October 2018 Open Thread

Our monthly open thread. Post news tips about alt parties and independent candidates, discuss any story that should be posted here but has not yet been posted, or even delve into completely off-topic stuff…just avoid quarantined thread subject matter and things that could get us and/or you into legal trouble such as threats, libel, and copyright infringement.

News tips can also be sent to the IPR writers who have chosen to make their contact info available at http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/about/.

252 thoughts on “October 2018 Open Thread

  1. Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

    Well, since you asked.

    1992
    The most significant year in the last half of the 20th Century
    What you don’t know is destroying America

    Until now you did not really know what happened. Because of this, the next 36 years which have sent America’s economy into a tail spin, enmeshed us in constant war, made millions homeless, and taken the world to the brink of disaster appeared to come out of nowhere. Look at the list below.

    • Bill Clinton would never have been elected president.
    • Bush W. would never have been elected president.
    • War on Iraq would not have happened.
    • Our economy would not hinge on the Federal Reserve System
    • The economy, world-wide, would be stable today.
    • We would have moved to sustainable construction
    • Millions would not have lost their homes.
    • We would all have affordable health care, and this would be under our control as individuals.

    Would your life be better now if our economy was stable, growing, no longer under the control of the Federal Reserve? Its not too late to change our direction.

    FLASH BACK – 1992

    In Mid-March 1992 Clinton had only $50,000 left and a HQ bus. On March 12 Bill and Hillary spent time at Hillary’s High School Alma Mater, Maine South High School near Chicago despite their win in the Southern Super Primary the day before. The Clintons were ready to wind down their campaign and return to Arkansas.

    Bill and Hillary had been talking about the presidency for years, looking for the right time but the money had not appeared, even after their win in Southern Super Tuesday on March 11th. Opposition was down to was Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown.

    It was 1992 or never. This was necessary to stay ahead of the scandals he and Hillary knew loomed. Bill Clinton was, and remains, a sexual predator. He could never have been elected today, now that the MeToo! Consciousness has awakened. Bill and Hillary knew they had a limited window of opportunity determined by Bill’s sexual habits.
    On January 26th Bill and Hillary Clinton appeared on 60 Minutes to deny Bill had carried on a long affair with Gennifer Flowers. Now, we know this was a carefully orchestrated lie.
    Money loomed was an insurmountable issue for Bill Clinton.

    Decision-time was coming up fast. The Clintons had reached out to the Democratic Labor establishment. They had to find the means to sell Bill and his carefully manufactured agenda to American voters.
    Two days after Clinton’s appearance on 60 Minutes, during George H. W. Bush’s State of the Union Address, only 1M of 29-Million phone calls to CBS via touch-tone phone buttons for #1 AGREE or #2 DISAGREE had gotten through. Millions of calls crashed to deadtone in 14 phone regions of the Bell System.
    The Clintons and Greer likely spent January to mid-March looking for solutions to the problem of rapidly increasing their media presence while staving off scandals and making enough money to put gas in their bus.
    How could they sell Clinton to the mass-audience with the money they had available and do so as a stream of propaganda without the problems caused when Bill was confronted with facts about his behavior? This is when Billary received a fax of the PhoneVoter TV Network Proposal.
    Frank Greer had come onboard as Clinton’s Media Consultant. Despite the title, Greer knew nothing about satellite technology as a distribution system. Satellite was the only way, but it was way beyond their means.
    How could they afford it? The answer they chose stole your voice in politics and send us over the cliff, economically.

    Click below
    The Story of PhoneVoter 1992
    http://www.phonevoter.us/get-real-debates

  2. DJ

    MP-F: What you don’t know is destroying America

    Until now you did not really know what happened. Because of this, the next 36 years which have sent America’s economy into a tail spin, enmeshed us in constant war, made millions homeless, and taken the world to the brink of disaster appeared to come out of nowhere. Look at the list below.

    • Bill Clinton would never have been elected president.
    • Bush W. would never have been elected president.
    • War on Iraq would not have happened.
    • Our economy would not hinge on the Federal Reserve System
    • The economy, world-wide, would be stable today.
    • We would have moved to sustainable construction
    • Millions would not have lost their homes.
    • We would all have affordable health care, and this would be under our control as individuals.

    Me: Speculation on your list, or wishful thinking. That said, you’ve come to the wrong forum if pointing out the Lefts’ indiscretions is your goal- they are the paragons of virtue in this forum, pure as the driven snow. Clinton is so yesterday. Today is Kavanaugh., because Trump- heritage Foundation, Mises, Lew Rockwell et al. The past is irrelevant- neocons on both sides are responsible for where we are and it began in 1913 with a Leftist as POTUS- but, that doesn’t matter to the Leftist apologists here, or anywhere for that matter. What matters is- Left, perceived or real, is pure as the driven snow. The wrath of the Left may rain down on you- but, Trump. Obama was/is a saint, so that means the Left is filled with saints- because Trump. Kavanaugh lies, the left doesn’t. Kavanaugh attacked women, the left doesn’t. Trump lies, the left doesn’t. Trump isn’t fit to be POTUS- that’s a status only the Left is worthy of- because Trump. LOL-

  3. DJ

    The Western Left-

    Father calls out son’s ‘political spectrum’ assignment for pushing biased agenda onto students: ‘This is 1984-esque propaganda’

    Matt DeFouw was taken aback when his son, a high school student, texted him a picture of an assignment that had been given to his class. The 10th-grade students at Valleyview Secondary School in Kamloops, a city in British Columbia, Canada, were supposed to be learning about differing views in partisan politics — but instead, they seemed to be getting schooled on the biased political stance of the person who had prepared the lesson.

    DeFouw took to his Facebook page on Monday to post his son’s assignment, writing “I cannot let this slide. It must be exposed, discussed, and then expediently rectified.” Explaining the image, he said his son whited out his answers and wrote the teacher-provided answers in their place.

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/father-calls-sons-political-spectrum-assignment-pushing-political-agenda-onto-students-1984-esque-propaganda-163552305.html

  4. DJ

    CM/S: Speaking of the Clinton’s, here’s an interesting article inferring Brett Kavanaugh gave them cover in the Vince Foster investigation.

    Me: Interesting article- puts me in mind of JFK and also Leonard Peltier- not to mention Waco, and Ruby Ridge. FBI.

    If it is true it also shows Kavanaugh as part of the US Left- the face of big gov’t. It also shows there is not a dimes worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats inside the beltway. Both are corrupt to the core. It also makes me wonder why Feinstein didn’t bring this up in the original Kavanaugh hearings- hmmm inquiring minds would like to know. But, we know she wouldn’t/couldn’t as it would expose the leeches in DC for what they are.

  5. William T. Forrest

    Wow, y’all are quiet today. What happened, did Redlich finally kick Frankel out too? 🙂

  6. Michael Wilson

    I see that the Working Families party is about to morph into the Democratic/Socialist machine. If Libertarians tried they might find that they could do more for the working people in this country than any other group but that might scare some of the conservatives in the movement.

  7. William T. Forrest

    I think you are probably right Michael Wilson. What more specifically do you suggest as far as issues to emphasize or language to use in candidate messaging, in case any candidates who agree with you are reading but don’t know how to do that?

  8. William T. Forrest

    Good point about his subsequent nonsense, but he nevertheless made lots of good points in that piece from 2011. Which of them do you disagree with, if any?

  9. dL

    Which of them do you disagree with, if any?

    None of them. I consider conservatism to be a mortal enemy of libertarianism. But Wilkinson deserves no due…

  10. Jim

    Ron Paul stopped reaching a new audience in 2013. Whatever good or harm he may or may not have done to libertarianism back then, he is no longer a driving factor.

    Hoppe has been a bigger problem in recent years. Attacking Ron Paul to stop the influence of Hoppe isn’t going to work.

  11. William T. Forrest

    “Andy Craig

    When asked about it by Matt Welch, Tom Woods gave two answers to deflect regarding the litany of noxiousness he’s been pushing on the movement and the Libertarian Party.

    First, he went on a long tangent about how his League of the South days were all the way back in the 1990s (practically ancient history!) and he was more of a paleoconservative then. He heavily downplays how outright racist the League was and how heavily involved he was with it, while at the same time insisting it’s somehow unfair to refer to something that old. As if he’s ever stopped pandering to white nationalists.

    Second, he tried to play off his promotion of Hoppe, North, Molyneux, etc., as if it was just his attitude to interview anybody. Which is of course ludicrous: he steadfastly refuses to have any sort of interview or debate with anybody who’ll challenge him about these things (such as Nick Sarwark), but he heaps glowing praise on virulent racists and violent theocrats. He does shows dedicated to praising Hoppe, Molyneux, and Cantwell. He’s a longtime close associate of Rockwell and Deist. North is his coauthor! These are the people whose morally abhorrent ideas he promotes, and none of it has anything to do with being “anti-war.”

    While we’re on the topic: he has never had any particular focus on being anti-war, so it’s downright bizarre to label him as such in the headline. I don’t doubt that he is anti-war, but he’s never put half as much energy into that issue as he does pushing immigration restrictionists, socially conservative authoritarians, and “race realists.”

    His answers were simply dishonest, and he should be persona non grata to anybody who doesn’t want the liberty movement to be indistinguishable from the worst, most vile strains on the far-right. I’ve never heard a convincing reason why I should regard him as any more of a “libertarian” than I would Richard Spencer or David Duke.

    I can at least say this: I’m proud of the Libertarian Party for rejecting his botched attempt at a takeover, and if we have to we’ll send him packing again in 2020.”

    Amen!

  12. Jim

    Andy Craig “I’ve never heard a convincing reason why I should regard (Tom Woods) as any more of a “libertarian” than I would Richard Spencer”

    Richard Spencer “I don’t think we have rights to really anything. No individual has a right outside of a collective community. You have rights, not eternally or given by God, or by nature. Ultimately the state gives those rights to you. The state is the source of rights, not the individual.”

    Tom Woods “They would be odd libertarians indeed to think people have no rights until a group of people wearing funny hats declare that they do, especially given that your friends would now need to explain how, if there is no such thing as rights prior to the state, these people get the right to establish a state and start barking out commands in the first place.”

  13. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy Craig’s description of the Woods interview, particularly vis a vis the League of the South, differs substantially from what I thought I was watching.

    In fact, I think Woods would have served himself better on the whole “won’t sign the anti-fascist statement and why would anyone expect me to” debacle to have signed it and linked to an explanation of the LoTS thing like the one he gives here as a great example of why such a statement was necessary.

    Here’s the interview in its entirety. I think it’s worth discussing, especially where it touches on the LP.

  14. Chuck Moulton

    Apparently this site “upgraded” the commenting system — amd I ise that term loosely because 99% of “upgrades” make things worse and this case is no exception.

    It’s clear there is a change because (unlike before) the email, name, website fields don’t appear until you write in the “leave a reply” box. I have no changed my phone OS or browser version recently — or in many years.

    Many of the old bugs have returned. When I leave a comment, submitting it does not show a new comment. I have to try submitting 4 or 5 times on average until it tells me there is a duplicate comment. It takes an average of 2 hours to see a new comment that I left show up on the page.

    Even worse, the old bug has resurfaced whereby suddenly characters I am typing will not register and I have to click outside the reply input box then back in the input box several times to make typing work again.

    Whatever change IPR made that introduced all these bugs, it SUCKS. Please roll back to a working version ASAP.

  15. paulie Post author

    In fact, I think Woods would have served himself better on the whole “won’t sign the anti-fascist statement and why would anyone expect me to” debacle to have signed it and linked to an explanation of the LoTS thing like the one he gives here as a great example of why such a statement was necessary.

    Yes, but that’s not the game he is playing – nor is it the game the paleo”libertarian”/alt right slide has been playing for nearly 30 years now. They always try to have it both ways – appeal to bigots as much as possible with a wink and a nod while maintaining some semi-plausible deniability. When it crosses the line into the undeniably, straightforwardly obvious, it’s memory holed, and then it’s right back to dog whistles.

    Who benefits: bigots, and a few people’s pockets.
    At the expense of: libertarianism and its prospects with much larger possibly available audiences that are repelled by this, directly or indirectly, and by the people it attracts to nominal libertarianism.

  16. paulie Post author

    Andy Craig “I’ve never heard a convincing reason why I should regard (Tom Woods) as any more of a “libertarian” than I would Richard Spencer”

    Richard Spencer “I don’t think we have rights to really anything. No individual has a right outside of a collective community. You have rights, not eternally or given by God, or by nature. Ultimately the state gives those rights to you. The state is the source of rights, not the individual.”

    Tom Woods “They would be odd libertarians indeed to think people have no rights until a group of people wearing funny hats declare that they do, especially given that your friends would now need to explain how, if there is no such thing as rights prior to the state, these people get the right to establish a state and start barking out commands in the first place.”

    You have a point there. Spencer is no longer a libertarian-leaning anything. But let’s not forget that he started out as a Ron Paul activist, and that he came up with the term and concept “alt right” together with Paul Gottfried, who is frequently published by Lew Rockwell.

    In turn, the long standing bigots have joined forces with trolls who “do it for the lulz” and have used Ron Paul campaigns, Campaign for Liberty, YAL, anarchocapitalist and libertarian discussion fora of all sorts, the LP (often through the Mises Caucus), the Mises Institute and its orbit, fan fora of podcasts such as Molyneux and Tom Woods, as well as the Trump movement to recruit people into the “paleolibertarian to alt right pipeline” which Spencer followed himself. And which Tom Woods has helped pave, I believe consciously, along with the rest of the paleo”libertarian” movement – as was laid out explicitly in the founding statements of the paleolibertarian strategy by Rothbard and Rockwell.

    The Alex Jones type conspiracy circles are also a common recruiting ground for these people. Once someone gets more heavily embroiled in those types of thoughts and discussions, it’s easier to get them to take seriously and accept conspiracy theories about Jews, “white genocide,” and so on. It’s only a half step to go from “international bankers” and “UN population control” and “zionist lobby” to “Jews are bringing in third world mud people to wipe out the white race herp derp.” No coincidence that there’s a ton of overlap between this and online trolling, support for Ron Paul and various outgrowths of his campaigns, fanatical Trump (and frequently Putin) fandom, neoconfederate fetishism…and Tom Woods is very much a facilitator of these intersecting orbits.

