with undercover feds back in those days, and it likely still is today. It is already a documented fact that various government agencies spy on and keep files on the LP, and that various government entities, and groups connected to government, pay people to troll online, and one of their primary targets is libertarians (just look at all of the mysterious troll posts that have popped up here over the years).

    The LP still has a lot of decent well meaning people in it, but acting like the organization is not already fucked up is delusional.

  64. paulie

    IOW, ain’t gonna happen, absent the Frankel Singularity’s onset.

    OK, so not too long to wait. That’s good news!

  65. paulie

    I have no anecdotal info to go on, but I would be surprised if a “blood and soil’er” can walk right into the chairmanship.

    He does not come off that way nor are most delegates going to dig that deep. And, again, I don’t know how much he harbors any of those thoughts himself – but, I explained above why that does not matter in either case. In any case, the LP has been drawing from that poisoned well for decades, so don’t be surprised, especially now that it is metastasizing rapidly

  66. paulie

    The modern “Mises people” don’t really support Mises. If anything they worship Hoppe and jackoff to the Ron Paul Survival Report.

    Exactly.

  67. paulie

    Also, it’s funny that I could predict that Andy would post a “creepy” response asking for personal information from the first guy who challenged his opinions. That’s Andy’s thing. It’s even been written about on other websites and blogs. If he doesn’t know you personally and you don’t tell him your real name, childrens’ names, entire LP membership history and CV, your arguments are invalid.

    Yeah, fuck that noise with a dynamite stick.

  68. robert capozzi

    pf: OK, so not too long to wait. That’s good news!

    Me: Yep, any day now, we’ll all be watching 2-hour long Roderick Long youtubes, no doubt.

Leave a Reply

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