Tom Woods to the Libertarian Party: Wake People Up; Don’t Put Them to Sleep

10 thoughts on “Tom Woods to the Libertarian Party: Wake People Up; Don’t Put Them to Sleep

  1. Paul

    You know, I was a Tom Woods fan back in my Ron Paul days. Now, after learning more about folks like Tom “League of the South” Woods, I realize why everyone warned me about the Ron Paul crew. At the time, I just assumed they were leftists or “neocons.”

  2. paulie

    Dunno. Pretty sure he still writes for Lew Rockwell, and Rockwell still is the intellectual force behind the Cult of RonPaulism.

  3. Andy

    Tom Woods is one of the best advocates for liberty that there is. His Liberty Classroom, and his involvement in developing the Ron Paul Curriculum (home schooling program), are both outstanding resources which can be used to move society in the direction of liberty, and which do not rely on winning elections. Tom is an excellent publuc speaker, and he handles himself really well in interviews and debates. He is also an excellent writer.

    I would love to see Tom Woods run for political office.

  4. Paul

    He’s a charlatan who founded a violent hate group who is now trying to sell books and online memberships. Hard pass.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    There are a lot of things I won’t defend Tom Woods on, including his response to concerns about his involvement with the League of the South.

    His response — not the actual events.

    He explained himself years ago — he was at the formative meeting, but hasn’t been associated with the group for years.

    Having explained himself once, long ago, he gets irritable when asked to explain himself again every time the LoTS e.g. shows up in Charlottesville screeching “Blood and Soil” and “the Jews will not replace us.”

    He should understand that questions recur. And he should understand how important it is to clearly, unequivocally, and repeatedly disassociate himself from that shit.

    But as for the mere fact that he was around when LoTS formed, no, I don’t see any reason that should count against him.

  6. Paul

    So, I made the mistake of listening to part of it. He acknowledges why Hitler initially liked free markets (social darwinism), but then redefines fascism to be based solely on economic principles. That’s somehow both revisionist and pedantic.

    I guess that’s to be expected from a Harvard-educated revisionist neo-confederate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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