  17. paulie Post author

    Jacob Ryan shared a post.

    Parents/aunt’s uncles/etc be careful who the kids in your life are talking to online the far right has been using trolling and memes to lure kids into white nationalism/identitarianism/whatever they wanna call themselves now

    Michelle Dione

    Dear white families, this is the leader of Identity Evropa talking about how easy it is to recruit your teenagers. They talk about how schools indoctrinate white kids to believing in hating their white culture and get rid of all white people (this isn’t true) They are talking about stopping schools that teach the truth about colonialism. Indoctrinating a generation. Please talk to your kids about who they talk to online and on campuses. Tell them it’s okay to be themselves every culture has its bad sides but they stay bad when we don’t a accept the truth. I’ve heard this many times now: “4Chan changed my friend into a political extremist”. Feel to share this post and don’t be scared we can stop them.

    Vlad Kremlin: they’ve also been using rational arguments, be very careful

    Sharon Presley: Don’t you mean seemingly rational? There is nothing rational about their crap.

    Vlad Kremlin: Well demographics for whites worldwide doesn’t exactly look rosy in 100 years, is this something we don’t need to address?

    Paulie: No, we don’t need to address it, other than to accept that it’s a good thing and help hasten it as much as possible. Globalization is a good thing. Race mixing is a good thing. Culture mixing is a good thing. Trade, travel and mass e/immigration are good things. Stop fighting it, start celebrating it. The sooner the races are blended the sooner we lose something stupid to fight over, and it’s a natural consequence of technological progress.

    And in the unlikely event that you are actually Russian rather than just fetishizing a dictator and his support for theocracy, ethnonationalism, authoritarianism, racism, chauvinism and bigotry both in Russia and around the world, including in the US: Otyabis’ i poshol ka ty nakhuy, blyat.

  18. dL

    amd I ise that term loosely because 99% of “upgrades” make things worse and this case is no exception.

    well, no, otherwise one would still be using punch cards and magnetic tape. It is true, however, that untested changes pushed to production can often prove disastrous.

  19. dL

    Here’s the interview in its entirety. I think it’s worth discussing, especially where it touches on the LP.

    Woods says his detractors don’t listen to his podcasts. Well, he may be correct. I don’t listen to them. I don’t have the time even I were so inclined. I read so much faster than I can listen to stuff, and he doesn’t make the transcripts available unless you are a paying subscriber.

    Ok, one may say, it costs money to accurately transcribe a conversation. Fair enough. But it is also fair to ask if one is under any obligation to listen to his podcasts, particularly if one can get a sense of where he is coming from via his written words and his social media posts. If those things don’t match up, then where does the fault for the interpretation error lie? If I came across as a reactionary on my twitter account, and someone called me out on it, and I responded: “heh, low IQ nitwit, didn’t you read my blog post from July, 2013,” is that a fair rejoinder? No, it is not. It resolves nothing. In fact, it only introduces a new question whether or not I’m simply a con man.

    And let us be clear. Unequivocally, the Mises Inst. by way of Hans Herman Hoppe, is an alt-right pipeline. There is no “if, ands or buts” about it to any honest observer with an IQ above 60. And I’m not going to Tom Woods for the source material on that. I’m going to the man himself, Hoppe. Generally, I’m someone who cares much more where you stand today than where you stood yesterday. After all, few of us got it right as soon as we exited our mother’s wombs. If Woods came out and said “Hoppe, his contributions to Austrian economics notwithstanding, is dead wrong on race realism, immigration and the dictatorship of the taxpayer. Those views are an anathema to libertarianism proper.” Then I wouldn’t give much of rat’s ass about his past associations. But he doesn’t do that. And I’m pretty sure if he did do that, his subscriber base would shrink to near nothing. So, who knows what Woods really thinks. But I have pretty good clue which views butters his bread.

  20. Jim

    Paulie ” the long standing bigots have joined forces with trolls who “do it for the lulz” and have used Ron Paul campaigns, Campaign for Liberty, YAL, anarchocapitalist and libertarian discussion fora of all sorts, the LP (often through the Mises Caucus), the Mises Institute and its orbit, fan fora of podcasts such as Molyneux and Tom Woods, as well as the Trump movement to recruit people into the “paleolibertarian to alt right pipeline” which Spencer followed himself. And which Tom Woods has helped pave, I believe consciously, along with the rest of the paleo”libertarian” movement – as was laid out explicitly in the founding statements of the paleolibertarian strategy by Rothbard and Rockwell.”

    It’s possible Tom Woods is heading in the opposite direction – he began as a PaleoConservative and has moved towards Libertarian.

    There is a PaleoLibertarian to Alt-Right pipeline, but there is a PaleoConservative to Alt-Right super highway. It’s the PaleoConservatives who are the ultimate source. The PaleoLibertarians are just a detour that some take which can either lead to the white nationalist faction of the Alt-Right or to Libertarianism without the PaleoConservative influence.

    Whether Tom Woods turns toward Libertarian or Alt-Right from here – I don’t think even he knows for sure. But maybe I’m not the best judge of that. I’ve listened to around 15 of his 1,260 podcasts.

    Hating on PaleoLibertarians from the Libertarian side while the White Nationalist Alt-Right reaches out to them from the other just guarantees which way they’ll turn.

  21. Jim

    Paulie “Race mixing is a good thing… Stop fighting it, start celebrating it. The sooner the races are blended the sooner we lose something stupid to fight over”

    What? It’s a thing. It isn’t good or bad. There’s no value attached. If some people want to do it, fine. If not, also fine. It doesn’t have to be encouraged, discouraged, celebrated, or mourned.

  22. paulie Post author

    Unequivocally, the Mises Inst. by way of Hans Herman Hoppe, is an alt-right pipeline.

    Bingo. To the extent it also works in the other direction, that’s not a good thing either. For every half-converted fash/bigot who starts to think of himself as a libertarian, gets involved in the LP and/or libertarian discussions and activities, etc, we are driving away many more potential converts who want nothing to do with such people and opinions even tangentially.

    If Woods came out and said “Hoppe, his contributions to Austrian economics notwithstanding, is dead wrong on race realism, immigration and the dictatorship of the taxpayer. Those views are an anathema to libertarianism proper.” Then I wouldn’t give much of rat’s ass about his past associations. But he doesn’t do that. And I’m pretty sure if he did do that, his subscriber base would shrink to near nothing. So, who knows what Woods really thinks. But I have pretty good clue which views butters his bread.

    Agreed.

  23. paulie Post author

    Hating on PaleoLibertarians from the Libertarian side while the White Nationalist Alt-Right reaches out to them from the other just guarantees which way they’ll turn.

    I think it’s better for us if they turn straight up fash. A lot of them are headed that way anyway, and their libertarian detours and regurgitations just besmirch us to the much larger available audiences we drive away thanks to their involvement and influence.

  24. paulie Post author

    Paulie “Race mixing is a good thing… Stop fighting it, start celebrating it. The sooner the races are blended the sooner we lose something stupid to fight over”

    What? It’s a thing. It isn’t good or bad. There’s no value attached. If some people want to do it, fine. If not, also fine. It doesn’t have to be encouraged, discouraged, celebrated, or mourned.

    Personally I like it, but not just as an active participant. I think it’s actually doing the world good to blend the races and cross-pollinate cultures. Increased international trade, travel and immigrations are a good thing. Insularity, isolation, inbreeding and xenophobia have the opposite effect. Even genetically, crossing strains strengthens a crop or herd, and I don’t think it’s different with humans. The divisions, lack of contact and lack of understanding, besides impoverishing us culturally and economically, also lead to war. Cultures benefit from coming into contact with each other, learning and evolving. Stasis is bad for evolution, it denies needed opportunities for growth.

  25. Jim

    I’m not looking it up, but I heard once that the dangers of inbreeding disappear by second cousin or so.

    I don’t believe that being from different races creates a lack of understanding. I don’t believe that skin color dictates thought process.

    And I’m pretty sure that race doesn’t have much to do with war, given that the bloodiest wars in history have been either between different groups of white people or different groups of Asian people.

    I just don’t see a need to conflate race mixing, which I see as neutral, with specialization and trade, which has clear and undeniable benefits.

  26. Jim

    Paulie “I think it’s better for us if they turn straight up fash. ”

    Maybe in the short run, but in the long run I don’t think it’s better for anyone to grow the ranks of fascists. I would rather convert them to our side.

  27. paulie Post author

    Maybe in the short run, but in the long run I don’t think it’s better for anyone to grow the ranks of fascists. I would rather convert them to our side.

    Keeping that two way door wide open grows their movement a lot more than it grows ours, and for us it comes at the expense of bringing in a lot of other people who would be more reachable otherwise. In other words the racist/fascist movement benefits from having a relationship with the libertarian movement while the libertarian movement suffers.

  28. paulie Post author

    I’m not looking it up, but I heard once that the dangers of inbreeding disappear by second cousin or so.

    It becomes less pronounced but in general, crossing strains or herds strengthens them.

    I don’t believe that being from different races creates a lack of understanding. I don’t believe that skin color dictates thought process.

    Two different things. Living in isolation from other races is what causes lack of understanding. Not getting to know people from a different background, not interacting with them much or at all. Once that takes place to a significant extent the rest takes care of itself. Race mixing is inevitable, may as well lay back (or lean forward or…) and enjoy it 🙂

    And I’m pretty sure that race doesn’t have much to do with war, given that the bloodiest wars in history have been either between different groups of white people or different groups of Asian people.

    But that’s also as a result of lack of trade, or lack of understanding and mingling between cultures, of dividing people up into ethnicities and nation-states and fostering hatred between them.

    I just don’t see a need to conflate race mixing, which I see as neutral, with specialization and trade, which has clear and undeniable benefits.

    All of it is a natural part of the globalization that has come about due to technological progress (and not as conspiracists maintain due to some kind of nefarious central planning by a secretive global elite). Cutting red tape would only hasten this progress.

  29. DJ

    The face of the left-

    Hillary Clinton contradicts Monica Lewinsky’s claim that affair with Bill Clinton was ‘gross abuse of power’

    Hillary Clinton has defended her husband against accusations that he abused his power with an affair with Monica Lewinsky in the 1990s.

    Ms Lewinsky said in a recent interview that she had been moved by the stories brought forth by women in the #MeToo movement, and had realised that former President Bill Clinton had abused his position of power when they had an affair.

    Ms Clinton, who stood by her husband after those accusations came forward, disagreed during an interview on “CBS Sunday Morning”.

    “In retrospect, do you think Bill should’ve resigned in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal?” Tony Dokoupil, a CBS correspondent, asked her during that interview.

    “Absolutely not,” Ms Clinton said.

    “It wasn’t an abuse of power?” Mr Dokoupil asked.

    “No. No,” Ms Clinton said.
    …………….. move the goal posts

    “But let me ask you this,” Ms Clinton continued, “Where’s the investigation of the current incumbent, against whom numerous allegations have been made, and which he dismisses, denies, and ridicules?”

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-contradicts-monica-lewinsky-161636191.html

  30. Jim

    Paulie “Keeping that two way door wide open grows their movement a lot more than it grows ours, and for us it comes at the expense of bringing in a lot of other people who would be more reachable otherwise. In other words the racist/fascist movement benefits from having a relationship with the libertarian movement while the libertarian movement suffers.”

    Libertarians don’t benefit from having ties to fascists, but we do from having a relationship with the Paleos. All we hear about is the dozen or so high profile cases of Paleo’s turning Alt-Right. But how many came to libertarianism through the Paleos and then went mainstream libertarian? It seems to me that’s kind of like how the news treats homicide. The murder rate is down by 50% since 1990, but it’s reported on so much more now that public perception is that the murder rate is up. Paleos turning Alt-Right? That’s a story. Paleo’s turning mainstream? No one cares.

    Consider two questions:

    Of the people who go PaleoConservative to PaleoLibertarian to Alt-Right – how many would have gone straight from PaleoConservative to Alt-Right if the PaleoLibertarian step didn’t exist?

    Of the people who go PaleoConservative to PaleoLibertarian to Mainstream Libertarian – how many would have gone straight from PaleoConservative to Mainstream Libertarian if the PaleoLibertarian step didn’t exist?

    I think mainstream libertarians benefit more from the PaleoLibertarian step than the Alt Right, because many of the PaleoConservatives would have gone Alt Right regardless, but few PaleoConservatives would have gone Mainstream Libertarian without the PaleoLibertarian step.

    I’m not seeing evidence that the Paleo’s are keeping the LP down. If this were 2008, there’s a case to be made for that. By some measures, the LP basically flat lined from 1990 – 2010. But the LP really took off under Obama (also – when Paul ran in 2008) and is still growing at a pretty good pace under Trump. I added it up not too long ago and we were around 540,000 registered voters, which is up about 40,000 since the 2016 election. During all 8 years of the Bush 2 administration we only added 18,000, and that’s even with an additional 4 states reporting the number.

    What percentage of the libertarian movement would you say was Paleo? Suppose the libertarian movement consists of 10 million people – the 7.4 million people who provably voted Libertarian in 2016, plus some that either couldn’t easily be identified or who didn’t vote at all. I’m having trouble estimating it.

  31. paulie Post author

    I don’t think it’s a matter of relative growth from a zero baseline so much as lost opportunities and bad PR. The question shouldn’t be how much we have grown but how much we could have. That’s not easy to quantify but for many reasons I have said here before we have a lot more growth potential on our left flank than on our right. There’s no set definition of how many people are in the libertarian movement, various people are in it to various extents and involved to various extents, and bringing on or driving away various other people to various extents.

  32. Gina

    Clinton is only “on the left” from the standpoint of US conservatives. Just about anyone else else in any other part of the world and many even in the US see her as being on the right, not substantially different from a Bush or Romney. Monica Lewinsky was a consenting adult, and if anyone was hurt by that it was….Hillary Clinton. Lewinsky, from what I understand, to the extent that she feel victimized today from the events back then, it’s not by Clinton but by his haters. Other Clinton accusers such as Juanita Broderick have a more compelling case against the former president. But he is never going to be president again, and as a realistic matter neither is Hillary, so they are kind of besides the point anyway.

  33. dL

    Libertarians don’t benefit from having ties to fascists, but we do from having a relationship with the Paleos.

    How exactly exactly does one benefit from intellectual expropriation? You seem to claim that paleo libertarianism is a one step up outreach program for paleo-conservatives, but they are in reality the same thing with a different marketing tag. Would anyone claim state socialist is a one step up outreach program for communists? Would it make a difference if they tagged themselves “social democratic libertarians”? I’m guessing you would see right that BS. Likewise for me RE: “paleo libertarianism.”

  34. William T. Forrest

    The Clintons are has beens. That generation of Clintons is done, most likely retired from public office and certainly from the presidency. I am more worried about people who are in power right now. Secondarily about people who could plausibly get in power sometime somewhat soon. Least of all about walking dinosaurs like Bill and Hill, who should have both been left behind together with the last millenium and now belatedly have earned their long deserved place as live action museum display pieces.

  35. William T. Forrest

    Meanwhile, in other duopoly news, Senator Warren is doing neither herself nor her party any good whatsoever with her latest idiotic antics. That’s no loss as far as she goes personally, since her party has no shortage of other attention-seekers jockeying for power. And in the big picture it doesn’t matter which half of the duopoly rules since much like the mafia commission they agree on most things most of the time at the expense of the regular people. But, it’s relatively less bad when the duopoly has divided control of government, so I was somewhat rooting for a “blue wave” with Trump and the increasingly Republican courts to counterbalance.

    Such a wave, which was probably much exaggerated to begin with, appears to be in full retreat before it has ever hit the beach, and Warren’s tone deaf egocentricity may have just put the last nails in the coffin of whatever slim chances Democrats had of taking the senate (if anything, Republicans will probably pick up seats there) and Democrats taking control of the House is far from assured as well. There’s a high likelihood that Republican unified government will continue past this election.

  36. Jim

    dL “You seem to claim that paleo libertarianism is a one step up outreach program for paleo-conservatives, but they are in reality the same thing with a different marketing tag.”

    They’re a mix of Libertarian and PaleoConservative. The biggest point of disagreement between PaleoLibertarians and PaleoConservatives is free trade. The PaleoConservative insistence on trade protectionism drives the PaleoLibertarians insane.

  37. William T. Forrest

    The social media giants are trying to catch up to IPR and the censorious trends Frankel started here by stepping up their removal of unapproved viewpoints, a process which is quickening and intensifying both here and on those larger platforms. These things always snowball, and usually take those who start them down with them. Frankel will be no exception.

    Soon, we will all end up in information bubbles composed purely of echoes of our own existing views. I don’t see this as a bad thing, and it’s part of the freedom of association. Those who insist that others bake them a cake or provide them a platform are an embarrassment to us all, and almost always hypocrites on this account. The walls are being built higher and higher, both the physical and metaphoric ones. Will they come down, and if and when they do will anything or anyone be left as they crush all our safe spaces in their collapse?

  38. dL

    The PaleoConservative insistence on trade protectionism drives the PaleoLibertarians insane.

    Not really. For fun, I just took a gander at Lew Rockwell’s site. There’s nothing there complaining about Trump’s protectionist trade policies. What I do see is a preoccupation with identity politics. Let’s see, there are 4 posts on Elizabeth Warren’s DNA tests. There’s “It gets better: Average White Person in America.” “Racial Preferences on Trial.” Of course, there is the obligatory autism conspiracy theory twaddle.

    I’ve read enough of Justin Raimondo to know that he claimed the paleos dumped Pat Buchanan in the 90s because of Pat’s trade protectionism. But I consider that a post hoc rationalization after Buchanan fizzled out. If free trade was really a sticking point, you wouldn’t ride that horse to begin with. If the Trump horse dies, then, yes, I fully expect the paelolibertarians to once again rediscover the virtue of free trade. As it is, for them it’s more of a post mortem convenience than a principle.

  39. DJ

    WTF: DJ thinks Hillary Clinton is on the left. Now that’s just sad.

    Me: What’s sad is that people in ALL political forums see what they want to see and don’t actually read what is written. Learn to read-

    DJ
    October 15, 2018 at 15:06

    The *face* of the left-
    .

  40. Tony From Long Island

    Hillary Clinton is the face of the left just as John Kasich is the face of the right . . . . that is . . . not in the slightest!

  41. Anthony Dlugos

    “In other words the racist/fascist movement benefits from having a relationship with the libertarian movement while the libertarian movement suffers.”

    +100 likes.

  42. Anthony Dlugos

    Yes, but that’s not the game he is playing – nor is it the game the paleo”libertarian”/alt right slide has been playing for nearly 30 years now. They always try to have it both ways – appeal to bigots as much as possible with a wink and a nod while maintaining some semi-plausible deniability. When it crosses the line into the undeniably, straightforwardly obvious, it’s memory holed, and then it’s right back to dog whistles.

    That’s EXACTLY the game he’s playing.

  43. Jim

    dL “I just took a gander at Lew Rockwell’s site. There’s nothing there complaining about Trump’s protectionist trade policies.”

    I glance at Rockwell’s site maybe 3 times a year, just to see if he’s still on the Trump train, but a google search over the last two years produces a number of articles and blog posts. They’re probably more frequent when tariffs are in the news.

    dL “What I do see is a preoccupation with identity politics.”

    Yeah, there’s always that.

    dL “I’ve read enough of Justin Raimondo to know that he claimed the paleos dumped Pat Buchanan in the 90s because of Pat’s trade protectionism. But I consider that a post hoc rationalization after Buchanan fizzled out. If free trade was really a sticking point, you wouldn’t ride that horse to begin with.”

    That was also mentioned in the Woods video, above. I don’t think he said trade protectionism specifically, but he made a reference more generically to frustration with PaleoConservative economics.

    It makes perfect sense for the PaleoLibertarians to work with the PaleoConserveratives even with their disagreements. People don’t come as blank slates. If you want to expand your ideology, you have to talk with and work with people who don’t agree with you. Your highest chance of success at a conversion comes from people with similar ideologies. For PaleoLibertarians, that means white nationalists, PaleoConservatives, and mainstream Libertarians.

    And yes, if you are a communist, some of your best chances at a conversion come from state socialists.

  44. paulie Post author

    Nobody has anything to say about the New Mexico debate?

    Haven’t seen it but saw different reactions online. One said he was frazzled, haggard and embarrassing. Someone else said he did well. So I guess mixed response.

  45. paulie Post author

    Hillary Clinton is the face of the left just as John Kasich is the face of the right . . . . that is . . . not in the slightest!

    She’s way too much of a warmongering, corporate money teat sucking, power hungry “realpolitik” game player to be any kind of ideological champion. She is just in it to jockey for power with other members of the establishment. And not nearly as slick at it as her husband. I once upon a time knew both of them a little bit, even been a guest at the governors mansion when they lived there. They were hypocrites and phonies then and I’ve seen nothing to indicate they changed – certainly not for the better.

    I’ll agree with someone else who said they are yesterday’s news.

  46. Jim

    Johnson’s constant movement sometimes made him seemed like a confused tweaker, but he would also sometimes come out with facts that made you think he wasn’t as confused as he appeared. It was a stark contrast with the Democrat, Heinrich, who seemed like a robot programmed to not say anything objectionable. Johnson, especially when talking about immigration, seemed alive and compassionate. The Republican, Mick Rich was entirely forgettable.

    I don’t know if either Johnson or Heinrich helped themselves, but it seemed to me that Rich lost ground.

  47. paulie Post author

    The social media giants are trying to catch up to IPR and the censorious trends Frankel started here by stepping up their removal of unapproved viewpoints, a process which is quickening and intensifying both here and on those larger platforms. These things always snowball, and usually take those who start them down with them. Frankel will be no exception.

    Soon, we will all end up in information bubbles composed purely of echoes of our own existing views. I don’t see this as a bad thing, and it’s part of the freedom of association. Those who insist that others bake them a cake or provide them a platform are an embarrassment to us all, and almost always hypocrites on this account. The walls are being built higher and higher, both the physical and metaphoric ones. Will they come down, and if and when they do will anything or anyone be left as they crush all our safe spaces in their collapse?

    Yeah, you’re totally not trolling.

  48. Anthony Dlugos

    “Johnson’s constant movement sometimes made him seemed like a confused tweaker, but he would also sometimes come out with facts that made you think he wasn’t as confused as he appeared…Johnson, especially when talking about immigration, seemed alive and compassionate.”

    Sounds like his 2016 Campaign, 2.0.

  49. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I’ve read enough of Justin Raimondo to know that he claimed the paleos dumped Pat Buchanan in the 90s because of Pat’s trade protectionism.”

    I guess Justin doesn’t consider himself a paleo, then — he was one of Buchanan’s nomination speakers at the Reform Party’s national convention in 2000.

  50. Thomas L. Knapp

    “someone is doing a hard pivot”

    It’s Weld’s patented move. He’s always a small-government radical until he gets what he wants (an election win as a major party candidate, or a nomination with a third party), then goes completely to shit when it counts.

  51. paulie Post author

    Meanwhile, in other duopoly news, Senator Warren is doing neither herself nor her party any good whatsoever with her latest idiotic antics.

    Agreed. She couldn’t help but make herself and her idiotic 1% or 0.01% native ancestry DNA test the focus instead of major national issues, when control of congress is undecided, making herself look ridiculous. LP Louisiana breaks it down…

  52. dL

    I guess Justin doesn’t consider himself a paleo, then — he was one of Buchanan’s nomination speakers at the Reform Party’s national convention in 2000.

    or, by way of a clarification(which allows Raimondo to retain his paleo status):

    the paleos that dumped Pat Buchanan in the 90s did so because of Pat’s trade protectionism.

  53. dL

    “someone is doing a hard pivot”

    No, Weld did a townhall with Matt Welch earlier in the summer where he spouted that same line: libertarianism is not the pragmatic center. Of course, soon thereafter, he did a podcast with Nick Gillespie where he parroted Nick’s schtick: libertarianism is the new pragmatic center. It’s frick and frack with those two guys. And Weld is going to frick or frack based on his audience.

  54. dL

    How did Governor Johnson do?

    I haven’t had a chance to watch it.

    Last time I checked, Johnson was establishing his pork barrel bona fides on military spending(military spending by Washington needs to be decreased but military spending ear marked for New Mexico needs to go up) and being called out on his hypocrisy by his opponents…

  55. dL

    I glance at Rockwell’s site maybe 3 times a year, just to see if he’s still on the Trump train, but a google search over the last two years produces a number of articles and blog posts. They’re probably more frequent when tariffs are in the news.

    well, yeah:
    trump trade site:lewrockwell.com

    will return hits but not nearly enough for an ideology that claims to be driven insane by paeloconservative protectionism. And Trump and trade is in the news as of late with the reorganization of NAFTA 2.0.

    It makes perfect sense for the PaleoLibertarians to work with the PaleoConserveratives even with their disagreements. People don’t come as blank slates. If you want to expand your ideology, you have to talk with and work with people who don’t agree with you.

    Well, we’re not talking about a whip caucus, here. The principle is dead simple. People should be free to do what they want without a contravening authority standing in the way. You either agree with that or you don’t.

    Now, if one wants to talk political issues, by all means one should work with different ideological factions to advance an issue that advances human liberty. For example, say, criminal justice reform. However, that type of compromise is not a compromise of principle.

  56. Anthony Dlugos

    “It’s Weld’s patented move.”

    “And Weld is going to frick or frack based on his audience.”

    Relax, guys. In the normal political world, this goes on all the time.

    Account for his situational messaging when evaluating Weld, but its better than the historical libertarian alternative of a 100% tone deaf message that in its best formulation is inapplicable utopianism (a world set free in our lifetime) and in its worst formulation is horrifically counterproductive machoflashing (service members are accessories to murder and shooting school boards is better than shooting students).

  57. DJ

    Not Yours To Give
    Davy Crockett on The Role Of Government

    from: The Life of Colonel David Crockett

    compiled by: Edward S. Elis (1884)

    “Money with [Congressmen] is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”

    http://hushmoney.org/Davy_Crockett_Farmer_Bunce.htm

  58. dL

    Relax, guys. In the normal political world, this goes on all the time. Account for his situational messaging when evaluating Weld…

    That’s not what you wrote here:
    http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2018/10/october-2018-open-thread/#comment-1903218

    Yes, but that’s not the game he is playing – nor is it the game the paleo”libertarian”/alt right slide has been playing for nearly 30 years now. They always try to have it both ways

    Which is it? Can you have it both ways or not? Or is it simply your position that Anthony Dlugos gets to have it both ways. You might be able to get away with that inside your own head, but the fantasy inside your head is not exactly the real world, to quote a phrase you like to unremittingly pontificate about.

  59. Anthony Dlugos

    “Can you have it both ways or not?”

    One can certainly try.

    Your problem is you apparently can’t see a difference between Woods and Weld and their messaging/policy ideas. This is what I would suggest is the hallmark of your fantasyland thinking.

    I understand WHY you think like that. For someone who sees ALL government action as force, there is no difference between Woods and Weld.

    I recall at some point in the past at this site…I leave it to you to find the occasion, as you appear to be adept at that…I made a point that we should try and appeal to voter concerns, and you suggested that that is exactly the argument of the blood-and-soil Mises crowd.

    You’re certainly free to make equivalencies like these, but you are only marginalizing yourself, and if followed through to its logical conclusion will end up supporting a lunatic candidate like Vohra or Kokesh at the 2020 Convention, because anyone from the world of practical politics will have some political warts, for obvious reasons.

    Good luck.

  60. Thomas L. Knapp

    It’s not that Weld has warts.

    It’s that he’s ALL warts.

    And not just on libertarian ideology. He’s been a shambling train wreck on a practical level since he left the governorship. He’s completely untrustworthy, arguably corrupt, and his entire selling point is that he’s got “connections” that never quite seem to come through for anything substantial except swinging casino deals and defrauding students. He makes Trump look competent and clean.

  61. William T. Forrest

    Gotta agree with Andy Craig again….

    “If you wouldn’t invite somebody to speak at an LP event who:

    – thinks the liberation of gays and minorities is a “cultural Marxist” plot
    – cofounded a white nationalist group and lies about how recently he defended them
    – promotes a coauthor who wants to stone non-Christians to death
    – endorses a psychotic cult leader who rants about “the JQ” (“Jewish Question”)
    – supports mass deportation and state immigration laws on explicitly racist grounds
    – promotes the idea that we should embrace a “blood and soil” mentality
    – attacks Libertarian candidates for not buying into all of the above

    …then you shouldn’t invite Tom Woods to speak at your LP event. I’m extremely disappointed, Libertarian Party of Florida.

    When you send the message that he’s somehow part of our movement, this is what you’re endorsing. It’s appalling and deserves to be called out and condemned.

    If I wanted to be part of a party like that, I could sign up for the GOP and send a check to Steve King.”

  62. dL

    Your problem is you apparently can’t see a difference between Woods and Weld and their messaging/policy ideas. This is what I would suggest is the hallmark of your fantasyland thinking.

    The fantasyland is to magically think people who say completely different things to different audiences won’t get called out on it.

    I understand WHY you think like that. For someone who sees ALL government action as force, there is no difference between Woods and Weld.

    Government is organized crime. Rest assured, however, that empirical observation does not impede my observatory powers to detect the differences between Weld and Woods.

    I recall at some point in the past at this site…I leave it to you to find the occasion, as you appear to be adept at that…I made a point that we should try and appeal to voter concerns, and you suggested that that is exactly the argument of the blood-and-soil Mises crowd.

    True, their own words. The difference between you and them is that they use the term LOLibertarian instead Napster. Unfortunately for you, 99.9999% of the population associates Napser with the music service, not libertarianism. So you would have the more daunting marketing problem, and you probably would just end up stealing their phrases. LOLibertarian is just a bit more clever than Napster.

    but you are only marginalizing yourself,

    To whom? You, lol. Like I give a rat’s ass…

    and if followed through to its logical conclusion will end up supporting a lunatic candidate like Vohra or Kokesh at the 2020 Convention,

    Nope. Other than perhaps Steve Kubby back in 2008, the LP POTUS slate has never really inspired me all that much. I doubt it will be any different the next go around…

  63. paulie Post author

    Other than perhaps Steve Kubby back in 2008, the LP POTUS slate has never really inspired me all that much.

    Yeah, it’s a shame we did not get more done with that one. Me and Knapp were about the only ones who did much of anything at all on the campaign aside from Steve himself. We kind of blew it at the convention too, had a ton of signs (can’t remember who funded those – Sparkman?), which we could have used by the time the VP nom rolled around, and couldn’t get them to people in time. We even got good advice (from Moulton?) to put them on every seat but that did not happen. Not sure that would have made the difference, the big issue was all the people who left as soon as Barr won nomination. They could have easily put us over the top for VP and while that would not have erased the stain of nominating Barr, Barr-Kubby would have still sent a much different and better message than Barr-Root.

  64. wredlich

    I go away for a while, come back and find lots of videos and people bashing Ron Paul.

    Ron Paul’s left pinky is more libertarian than the combination of Bill Weld, Gary Johnson and Bob Barr. But that’s not saying much.

    Yes, I know the left pinky thing makes little sense. But it’s funny.

  65. William T. Forrest

    I doubt he’s any more libertarian than Johnson. But Ron Paul knows how to market himself to different audiences and tell them what they want to hear, including libertarians. I don’t think his association with Rothbard, Rockwell and the bigots they have associated with libertarianism by way of the “paleo” /alt right has done us any favors. In fact any association with bigotry sets us way back. The Paul cult is also very anti-LP, endorsing very non-libertarian Republicans and Constitution Party theocrats one minute, advocating against voting at all the next. When they do make their periodic incursions into the LP they are not any better, always pushing for making the LP more socially conservative and bigot-friendly. I’m pretty much OK with them being “Libertarians for Trump,” except I wish they would stop calling themselves libertarians.

  66. Anthony Dlugos

    “Ron Paul’s left pinky is more libertarian than the combination of Bill Weld, Gary Johnson and Bob Barr. But that’s not saying much.”

    Yea, that racist tweet from July with the horrific depictions of an Asian, a black man, a Jewish person, and (apparently) a Latino man, along with a flat out racist reactionary comment about a changing American culture is just a wonderful example to Americans regarding what it means to be a libertarian.

    And the old coot racist Ron Paul’s ass-covering, idiotic response to the firestorm that resulted from the tweet…that it was “inadvertently” posted…(how does a Tweet get inadvertently posted? Does that mean he was okay with its creation, but it just shouldn’t have been posted?*)…was matched only by his now-typical claim, going back to the atrocious newsletters, that someone else did it. An excuse that doesn’t work for an eight-year old kid, let alone an experience politician.

    Why is this conspiratorial, dried-up, useless piece of paleoconservative detritus still in the Libertarian Party Hall of Liberty? Per the LP itself, that is the highest honor the Libertarian Party could bestow, recognizing, among other things, “outstanding leadership and high character.” His actions lo’ these many years display none of that. He displays the opposite.

    Come to think of it, maybe Paul’s inclusion in the Hall does fit. After all, per the party, the Hall was established “to honor lifetime or significant achievement having a lasting effect on the Libertarian Party or libertarian movement.” A lasting effect, indeed.

    That is to say nothing of the practical reality that if our 2020 candidate ever got any traction, an opponent of our candidate could easily sink that traction by bringing up Paul’s inclusion in the Hall, in combination with his history of blatant racism.

    Its long been time to cut loose of the swindling geezer. At a bare minimum, he should absolutely be withdrawn from the Hall of Liberty. Whatever good he did for the party and movement was far outweighed by the noxious element he attracted.

    *Was the connotation intended, that Paul had less problem with the tweet itself than he was with the fact that it got posted? For that, I refer to the Dondero Rule, which asserts that, when in doubt, assume the tired paleo fool is always about the money, knows the dastardly makeup of his following, and, yes, intended to indicate that he doesn’t have as much of a problem with the message behind the tweet, as he does with the fact that it revealed too much about his support. As has been said (and not coincidentally, I might add) about Trump’s supporters: I’m not sure how many of Paul supporters are actual racists, and how many of them just don’t have much of a problem with the implication.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/395176-ron-paul-tweets-racist-cartoon-faces-backlash

    Let’s drop this this pustule before he causes the LP even more trouble.

  67. Anthony Dlugos

    dL,

    I hereby nominate you for president of the Libertarian Party Aggressively Pedantic Caucus.

    No clue why you would think I, of all people, would be bothered by Woods’ tactics, which I understand given the nature of the competition vis a vi intraparty electoral politics. No one forced me into the party and thus be beholden to its rules.

    If Woods manages to convince enough of the party to follow him, then his version of libertarianism becomes the official version of the party. That’s reason enough to fight him. But if I had a problem with the ground rules and political tactics themselves, that they could potentially result in the sullying of a purist view of the philosophy that I couldn’t deal with, then I wouldn’t join the party in the first place.

  68. dL

    I hereby nominate you for president of the Libertarian Party Aggressively Pedantic Caucus.

    pedantic, indeed, though talking out your ass sophistry would be the better description…

  69. William T. Forrest

    From the study: [Researchers in the United States have pointed out that the urban crime problem is not generated by immigrants, legal or undocumented, and that immigrants are not increasing crime rates. Socially disadvantaged neighborhoods may, however, make immigrant groups more susceptible to crime victimization when social support networks do not exist or are lacking. Despite the research findings on crime and immigration, the U.S. public mistakenly believes foreign-born immigrants to be dangerous criminals.]

    http://criminology.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-93

  70. robert capozzi

    wtf,

    My views on immigration are not informed by the “crime” argument. However, a few things to feedback:

    * Conflating all immigrants with illegal immigrants is a disservice to truth. Few to none have any quarrel with LEGAL immigrants. And why the qualification of “urban” crime?
    * iirc, crime rates are falling overall. It may well be that crimes by illegal immigrants happen less frequently than those committed by legal immigrants or US-born persons. I have to wonder how this can be known, however. Many crimes go unprosecuted. Who does them is unknown.
    * Being more susceptible to crime and less willing to report crime BECAUSE an illegal immigrant wants to remain in the shadows is a problem. And, again, unreported crimes are difficult/impossible to track, making the data unreliable.

  71. Paul

    WTF,

    I’ve found the Republican Party is generally less tolerant of outright bigots than the Libertarian Party. One obvious example is the RP newsletters. Another would be how the GOP polices the affiliations of its leadership.

    I think it speaks more to desperation than anything though. The Republicans clearly don’t want or need a Ron Paul or a Tom Woods.

  72. DJ

    Paul: I’ve found the Republican Party is generally less tolerant of outright bigots than the Libertarian Party.

    Me: That should go without saying- but hang around here and learn how Democrats (the face of the left in the US) are ignored for their bigotry, because- Trump. LOL

  73. DJ

    RC: My views on immigration are not informed by the “crime” argument. However, a few things to feedback:

    Me: Do not question the purity of the driven snow, Robert.

  74. Freeman

    I’ve lived outside the States for a long while. Friends tell me it’s become a land of thin-skinned hyperoffensable people. They say it’s not just liberals & conservatives, Libertarians & Greens, and bloggers. It’s the air you breathe . . . sounds stifling.

  75. dL

    I’ve found the Republican Party is generally less tolerant of outright bigots than the Libertarian Party.

    No, not even close…The GOP is an outright white nationalist party.
    https://www.unzensuriert.at/content/0027654-Steve-King-Bring-Pride-back-Austria
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/john-boehner-nazis-congress-republicans-trump-congress-interview-a8030026.html

    American libertarianism problems w/ white nationalism is a consequence of the spillover from conservative fusionism.

  76. DJ

    dl: No, not even close…The GOP is an outright white nationalist party.

    Me: Yet Democrats subscribe to the same policies that finance and perpetrate a nationalist mentality – I suppose being covertly nationalist is perfectly acceptable. LOL- Is that why there is no denigration of them? Oh, never mind, they are pure as (the face of the left) driven snow. My bad, I apologize.

    dl: American libertarianism problems w/ white nationalism is a consequence of the spillover from conservative fusionism.

    Me: Well, who else would be to blame? Russians? Mexicans? Chinese? This is America and many don’t subscribe to an echo chamber of esoteric European rhetoric. Conservatives have as much right to be heard as Democrat liberals and vice versa but since we vote for politicians not everyone gets their way- and most conservatives believe that Democrats are the root of all evil- I wonder why that is? Don’t you? Nationalism? LOL- Democrats just sell their red, white and blue nationalism bullshit with different rhetoric than Republicans

    SMH-

  77. William T. Forrest

    Normally, I wouldn’t read much less post anything this long here, but it is very powerful and moving please read it. Also, it’s from facebook, and with their weird terms and conditions on who can see what I’m not sure how many of you would be able to see it if I just posted the link.

    George Godwyn wrote:

    Something happened on Facebook awhile ago that I’ve never written about and only shared with a few people. I kept it to myself, mostly, because I didn’t want to upset the people in question, but I guess it’s time. (And for probably the first time I am going to put a content warning on a post, because this post probably requires one. So, here’s a CW for violence against trans people.)

    For a long time, I wondered about the understanding of gender on the far right, the Trump right. The bathroom controversy, in particular I thought bizarre. I can understand the basic conservatism and fear of new ideas, but the bathroom conflict seemed odd to me. It was extremely important in the minds of Trump supporters, even though it can’t possibly be a common problem in most of the areas these people live. The position on the right seemed precisely the opposite of what it should be. Why do you want someone presenting as a woman in every respect using the damn men’s room, or vice versa? Isn’t that going to be more socially outrageous, in most situations? I didn’t get it. So I decided to ask the Trump supporters.

    I posted a picture of Buck Angel, a transgender adult film actor, in a few of large, sometimes huge, Trump groups. The picture showed a very buff, ripped Mr. Angel from the waist up, shirtless, with a shaved head and sporting a Fu Manchu mustache. He is an extremely masculine looking guy. With the picture I included the question “This person has a vagina. Which bathroom should they use?”

    I thought at least some of these people will realize how silly it would be to want this man to use the ladies room. How socially awkward and alarming that would be, in so many situations. Putting aside how dangerous it would be for the man, simply on the basis of the the immediate, practical effect on the other diners in the given Applebee’s or wherever it was happening.

    The post got hundreds of comments, finally thousands. Immediately. The Trump supporters had a very clear answer and they were adamant about it. Almost no answered with “the men’s room”. A few said things like “if they’ve got a vagina, they use a woman’s room, if they have a penis, they use the men’s room.” But the majority of the of the commenters had an answer I hadn’t considered at all. These people had worked out a very simple solution to the problem of transgender people and the norms revolving public restrooms.

    They wanted transgender people to die.

    They were quite explicit about it, very blunt. “They should die.” That simple. That concise. “They should die.”

    Let me be entirely clear about this – they knew what they were saying, they knew exactly what they wanted. They didn’t want a trans man in the men’s room and they didn’t want a trans man in the woman’s room. They wanted the trans man to be dead.

    Of course some of them were more loquacious than that. They had reasons they should die, preferred methods, they expressed their feelings about the fantasized the deaths, but death or something similar was the most common answer. “Stop being”, essentially. A lot of other people answered “they should stay home”, maintaining the status quo without having to deal with the problem while still allowing transgender people to, you know, live, but mostly death or some sort of violence was the preferred option. Comment after comment, they should die, fuck them, stay-at-home, don’t use the bathroom, I’ll kill them if I catch them in the bathroom with my daughter, they should die, they should die, they should die.

    Oh, and in case That’s not plain enough, it wasn’t just death they were threatening. They were threatening anything they could think of. Torture, castration, humiliation, at adults and children alike. Any brutal, vicious insult or threat imaginable. I’ve watched these groups for years, dozens of them. Anyone who watches the news, who’s seen our president make a speech, knows how mean, how grotesque, how petty and ugly these people can be. The things they say about Mexicans, Muslims, about women, gay people, immigrant children. Even if you haven’t been in one of these groups, it’s not hard to imagine. Jesus, our president publicly mocked a disabled man. But I still wasn’t prepared for the comments in this thread. Just sheer, stark, gut level hatred, unencumbered by the slightest empathy. Loathing. Disgust. Raw hate.

    As much time as I’ve spent in these groups, examining these people, I didn’t think anything could shock me. I was wrong. Maybe it shouldn’t have, but it did.

    There is not one single issue that brings the evil out in Trump supporters the way trans-people do, there is no class of people more loathed. More than anything else, gender self-determination symbolizes precisely the social progress that animates the Trump right. They despise it and the people who embody it. Understand this. This issue is central to these people on the right, there is nothing they feel more deeply about. The Trump right does not want a solution to the social problem of trans people and restroom use. They simply do not want trans people to exist. That is what they want. What they demand. Nonexistence.

    Today the New York Times reported that the Trump administration is now in the process of redefining the administrative understanding of gender as simply a matter of biology and nothing more. Gender would be determined solely and entirely by birth assignment – as male or female, immutable and unchangeable, a fact. They are already rolling back numerous civil rights guarantees instantiated in the Obama years, policies that allowed a significant portion of our nation to live their lives with some basic dignity and safety. Essentially the Department of Health and Human Services intends to define transgender people out of existence.

    This is happening now. Right now.

    Like I said at the beginning, I never really talked about that little test I did in the Trump groups with Buck Angel’s picture much before this. I know so many trans people and I know how difficult it can be for them, sometimes, just to live their lives, what a scary place the world can be. I felt like it was all too awful, I didn’t want to scare people even more. I guess it probably wouldn’t come as a shock to most of my trans friends, it’s a reality they live every day, but I just didn’t want to pile on. But it’s too late for all that now.

    I haven’t heard people talking about the Health and Human Services attack on trans rights all that much, so far, and I’m a little surprised, because we should all be clear about something. The changes they are making don’t mean a little inconvenience for a few trans people.

    They mean death. It’s that simple. It’s going to mean withdrawal, seclusion, humiliation, violence and death.

    Think about the Trump supporters I described, think about the thousands of comments I just told you about. Now think about the reinforcement this sort of decision makes for their worst instincts, think about a trans man, presenting as a man, being forced to use the ladies room in some Podunk, red state, Trump voting shithole.

    Now how do you suppose that goes down with the rest of the folks in the having dinner? And how do you suppose the teenage trans boy using the ladies room goes down with the parents of the teenage girls at the high school? And how does that make the teenage trans boy feel? Or the teenage trans girl having to share a bathroom with the testosterone jacked 17-year-old jocks at the high school? And what do you suppose happens to the trans girl forced to onto a man’s prison block?

    Humiliation, violence, rape, suicide, and murder. Death. Trans rights are a matter of life and death, in a very real, very palpable way. The definitions change, and people die. The rules change, and people die. The laws change, and people die. Immediately.

    This is happening because the people in the White House get it. They know their base, and they know exactly what their base wants. They got it 100% right this time. They are defining transgender people out of existence because they know their base wants transgender people to be dead.

    Trans rights, opposition to gender self-determination, hatred for trans people, as I’ve already described, are at the heart of the Trump phenomena. There is nothing that evokes the hatred and fear and violence on the right the way the simple existence of trans people does. It is stomach turning to see, horrible in its blind ferocity, and I don’t know how the fuck my trans friends have the strength and poise to live every day in the face of that horror, that hatred, but they do. I suppose they have to, and that’s where the fight is now.

    I don’t care who you are, I don’t care where you are in the political spectrum, I don’t care how fucking liberal or leftist you are, I don’t care how feminist you are, if you don’t support trans-rights, you are not on my fucking side. I don’t give a fuck about your bio–essentialist arguments, I don’t give a fuck about your history with men, I don’t care about your pissing eight year old or your bigot grandmother. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about your traumatic sexual assault if it means you’re going to take it out on some fucking teenage girl who doesn’t want to have to use a bathroom with a bunch of frat boys and have the same fucking thing happen to her. Fuck you.

    If you want to know where the battle lines are drawn most clearly and unmistakably, between decency and the dark, right now, in the United States, in 2018, it’s here. Trans rights are the battlefield and trans people, like it or not, are in the vanguard of that battle. They are the front-line in a fight they never asked for, every fucking day, every hour, every time they leave the fucking house.

    There is no fight more important as this, now, today. There are no people so vulnerable, so marginalized and there should be no fucking doubt among anyone on the left, any liberal, any libertarian, about this.

    The fight is here now, it’s happening. An entire marginalized community, federally defined out of existence and set up to be victimized by a segment of the population too fucking backwards and just plain, willfully dumb to bother to try and understand what the hell is going on in the world, or empathize with another fucking human being.

    If we don’t stop this, people are going to die, killed for something they can’t change, for who they are in the deepest part of themselves. Not somewhere down the road, not in five years, but now. They’re going to start dying now.

    We can’t let that happen. Those of us who still live in the modern world still own this culture and we need to do what we can to make sure it doesn’t. We cannot go back to the 1950s, we cannot watch more people die simply for being born a woman or a man. We cannot let that happen. We can’t lose this battle.

    This isn’t temporary, this isn’t going to go away tomorrow, the last two years is only the beginning. Gender self-determination will be the civil rights battle of the 21st century. If we have to fight this for the rest of our lives, we cannot allow these fuckers, this raw hate, to win.

    So be shocked for a second, cry about it for a minute, and while you’re at it, maybe today is a good day to hug your trans friends, tell them you got their back. Because we do, a lot of us. America isn’t just Trump supporters. Remember that, guys and gals. For what it’s worth, some of us got your back.

    Then get over it and get ready, because this is a fight and you’re in it. We all are, all of us, left, liberal, libertarian, right, if you’re a decent human being and you care about basic human rights, you’re in it up to your ass and the water is rising fast.

    Hatred is a powerful emotion and it is temporarily ascendant, but hate can’t beat the future, and that future is an America, a world, where every single trans person lives their life safely and with the same dignity any other man or woman enjoys, because ultimately, as badly as they want to, they just can’t turn back the clock. Not when so many of us stand in their way, not with so many lives on the line. They just can’t.

    And that really is immutable, unchangeable. That really is a fact.

    #WontBeErased

  78. William T. Forrest

    Josh Shepard: Their hate for the transgender is just the beginning. The reality is, they want us all dead. Everyone who thinks and feels differently than them. Everyone who looks different, sounds different, sees the world from a different perspective. They want us all dead. Trump worshipers are beyond reasoning with. This is a fight to protect the vulnerable, certainly, but make no mistake, it will not end with them. This is a fight for survival. To give one inch is to lose everything.

  79. William T. Forrest

    “What vitriol toward Ron Paul! He’s a hero to me.”

    You should re-examine who your heroes are then. It’s past time the libertarian movement took a good look in the mirror, an honest look, and cut out the alt right/paleo cancer once and for all. Conflating libertarianism with white ethnonationalism, bigotry, reactionary patriarchal violence, migrant bashing, theocracy, anti-semitism, etc, etc, is incredibly toxic. Conflating it with the Republican Party, which is also increasingly the open and natural home of such things, is also very toxic. Simultaneously trying to also conflate these things with the Libertarian Party makes it all the worse.

    Make no mistake, Ron Paul has done many things, open and not so open, well known and not so well known, along with Rothbard and Lew Rockwell and the slithering slime creatures like Gary North and Hans Hoppe who are always in tow, to conflate all these things. Much to our detriment. And while Ron Paul is not himself on the Trump train, many of his supporters are, from Alex Jones to Rand Paul to Lew Rockwell and Walter Block and many, many others. And that train, make no mistake, is headed right for the death camps.

    It has a long track and it will start slowly at first, much as it did in the very same Nazi Germany that Donald Trump’s much beloved father admired so much and which his son equally looks up to and plans to emulate – a plan he is starting to put all the pieces in place for.

    And much like Trump, Ron Paul does a lot to foster and encourage the whitewashing and fetishization of Russian dictator Putin, whose own train to the concentration camp is further down that same track. Like Trump, Ron Paul is known for whitewashing the Confederacy, although as far as I know, of the two Ron Paul is the only one who proudly campaigned in public with a Confederate flag. Decades after this has become unacceptable for most politicians.

    This cancer has eaten deep into the heart, brain and vital organs of libertarianism for a very long time now. And now the only question isn’t whether it should be cut out, how quickly or how thoroughly, but whether it is already too late to save the patient.

  80. Anthony Dlugos

    “It’s past time the libertarian movement took a good look in the mirror, an honest look, and cut out the alt right/paleo cancer once and for all.”

    I obviously agree.

    How?

  81. dL

    Yet Democrats subscribe to the same policies that finance and perpetrate a nationalist mentality – I suppose being covertly nationalist is perfectly acceptable. LOL

    Yes, they do, more or less. No, it is not acceptable.

  82. dL

    And much like Trump, Ron Paul

    I’m not a Ron Paul fan, but I can’t make a moral equivalence between Trump and Paul.

    fetishization of Russian dictator Putin,

    The democrats are the ones with the Putin fetish…

  83. Anthony Dlugos

    “For starters, stop being a turnstile for the GOP.”

    Replaced with whom?

    A) If you are referring to the party’s presidential candidates, the party had no other legitimate option in 2008, 2012, or 2016, except possibly for Gravel in ’08, a guy who was hardly a plumbline libertarian. (and, as an aside, someone I would have been okay with).

    B) In the present political context, it stands to reason that defections are more likely to come from the more troubled of the two major parties, and its also likely that early defectors are going to be the politicians most aware of and repulsed by their erstwhile party’s changes.

    C) Its sheer lunacy to suggest the alt-right/paleo wing of the party were okay with Johnson/Weld. They were more nauseated by the ticket than anyone else in the party. e.g,: the bake the cake issue, vouching for Hilary, Johnson’s apparent assent to a carbon tax at the Saturday night debate at the convention in Orlando.

    As I have mentioned several times at this site in the past: for the love of everything holy, find me a Democrat worthy of our support AND willing to defect and I’ll gladly get behind him, or preferably, her. B

    But until then, if we are going to limit this discussion to which currently available candidate will best help drive out the alt-righters and paleos in 2020, the best option RIGHT NOW is Governor Weld. No one at this site had a bigger problem with Weld than the Xenophobe Andy did, and that goes ditto of the rest of the alt-right incursion.

    I’ll repeat that, in Goat Blood Boy Augustus Invictus’ fare-the-well to the LP, he made it a point to say that the LP screwed up by nominating J-W and should have nominated Pertersen-Sharpe. I wonder why that is? After all, if Goat Blood Boy thought ANY ex-republican was acceptable for alt-right entryism purposes, he would have endorsed them, not criticized them. (Its not just G.B.B. The paleos were apoplectic about the nomination).

    In the mean time, far more important than worrying about nominating another liberal ex-republican, would be to go after their anointed one, and get Paul removed from the Hall of Liberty in 2020.

  84. dL

    If you are referring to the party’s presidential candidates, the party had no other legitimate option in 2008, 2012, or 2016, except possibly for Gravel in ’08, a guy who was hardly a plumbline libertarian. (and, as an aside, someone I would have been okay with).

    I’m not aware of any of the candidates for the nomination in the past who failed to meet the “legitimacy” requirements, which would be 35 years of age +, 14 years residency requirement, natural born citizen. Can you point out the candidates who managed to slip past the qualification requirements?

    Now, if you mean serious, well the LP has never run a serious presidential ticket. Johnson/Weld managed 3.2%. That’s margin of error stuff. What kind of loser thinks margin of error is serious? The definition of serious in presidential politics is bringing, oh, at least a quarter of a billion to the table. Even with that, you would still be spending a fraction what the duopoly candidates spend. And I got news bulletin for you, anyone capable of self-funding 250 million+ for an independent campaign doesn’t need the libertarian party.

    Its sheer lunacy to suggest the alt-right/paleo wing of the party were okay with Johnson/Weld.

    I agree, but I didn’t nor have I ever suggested that. The Mises Caucus didn’t sign up for the LP b/c they were okay with Johnson/Weld; they signed up b/c they think Johnson/Weld is an indicator that the LP is weak and ripe for an intellectual takeover. They use where Johnson/Weld are bad on the issues to argue that where they are better(e.g, immigration) is just mere CNN SJW virtue signaling. And, frankly, I don’t need you to tell me what the paleos are supposedly thinking. I’m not offering up my opinions, here. I’m getting this by reading straight from the horses’ mouths.

  85. Bondurant

    Last month I wrote to J.D. Mesnard, one of the chief architects for restricting ballot access in Arizona, claiming I would forever vote Democrat for any office not contested by a Libertarian. I couldn’t bring myself to follow through with the threat on my ballot.

    I voted Green for governor and senate. In non-partisan races I was able to vote for 4 Libertarians (including Nick Sarwark for mayor in Phoenix).

    For all other races I wrote-in staff and whack packers from The Howard Stern Show.

    Bye, for now. Ack, ack.

  86. Tony From Long Island

    Yeah . . . . Voting for Baba Booey is really a great example of doing your civic duty . . . .

  87. Anthony Dlugos

    re: legitimate vs. serious.

    Ahh, there it is again, the hackneyed dL resort to aggressive pedantism.

    You know, your admonishment regarding needing a candidate who could theoretically raise $250 million would have some value if it wasn’t abundantly clear that your anyone you’d be okay with as a candidate couldn’t raise a thousandth of that. (by your own admission, probably).

    In any event, if the Mises Caucus thinks that they can make the case that J-W 2016, by all accounts the most left-leaning ticket and by far the most successful in LP history, proves the party is weak and ripe for takeover, far be it from me to disabuse them of their delusions.

    Indeed, I welcome the fight. Given the intraparty rules of the LP (to wit, we count votes) anyone willing to call themselves the Mises Caucus might as well have “Born To Lose” tattooed on their foreheads. How many Miseseans could there be in the whole country? Not enough, that’s for damn sure. Long term, they have no chance of beating us, and frankly any faction that repairs to some formulation of “But Other Candidate/Faction X is not principled!” or “We need to be bold in our messaging” (two things Woods has recently said) is already admitting they don’t have the votes.

    Its too late for the Mises Caucus, or any other “principled” faction. We have a clear baseline already; J-W 2016, 4.5 million votes. Call it only 3.2% and within the margin of error if you want, but its much better than any previous result, the party won’t go back to one-half of a percent and 400,000 votes.

    If you want to decry the reality that, once a philosophy puts itself onto the playing field of electoral politics, compromise is inevitable, then go ahead. But is a reality nonetheless. The only option is refusal to enter that playing field, something I know you’ve alluded to in the past.

  88. paulie Post author

    “It’s past time the libertarian movement took a good look in the mirror, an honest look, and cut out the alt right/paleo cancer once and for all.”

    I obviously agree.

    How?

    I don’t think there’s any magic bullet answer to that. It’s going to take a lot of work. And it may indeed be too late.

  89. paulie Post author

    Yes, they do, more or less. No, it is not acceptable.

    Agreed. If we keep allowing the Democrats to be the only “opposition,” we’ve already lost.

  90. paulie Post author

    For starters, stop being a turnstile for the GOP…

    Agreed again. The larger context of continuing conservative-libertarian fusionism, while not necessarily tied with or even friendly to ethnonationalism, bigotry, theocracy etc in and of itself, provides the habitat in which fusionism with the bigot far right festers and breeds, the water in which it swims, and the oxygen it needs to sustain itself.

  91. paulie Post author

    I’m not a Ron Paul fan, but I can’t make a moral equivalence between Trump and Paul.

    I wouldn’t either, but there are some aspects of similarity. For example, both play footsy with the support they both get from racists and bigots and do little or nothing to dissociate from it any way, but instead send out frequent dog whistles to encourage more of the same.

    The democrats are the ones with the Putin fetish…

    Disagreed. The racists and alt right have a major Putin crush. If you go on their pages, sites, posts etc it’s a major theme. They also love Trump. And Ron Paul. Not every one of them but almost. Ron Paul/Paleo networks mirror Kremlin propaganda frequently (I keep up with both, so I can see it in real time). Putin funnels money in various ways to various racist and nationalist groups all over the world, including in the US and including parties in Europe some of which are in power and others major threats to assume power. Some of that money ends up in the hands of Ron Paul and the various paleo network groups, some ends up helping fund the publications and forums they often get and share news from, and the same is true of the Trump campaign – both the official campaign and its grassroots fan base. There’s a lot of overlap there.

  92. paulie Post author

    And, frankly, I don’t need you to tell me what the paleos are supposedly thinking. I’m not offering up my opinions, here. I’m getting this by reading straight from the horses’ mouths.

    And you are unaware that a lot of them are Putin fans, many longstanding?

  93. Anthony Dlugos

    “I don’t think there’s any magic bullet answer to that.”

    No, there isn’t a magic bullet. But lets keep in mind that the LP is a political party; in other words, we count votes. The Mises Caucus and the alt-right in general is in a minority status in the party. When their message is put up to a vote, at least nationally, they lose. What they want is a straight-up philosophical battle, because there is essentially no objective answer and thus puts them on equal footing, permanently.

    Consequently, make them vote as much as possible. It puts them on the defensive. The immigration plank victory in New Orleans is a good example.

    My idea to put removal of Ron Paul from the Hall of Liberty to a vote is another one.

    Amend the “2.1 Property and Contract” plank to somehow suggest than any organization open to the public that avails itself of a government service is no longer free to discriminate as they wish.

    Amend the abortion rights plank to argue that we are opposed to any targeted defunding of planned parenthood (or targeted defunding of any government program that specifically impacts any particular race, class, etc).

    There’s a thousand ways the message can be sent that they are not welcome via votes like that, but we have to be willing to put purist principle on the line, letting the alt-right/paleo/mises crew know that we are prepared to lose some “principle” in order get rid of their worthless asses.

  94. paulie Post author

    Consequently, make them vote as much as possible. It puts them on the defensive. The immigration plank victory in New Orleans is a good example.

    Agreed.

    My idea to put removal of Ron Paul from the Hall of Liberty to a vote is another one.

    I don’t see that passing at this stage. Then again, it’s all about who shows up, and getting delegate spots may well be competitive by 2020 (it was starting to be in 2016 and 2018), so it also means who shows up at both the state and national conventions, brings friends with them, and is effective at campaigning and organizing on the convention floor.

  95. Bondurant

    Voting for Baba Booey and a deceased Eric the Midget is my civic duty. I am expressing my lack of enthusiasm for Democrats and Republicans while not falling for the lesser of two evils fallacy.

  96. William T. Forrest

    Voting? Voting is so last century! I say we (and by we I mean those of you who actually travel to these stupid things, not trolls like me who rarely ever emerge from our caves and spend as little time in the light and/or around other humans as we possibly can) just start punching nazis and any and all suspected fascist sympathizers. Since they only respect violence, only violence exercised directly against them wherever they show up can dissuade them from taking over. It’s the only thing that ever makes racist infiltrators feel unwelcome and sends them scurrying back under their rocks. Just start sucker punching the shit out of these people any time you see one or believe you have identified one as such. You can thank me later.

  97. paulie Post author

    Just start sucker punching the shit out of these people any time you see one or believe you have identified one as such.

    Decades ago, I actually did think that, and acted on it frequently. Over time I came to realize violence only begets more violence.

  98. paulie Post author

    Adam Bates

    “You’re one of the most divisive influences in libertarianism. All you do is divide people who aren’t as militant about immigration as you are.”

    I hate “divisive” as an insult generally, but especially in this context.

    You people have separated 7.5 billion souls into “us” and “not us.” You’ve rent apart what Nature and Nature’s God created as one. You had your evil governments draw lines of blood all across the earth and you shrug your shoulders while thousands of innocent people die trying to cross them, extinguishing with them all the liberty that they and their progeny would ever have exercised in a freer world.

    You people divide humanity every minute of every day and then call me “divisive” for thinking we should put it back together. Eat me.

  99. dL

    Amend the abortion rights plank to argue that we are opposed to any targeted defunding of planned parenthood…

    I give Weld 1:4 odds he will get the LP nomination if decides to run, with one caveat: if he started babbling about amending the platform in support of government funding for planned parenthood. Then I would give him 20:1 odds against. So, do us all a favor and fax your resume for campaign manager to Weld’s office. Long shot, I know, but maybe early dementia might set in by then and he will be just as delusional as you are now.

  100. paulie Post author

    “Russia is our friend” was buried by the lead, “Jews will not replace us”

    Basically two ways of saying the same thing when you consider the Russian history of pogroms or for that matter who is paying for much of that “Jews will not replace us” type of message all over the world today.

  101. dL

    Basically two ways of saying the same thing when you consider the Russian history of pogroms

    No, it’s not. European history is rife w/ anti-semitism. It was not limited to Russia. And if I gauge the collective intellectual capacity of that crowd correctly, they weren’t chanting it because of some historical unity with the late 19th century Russian pogrom but rather because Putin is public enemy number one on MSNBC and CNN. A generation ago, these same yahoos would have been chomping on popcorn watching Red Dawn.

  102. Anthony Dlugos

    “I give Weld 1:4 odds he will get the LP nomination if decides to run, with one caveat: if he started babbling about amending the platform in support of government funding for planned parenthood.”

    Come on, Mr. Pedant, get the wax out of your ears!

    Who said anything about Weld leading the charge to amend the platform?

    Not me. Obviously, that would be a bad idea for someone who might be trying to secure the presidential nomination, thus needing support of as many delegates as possible.

    For a presidential candidate, especially within a small party beset with dogmatism like the LP, the better way to effectively change the platform is to win the nomination and go directly to the voters with YOUR message of libertarianism. Its a pointless endeavor to try and change it directly by appealing to the likes of you at an actual convention.

    The subject at hand was how the libertarian movement could cut out the alt-right/paleo movement.

    My specific suggestion was how Libertarian Party rank and file members could start that process within the party itself.

    In any case, as usual, you do the typical dL chickensh*t move of criticizing someone else’s idea without proffering an idea of your own. Nope. As anyone here can see with regard my question about the LP should have nominated in 2008, 2012, or 2016, you just evade, secure in your ivory tower of PEDANTRY.

  103. Anthony Dlugos

    paulie,

    “I don’t see that passing at this stage.”

    It doesn’t need to pass, at least not initially, although I would like it to.

    At a bare minimum, it can be a determination of strength, forces the paleos/alt-right to defend an indefensible position, and smokes out the outright racists and their fellow travelers, along with anyone who doesn’t have the stones to call out racism when they see it.

    Bear in mind, this isn’t expulsion. Its just what I think is a reasonable position: in a strictly political sense, leaving Paul in the Hall of Liberty is an exposure to trouble we don’t need, and, given the alt-right problems we have, its an exposure we should be particularly concerned with.

  104. paulie Post author

    No, it’s not. European history is rife w/ anti-semitism. It was not limited to Russia.

    True, but it was particularly strong in Russia. It was Russian operatives who forged the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” and pogroms were primarily a Russian phenomenon. In the post-nazi era Western Europe had denazification but Eastern Europe did not, so racism and antisemitism were never made so anathema to the public there as in the West.

    And if I gauge the collective intellectual capacity of that crowd correctly, they weren’t chanting it because of some historical unity with the late 19th century Russian pogrom but rather because Putin is public enemy number one on MSNBC and CNN. A generation ago, these same yahoos would have been chomping on popcorn watching Red Dawn.

    Their affinity for Putin and Russia predates CNN and MSNBC making him public enemy number one. Everyone from Pat Buchanan to David Duke to many of the writers on Lew Rockwell’s site, Stormfront, Anglin et al were praising Putin for years, saying he would save Christendom and white race etc. They love his crackdowns on journalists, his mixing church and state, his anti-gay laws, his war on Islamic secessionists in the Caucasus, and he in turn loves them and funnels money to far right parties in Europe and media outlets they get news from. There’s nothing coincidental about the links between Putin, European racists, US white nationalists and Trump. The Rockwellians are also part of that same orbit, as they have affinity for all of these. There are also financial and information-sharing ties between all of them – and they predate CNN or MSNBC noticing any of it.

  105. robert capozzi

    AD,

    Do you feel that the alt-right incursion is a bigger problem for the LP vs the commitment to NAPism in the founding documents?

  106. Jim

    dL ‘“Russia is our friend” was buried by the lead, “Jews will not replace us.” The Dems would never bury Putin on page 3 like that…’

    They started out “You will not replace us.” It morphed into “Jews will not replace us” sometime later. I’m not sure if it was before or after “Russia is our friend.”

    The “You will not replace us” chant that was intended to be the lead, I’m guessing, was them identifying with the Confederate monuments and their opposition to the monuments being removed and possibly replaced with some civil rights leader. They started out white supremacist, then moved on to antisemitism later.

    “Russia is our biggest inspiration. I see President Putin as the leader of the free world.” – Matthew Heimbach, founder of the NeoNazi and white nationalist Traditionalist Worker Party

    Russia is the “key to white survival”. – David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK

    Russia is “the sole white power in the world.” – Richard Spencer, white nationalist President of the National Policy Institute.

    These people love Putin and Russia and Putin has returned their love by backing their side in the US and Europe. These people love the idea of a strongman in charge of the country. They love Putin’s rejection of liberalism and globalism, which they see as a Jewish conspiracy to undermine traditional Western Civilization in much in the same way that they viewed Communism as a Jewish conspiracy a generation ago.

    So you’re right that they are not in love with Russia because Russia killed some Jews a hundred years ago, and you’re right that they opposed Russia a generation ago. You’re wrong that they love Putin now simply because Putin is public enemy number one on MSNBC and CNN. The “war” in their mind, following the collapse of the USSR, has shifted from anti-Communism to anti-Liberalism, and that means Putin is now their ally. But the Jewish enemy, in their mind, is the same.

  107. paulie Post author

    See just a few examples among many

    http://www.pfaw.org/press-releases/the-traditionalist-international-new-report-examines-connections-between-u-s-religious-right-white-nationalist-right-and-putins-regime/

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/how-russia-became-a-leader-of-the-worldwide-christian-right-214755

    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/report/the-rise-of-the-traditionalist-international-how-the-american-right-learned-to-love-moscow-in-the-era-of-trump/

    https://qz.com/869938/how-russia-surpassed-germany-to-become-the-dangerous-new-role-model-for-trump-loving-american-white-supremacists/

  108. paulie Post author

    The “You will not replace us” chant that was intended to be the lead, I’m guessing, was them identifying with the Confederate monuments and their opposition to the monuments being removed and possibly replaced with some civil rights leader.

    Haven’t heard that take on it but whether they were also referring to that or not it’s also a reference to population replacement conspiracy theory, which basically states that massive amounts of third world immigrants are purposely being “imported” into “white” countries to “replace” the white population. The conspirators behind this dastardly “replacement” plan are sometimes identified as the UN, the “globalists,” the “New World Order,” “Illuminati,” “trilateralists/Bilderbergers/CFR,” Soros, Zionists, “Khazars,” “Ashkenazis,” or just plain Jews. Put population replacement genocide into your favorite search engine and you’ll see all kinds of links I’d just as soon not share here.

  109. Anthony Dlugos

    RC,

    No, definitely not. Dogmatism draws in the dogmatic. “A world set free in our lifetime” is a meaningless term in the realm of practical politics. It can mean whatever you want it to mean, including some nasty stuff.

    The original and bigger problem is the commitment to NAPism in the founding documents. The alt-right incursion is just a symptom, not the disease.

    Not that the founders intended this. Nor do the current crop of NAPists. On the other hand, lose the dogma, and I think you’ll lose a lot of both groups.

    I assume you feel the same?

  110. dL

    The original and bigger problem is the commitment to NAPism in the founding documents.

    If you’re a bigot, I agree, the Non-Aggression Principle is a bigger problem…

  111. dL

    Who said anything about Weld leading the charge to amend the platform?

    You did.

    “For a presidential candidate, especially within a small party beset with dogmatism like the LP, the better way to effectively change the platform is to win the nomination and go directly to the voters with YOUR message of libertarianism.”

    Weld is going to lead the calvary carrying the voice of the people to amend the the LP platform to call for the protection of government subsidies for Planned Parenthood. Yeah…

    via GIPHY

    dL chickensh*t move

    This is not exactly a family forum, Beavis. You can spell it out…

  112. paulie Post author

    Anthony said effectively change the platform, not actually. That is, he wants Weld to run counter to the platform as the nominee, without bothering to change it.

  113. dL

    Anthony said effectively change the platform, not actually.

    No, it was actually amend it…

    Amend the abortion rights plank to argue that we are opposed to any targeted defunding of planned parenthood

    Of course, Beavis often talks out of both sides of his mouth. Which side of his lips are moving depends on whose underwear he is sniffing at the time

  114. dL

    The Rockwellians are also part of that same orbit, as they have affinity for all of these. There are also financial and information-sharing ties between all of them – and they predate CNN or MSNBC noticing any of it.

    A “Putin” search on LRC from, say, 2003 to 2006, doesn’t return much. Back when I used to peruse LRC, I didn’t detect any Putin fetish.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=putin+site%3Alewrockwell.com+daterange%3A2452937-2453668&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F25%2F2003%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F25%2F2006&tbm=

    Frankly, the stuff that is happening today was predictable a generation ago when Putin was much more of a minor player. Putin or no Putin, it was going to happen, regardless…

  115. Jim

    The PaleoLibertarians are on the periphery of the Alt-Right and were the last to catch on. David Duke moved to Moscow in 1999 and lived there for 5 years. But the Russians mostly just played around with the European equivalent of the Alt-Right for a long time after Putin came to power. They were establishing ties with groups like Golden Dawn. The US came later and the PaleoLibertarians probably didn’t figure it out until Trump’s campaign began in 2015.

  116. robert capozzi

    AD,

    Yes, agreed. NAPism is the fundamental flaw. Alt-rightists — who are often NAPists as well — is yet another symptom of why NAPism should be relinquished as the operating philosophy for a lessarchist party. Non-alt-rightist NAPists seem able to separate the NAP from the alt-rightists rather than taking the opportunity to examine the NAP with an open mind. It withers under any amount of scrutiny.

    I note that the term “alt-right” lacks a clear definition. This can lead to unfairness, which I oppose more than the NAP. Sometimes it’s used to mean “David Duke.” Other times it means “Pat Buchanan.”

  117. Freeman

    Robert,
    I’ve known you to describe the NAP as a nostrum. I agree that it in no way suffices as a summation of libertarian principles. Please supply a working definition of “NAPism”.

  118. robert capozzi

    NAPism is the simplistic and inflexible application of the NAP to all political matters.

  119. Anthony Dlugos

    paulie writes,

    “Anthony said effectively change the platform, not actually. That is, he wants Weld to run counter to the platform as the nominee, without bothering to change it.”

    Of course you are right, and any half-wit who read through this conversation could see that, but dL has a problem with being intentionally obtuse as a way to try and make a point, see above on 10/22 at 15:02, where I referred to “legitimate” options for the presidential nomination at the LP’s last 3 conventions. Again, any half-wit would realize that means more than “constitutionally qualified.”

    When I wrote,

    “Amend the abortion rights plank to argue that we are opposed to any targeted defunding of planned parenthood.”

    It was clearly in reference to what I think WE can do to start removing the alt-right element/influence from the party.

    dL’s is the one who brought Weld’s name into the mix with his subsequent post. In fact, he tacitly admits that by saying,

    “I give Weld 1:4 odds he will get the LP nomination if decides to run, with one caveat: if he STARTED babbling about amending the platform in support of government funding for planned parenthood.”

    Emphasis on “started” being mine, meaning Weld is advocating for no such change at this time.

    dL’s bald-face prevarication continues at yesterday at 23:52, when he deliberately obfuscates what I think rank-and-file party members should do and what a presidential nominee should do.

    takes a lot of gall by him to then suggest I talk out of both sides of my mouth. But, its not surprising coming from someone who sniffs only his own underwear.

  120. Anthony Dlugos

    RC,

    “Non-alt-rightist NAPists seem able to separate the NAP from the alt-rightists rather than taking the opportunity to examine the NAP with an open mind. It withers under any amount of scrutiny.”

    No doubt about it. Ironically, the harder they try to (philosophically) separate the NAP from the alt-rightists, the more the alt-right barnacles stick to the ship of the LP. Like I said, endless angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin arguments is the arena the alt-righters WANT us to compete in. There’s no end to it. which keeps them in the fight just enough to expose us to trouble.

    The alt-right incursion’s worst nightmare is the party proclaiming that we no longer intend to be a dogmatic cult.

    Governor Weld, the least dogmatic person we’ve probably ever had on the presidential ticket,, he of vouching for Hillary and Trump being a far greater danger than Mrs. Clinton, was the one who incurred the wrath of BOTH the radical NAPists AND the alt-right incursion. Meanwhile, its radicals in the party who have since periodically made common cause with the alt-right element.

  121. dL

    takes a lot of gall by him to then suggest I talk out of both sides of my mouth. But, its not surprising coming from someone who sniffs only his own underwear.

    Beavis, wipe your nose, dry your tears, man…and try to muster at least a modicum of wit to come up with your own material

  122. paulie Post author

    A “Putin” search on LRC from, say, 2003 to 2006, doesn’t return much.

    The alt right/paleo orbit started holding Putin up as a model for the rest of the world around 2012/2013. As recently as 2011 the far right in Russia still hated Putin, but since then most of them have embraced him, and it’s since then that he has built up his ties with the far right throughout Europe and the US. When you say that the far right today loves Putin because CNN and MSNBC hates him you are mixing up cause and effect.

  123. paulie Post author

    I note that the term “alt-right” lacks a clear definition. This can lead to unfairness, which I oppose more than the NAP. Sometimes it’s used to mean “David Duke.” Other times it means “Pat Buchanan.”

    Neither Duke nor Buchanan epitomizes the alt right. The “alt” part refers to being culturally edgy, hip, sarcastic, youth-oriented. That doesn’t mean they reject the old school racists and traditionalist-populist-nationalist reactionaries like Duke and Buchanan, or that those old schoolers reject them, just that they put a different sort of marketing spin on that same old garbage. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right for a fuller understanding. It’s notable that the two co-creators of the Alt Right concept, Richard Spencer and Paul Gottfried, initially came out of the Ron Paul/Lew Rockwell orbit, as did many of its subsequent leaders such as Augustus Invictus, Christopher Cantwell and Mike Peinovich among others.

  124. robert capozzi

    AD: …vouching for Hillary and Trump being a far greater danger than Mrs. Clinton…

    Me: I thought WW went too far with his vouching, but I did root for HRC over Trump for the same reasons.

  125. robert capozzi

    PF,

    Anarcho-capitalists are associated with the alt-right, per Wikipedia? That should be bracing, and yet it doesn’t seem to wake up the NAPists.

  126. Anthony Dlugos

    “I thought WW went too far with his vouching…”

    I think he did too, and I found the J-W ticket’s statements during the entire campaign regarding Clinton to be at best…clumsy.

    However, clumsy as those attempts were, its laughable to suggest such messaging is a signal to the alt-right that says, “hey, were your kind of people.”

    I get WHY the dyed-in-the-wool NAPist or radical THINKS that. After all, its turtles all the way down for them. Its all aggression from the state, be it a bump-stock ban or the prohibition on private nukes. Once you let a little aggression in, the holy writs are sullied.

    Back here in the real world, its clear that there is so much territory on the Nolan Chart that is filled with people who are like-minded that the realistic chances of turning into, say, a new GOP (especially given the fact that there already IS a GOP), is nil.

    Of course, we will have to give up on the “world set free.”

  127. paulie Post author

    David Duke moved to Moscow in 1999 and lived there for 5 years. But the Russians mostly just played around with the European equivalent of the Alt-Right for a long time after Putin came to power.

    While Putin was known for his Islamophobia even back then, the reason why racists such as Duke loved Russia back then had nothing to do with Putin per se. At the time, there was a thriving far right underground in Russia where racism and other forms of bigotry were often expressed openly and allowed to thrive and recruit.

    Racist banners and chants were common in soccer stands, uniformed skinheads were often seen handing out leaflets in public places like Red Square and towns all over Russia, racist marches attracted thousands of participants as well as joining larger opposition coalition demonstrations and being welcomed as equal participants. Paramilitary and fight club racist groups were much bigger and better organized than in other countries with estimated membership in the tens or hundreds of thousands, openly racist musical acts played stadium shows and were treated as just normal music groups or performers by the pop culture media. And of course violent racist attacks on the streets and subways were notoriously common.

    What happened since then is that, I think perhaps Putin saw racist extremism as a potential threat to turn into revolution and depose him, especially in an economic crisis. What he has done is ban a lot of the more extreme racism – swastikas, sieg heil salutes and the like are no longer legal, with substitute symbols taking their place at the now much smaller far right marches and concerts, and some leaders and participants in openly racist organizing are jailed under Article 282.

    At the same time Putin has enacted many of the less extreme demands of the racist movement – his anti-gay laws, crackdown on socially liberal voices in the media (sometimes with extrajudicial killings of journalists), jailings and murders of Jewish and socially liberal oligarchs and opposition figures, mixing of church and state, etc. While the largest racist paramilitary and fight club groups have been banned or disbanded, their membership has been given a free rein outlet to fight in Ukraine and the Caucasus.

    I don’t know, but perhaps some of Putin’s more recent support of the racist far right in Europe and North America has to do in part with his desire to see such people make trouble in their own countries rather than immigrate to Russia. There are other reasons as well, however.

  128. paulie Post author

    Back here in the real world, its clear that there is so much territory on the Nolan Chart that is filled with people who are like-minded that the realistic chances of turning into, say, a new GOP (especially given the fact that there already IS a GOP), is nil.

    In the US, the chances of turning into the new Reform Party are much higher. But there is historical precedent elsewhere – the Costa Rican equivalent of the LP essentially turned into a new equivalent of its equivalent of our NSGOP after the latter collapsed in disgrace amidst corruption scandals, sending conservative politicians scurrying into the “libertarian” camp which promptly adopted the distinctly unlibertarian elements of conservatism.

  129. paulie Post author

    Anarcho-capitalists are associated with the alt-right, per Wikipedia?

    There’s an unfortunately far too large overlap. I think that’s almost entirely due to the lingering effects of the Rothbard-Rockwell paleo strategy.

    I highly recommend reading the whole article though.

  130. robert capozzi

    pf: I think that’s almost entirely due to the lingering effects of the Rothbard-Rockwell paleo strategy.

    me: Almost I can buy to some extent. Although this second wave of NAPists (Cantwell, Invictus, Jacob) tell me that it’s something deeper. Those who adopt an unworkable, extremist construct are prone to latching onto to other extremist trends, like alt-right-ism. Longists seem immune, so far.

  131. William T. Forrest

    “pf: I think that’s almost entirely due to the lingering effects of the Rothbard-Rockwell paleo strategy.

    rc: Almost I can buy to some extent. ”

    There are other factor, aside from but interwoven with the Paleo strategy.

    A lot of libertarians are nerdy males, and it’s easy to twist their frustration with not getting the attention they want from women into misogyny, or the discomfort they may have with any gay or bi desires they may have into homophobia. Most of them are relatively privileged whites, and it’s easy to twist their sense of being entitled to a higher social rank on those bases and the cultural shifts which come with the loss of some of that privilege into various kinds of racism and bigotry. A lot of them have rebellious and contrarian tendencies, and it’s easy to twist those into a reactionary overcompensation for the stifling aspects of political correctness.

    Libertarians tend to be antiwar and anti foreign aid, and thus likely to encounter and sympathize with antizionist voices – but it’s easy to follow that path into antisemitism. The same is true with libertarian opposition to global alliances and institutions, managed trade deals, the UN, and such. When you look for alternatives to major parties and establishment media, it’s easy to find yourself in the swamps where racists and antisemites recruit and where their propaganda echoes, often without realizing what you are dealing with, and to find yourself susceptible to it. If you start with opposition to central banking – an entirely sensible idea – it’s easy to find yourself in conspiracy circles where age-old gripes about “Jewish bankers” and “Jew run media” and “Jewish globalists” reverbate.

    It isn’t difficult to glide down the chute from libertarian opposition to forced association (e.g. opposition to affirmative action, opposition to anti-discrimination laws on grounds of freedom of association/dissociation) to rubbing elbows with outright racists who oppose such laws for entirely different reasons, neo-confederates, neo-nazis and their ilk.

    If you are a Second Amendment enthusiast, for the entirely sensible libertarian principle of an armed population being a bulwark against tyranny, it’s easy to wind up in circles with racist nuts stocking up on weapons and ammo and undergoing paramilitary training in preparation for fulfilling their dreams of carrying out a global race war.

    If you have entirely understandable concerns about freedom of speech, it isn’t long before you are in the vicinity of hateful assholes whose chief concern is their own freedom to engage in hate speech, and who would deny freedom of speech (or for that matter armed self-defense) to others in a heart beat as soon as they found themselves in a position to do so.

    The paleo strategy works with and reinforces all these trends, and rides the Trump train when it can, as it allows bigots to poach the libertarian movement in their recruitment efforts.

    A lot of those same phenomenon are playing out within the conservative movement, and the more long term conservative-libertarian fusionism which long predated the latter and more extreme paleo strategy of libertarian-far right fusionism feeds into and enables this alt right confluence.

  132. William T. Forrest

    I think “alt reich” is actually more accurate as a descriptor than Alt Right. The term “alt right” is meant to convey that they are alternative, fresh, hip – some kind of refreshing change from the same old same old. But alt also happens to be German for old, so alt reich=Old Reich. Reich is best known for its inclusion in Third Reich, Hitler’s vision of a new Germanic empire dominating Europe and the world, but there was also the monarchist Second Reich of Bismarck and the Kaisers which collapsed during the first World War and before that the first Reich – Charlemagne’s Holy Roman Empire which lasted over a thousand years and collapsed in the Napoleonic wars.

    The alt reich harkens back to all of these in its quest to create a fourth reich (realm). That seems more accurate than accepting its dishonest, intentionally deceptive propaganda claim to represent some kind of new alternative. It’s actually just the same very old poisonous wine in new wineskins. Calling it alt reich is really calling it out for what it actually is.

  133. robert capozzi

    wtf,

    Yes, the mix of psychological predispositions AND ideological fervor explains a lot of this unfortunate chain of events. Arrested development “nerdy” males are prone to buy into a simplistic ideology (NAPism), and then, when their quixotic worldview is scoffed at, this inflames in them a desire to lash out. Cantwell is Exhibit A.

    As a radical truth seeker, I’d rather see us strike the root of NAPism as the source of political dysfunction.

  134. paulie Post author

    The source of political dysfunction? So without the non-aggression principle our political discourse would be wholly functional? Somehow I doubt that. Look at the dysfunctional political discourse of the left and right. They aren’t adherents of or in many cases even ever heard of the NAP but as for dysfunction – well there’s plenty to go around.

  135. robert capozzi

    PF,

    Of COURSE not! The left and right are profoundly dysfunctional, but they ARE relevant and of influence. Ls–saddled with the NAP–are dysfunctional, irrelevant, and of almost no influence. Ls hands are not dirty, but the nerdy male Ls are using them for…well, I’ll leave that to your imagination! 😉

    My hypothesis is that Ls — unleashed from its NAPist millstone — could get a seat at the table and begin the messy work of undoing left and right dysfunction.

  136. Jim

    paulie “As recently as 2011 the far right in Russia still hated Putin, but since then most of them have embraced him, and it’s since then that he has built up his ties with the far right throughout Europe and the US.”

    paulie “What happened since then is that, I think perhaps Putin saw racist extremism as a potential threat to turn into revolution and depose him, especially in an economic crisis. What he has done is ban a lot of the more extreme racism … At the same time Putin has enacted many of the less extreme demands of the racist movement … I don’t know, but perhaps some of Putin’s more recent support of the racist far right in Europe and North America has to do in part with his desire to see such people make trouble in their own countries rather than immigrate to Russia.”

    Putin somewhat more openly embraced the far right within Russia in late 2011, not because he saw them as a threat, but because he saw the liberals as a growing threat and the far right could keep them off balance. But Putin had connections with the Russian far right before that. Aleksandr Dugin, the then chairman of the geopolitical section of the Duma’s Advisory Council on National Security and the brains behind the fascist movement in Russia, met with Putin just a few months after he took office back in 2000 and sold him on many aspects of Dugin’s ideology. By 2007 Dugin was saying “There are no more opponents of Putin’s course and, if there are, they are mentally ill and need to be sent off for clinical examination. Putin is everywhere, Putin is everything, Putin is absolute, and Putin is indispensable.”

    In the rest of Europe Putin more openly allied with the far right long before 2011, and Aleksandr Dugin was often the point man. Dugin set up a far right, pro-Russian group in Ukraine back in 2005, which trained people to to seize the Ukrainian Parliament and to foment unrest in preparation for a Russian invasion. Dugin was also sent to South Ossetia prior to the Russian conflict with Georgia. Dugin has also met with or founded far right, pro-Russian groups in France, Austria, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Turkey, the Netherlands, and other European countries.

    Dugin’s goal is to break European ties with the US, destabilize their countries, and to establish a fascist Eurasian empire that encompasses the entire EU, the Middle East, and much of China. Dugin sometimes gets irritated with Putin because Putin has hesitated on that last part, but Putin has overall been advancing Dugin’s goals.

    David Duke met with Dugin in 2011. Dugin came to the US to meet with various Alt-Right groups in 2015. Richard Spencer’s wife, a Russian woman, has translated some of Dugin’s writings into English.

  137. dL

    A lot of libertarians are nerdy males

    Nerd is the wrong term. Maybe for a certain segment back in the old cypherpunk days, but I certainly don’t see any manifestation of abstract technical proficiency dominating the discussion today. What I do see is resentment/scapegoating hiding behind thinly veiled third rate arguments. Citing fake constitutions(i.e, citing something they have never apparently read) or analogizing the crossing of imaginary lines to raiding refrigerators does not exactly exemplify the archetype of a nerd intellect. If it does, it is much lower class of nerd. I think you need a better term for intellectually average, socially resentful.

  138. dL

    Putin somewhat more openly embraced the far right within Russia in late 2011

    I don’t pretend to be a scholar of Russian domestic politics and neither have the interest nor the time to debate it. I would only note that a lot those names you are dropping seem to be on the outside looking in these days vis a vis the Kremlin. In any event, the blame for the right-wing politics of the United States lies internally. Putin didn’t drag the US into the middle east. Putin didn’t orchestrate the US propping up Boris Yeltsin. Putin didn’t create the department of homeland security. Prior to the creation of that abomination, the völkisch term “homeland” was rarely used in public discussion. It is not surprising that once you legitimize its use, the ugliness that is historically associated with it becomes acceptable. Polluting the homeland follows defending the homeland like stink on shit. And I can’t attribute it to some Putin conspiracy that shit stinks.

  139. robert capozzi

    pf,

    in re: your cartoon: Yes, well, when has over-simplification ever led to progress?

  140. paulie Post author

    Its also illuminating how abortion restrictions were the first salvo fired by the christian right in Russia.

    Very much against the grain in Russia. In Soviet times condoms and other kinds of birth control were not always easy to find or reliable, so abortion became very common, much more than in the US, and has remained more ingrained in the culture.

    Putin has promoted other aspects of theocracy, like putting prayer and religious instruction in government schools among other things.

  141. paulie Post author

    Putin somewhat more openly embraced the far right within Russia in late 2011, not because he saw them as a threat, but because he saw the liberals as a growing threat and the far right could keep them off balance.

    Fair point. I think he has certainly used them as a counterweight to liberals. But I think he probably did see them as somewhat of a potential threat too. After all, “Russia for (ethnic) Russians” is a popular slogan, they had large organized groups in support compared with other countries, and many many more sympathizers to some degree, many with military training and combat experience in the Caucasus, Afghanistan, etc. Then add economic crisis, widespread racism and scapegoating, and traditional Russian longing for totalitarian rule. The threat did and does exist, and I’m sure it played a role.

  142. paulie Post author

    In the rest of Europe Putin more openly allied with the far right long before 2011, and Aleksandr Dugin was often the point man.

    True. Anyone here who thinks Putin is essentially benign or harmless, or just wants peace or for Russia to be left alone, should really study up on Dugin, his ideas and his relationship to Putin.

  143. dL

    True. Anyone here who thinks Putin is essentially benign or harmless

    No one here is claiming Putin is benign or harmless. He is an autocratic slimeball, like they all are. However, Putin is not the global puppet master nor is he the scheming mastermind behind the American right. You’re basically just rehashing the McCarthyite/Bircher bunkum from the past that held Russia to be the conspiratorial svengali behind the American left.

  144. dL

    Government property is invalid and therefor so are borders

    You don’t even need to go that far. Most of the so-called contiguous border is not even government owned property. The closed/controlled borders argument treats everything as if it were government property, which is clearly invalid.

  145. paulie Post author

    . However, Putin is not the global puppet master

    A, not the.

    nor is he the scheming mastermind behind the American right.

    Again, a, not the. And it’s global, not just American.

    You’re basically just rehashing the McCarthyite/Bircher bunkum from the past that held Russia to be the conspiratorial svengali behind the American left.

    No.

  146. paulie Post author

    You don’t even need to go that far. Most of the so-called contiguous border is not even government owned property. The closed/controlled borders argument treats everything as if it were government property, which is clearly invalid.

    Correct.

  147. dL

    A, not the.

    What head of state of a Top 10 military/intelligence spending country wouldn’t be? I would hardly dispute that…

  148. Jim

    2nd New Mexico US Senate debate.

    Gary Johnson defends illegal immigrants, says we should not ban bump stocks, should not raise the minimum wage, says healthy people are getting screwed by unhealthy people under the current healthcare system, says young people are getting screwed by the short term thinking of older people with deficit spending, says military spending should be cut (but not in New Mexico), says we should stop being the world’s policeman and foreign military engagements should be ended.

    All three admitted to smoking marijuana. The Republican wants to keep it banned.

    https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-governement/elections/krqe-hosts-2018-senate-debate/1546723342

    There is a post debate poll:
    https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-governement/poll-who-won-the-senatorial-debate-/1552887698

  149. Jim

    Johnson’s polling results by the three neutral pollsters to look at this election:

    21% August 18th (Emerson College)

    16% September 13th (Albuquerque Journal)

    22% October 25th (Pacific Market Research)

    Not much to go on, but maybe that 21% was partially due to the initial entry buzz and that 16% was the bottom of his support. Then, hopefully, that +6% between September 13th and October 25th was due to the first debate on October 12th. I thought Johnson’s performance in the second debate was better.

    The language Johnson was using, insisting that people were getting ‘screwed’ by the current system, was designed to really shake things up. Johnson positioned himself as a credible anti-establishment candidate and Heinrich as part of the establishment, even though Heinrich’s party is out of power. Rich tried to do the same thing, but he was entirely ineffective at it. Rich seems like he is going to get the single issue anti-immigrant vote and nothing else.

    Still, it’s a blue state, a blue year, Heinrich hasn’t made any serious mistakes, and the anti-Heinrich vote is split two ways. Johnson probably wasn’t good enough in the debate to overcome that.

  150. dL

    21% August 18th (Emerson College)

    16% September 13th (Albuquerque Journal)

    22% October 25th (Pacific Market Research)

    3 polls by three different orgs w/ no published methodology(e.g, margin of error). You can’t make any “momentum deductions” from that.

  151. paulie Post author

    I wouldn’t make momentum deductions either, but if they are independent of each other, that gives us a rough ballpark for where we may expect the vote range to be, roughly. Not seeing anything that looks like either Johnson or Rich is likely to knock the incumbent off, and beating Miller’s record for LP US Senate is looking like a long shot too, but not entirely impossible.

  152. paulie Post author

    Still, it’s a blue state, a blue year, Heinrich hasn’t made any serious mistakes, and the anti-Heinrich vote is split two ways. Johnson probably wasn’t good enough in the debate to overcome that.

    There’s also the incumbency advantage, which is still a big deal, even if not quite to the degree it was at one time.

  153. paulie Post author

    What head of state of a Top 10 military/intelligence spending country wouldn’t be? I would hardly dispute that…

    It goes a bit beyond that. I’d recommend reading up on Dugin and Eurasianism and the ties with Putinism and its role in the global far right. Basically, Putin is among the ex-KGB officers who – while not necessarily pining for communism – resents the loss of prestige that came with the loss of superpower status and control of the ex-Soviet Republics and Iron Curtain sphere of influence.

    More broadly, Eurasianists such as Putin oppose the post-WWII and especially post-cold war liberal norms which hold that territorial conquest and domestic civil rights abuses are outside of international norms. They seek to return the world to a pre world wars state of spheres of influence and authoritarian pan-nationalism. They see efforts to spread liberal democratic and free market norms worldwide as undue interference in their affairs, oppose them within what they consider the rightful Eurasian sphere of influence, and counter with efforts to spread authoritarian populist nationalism as a global norm in what they see as a countermeasure, including in countries where liberal democracy and free markets have been longstanding traditions.

    In a sense, what they want to overturn is the enlightenment and the classical liberal social revolution that accompanied the industrial revolution and return to a sort of feudal-absolutist-theocratic-mercantilist world order mixed with more modern authoritarian populist nationalism and geopolitical spheres of influence. For Russia, they see their natural sphere of influence as including the ex-Soviet Republics, the former Soviet sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe and Central Asia, the petroleum-rich areas of the Middle East, and the former Soviet and Czarist Russian spheres of control in Mongolia, Manchuria and Korea. Some of them also have outlandish ideas about waging a new crusade for the Orthodox Church to take Jerusalem, reviving the 19th century Czarist empire in northwest North America, and so on.

    Russian nationalists often see Russia as attacked from all sides by the US, European Union, Islam, Jews/Israel, China and Japan. Eurasianists propose to fight back by neutralizing all of these. They also harken back to old Russian traditions of absolutism, authoritarianism and antisemitism and seek to limit Western influence within Russian culture, which they seek as including excesses of free markets and social liberalism. They prefer a more feudalistic-mercantilistic public-private partnership economy, highly limited social freedoms and civil liberties, a church-state partnership, genetic separation of races and ethnicities, a return to traditional patriarchal gender and family roles, extol celebration of military and police power and aggressive hypermasculinity; and they also seek to export and globalize these norms, to some degree in what they see as a defensive measure.

  154. William T. Forrest

    See

    https://medium.com/the-radical-center/whose-loved-by-the-racists-the-attempt-to-push-libertarianism-toward-racism-2fc96fe8a141

    And:

    The same “libertarians” pushing for an alliance with racists, bigots and theocrats also push pro-Putin “libertarianism.” They are also the same ones who created “libertarians for Trump.” Putin has ties to the global network of racists and bigots, both financial and propaganda. Trump and members of his campaign had longstanding ties with Russian financial interests and business dealings in Russia (attempted or actual) and Russian investors who rescued them from bankruptcy. Putin has had ties with European far right parties which have also been praised by Trump and by Pro-Trump, pro-racist “libertarians.” Trump called for Russia to help his campaign openly, in public. His campaign staff met with Russian agents in secret, and later lied about it repeatedly.

    Putin has been instituting theocracy in Russia and waging war on Muslims. Trump has been spreading fear of Muslims and trying to limit Muslim immigration. Putin and Trump support anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant parties in Europe. Long time Trump cohort Roger Stone has in recent years been infiltrating libertarianism and calling himself a Libertarian. Stone was business partners with Paul Manafort, who later became Trump’s campaign chair and has now pled guilty to corruption charges involving Russia and Ukraine as have a number of other Trump campaign and administration figures with likely more to come.

    Like Putin, Trump has also been attacking feminists and LGBT rights. Putin and Trump have both been ramping up military spending. Tensions with Western Europe, Latin America, China and some parts of the Middle East have all been exacerbated. The North Korean situation remains volatile even if it has been temporarily “fixed.” Like Putin, Trump has been building a domestic police state, while attacking elements of the military, espionage and judicial power structures not under their direct control. Both have attacked journalists who are critical of them in severe terms, even justifying killings of journalists; both have condoned beatings (or worse) of their opponents by their fans.

    Rockwell and other “paleos” called for the police to be unleashed on minorities. Trump and his fans have been notorious for the same police fetishism. Trump, Eurofascists and paleo “libertarians” all spread fear and loathing of immigrants and bolster the police state apparatuses used to crack down on immigration. Trump has met with Putin with no aides present, and has had Russian agents in the white house with little or no supervision.

    I’m sure these (among a bunch of other things) are all coincidences.

  155. Tony From Long Island

    I miss the part where Andy would tell me that Pittsburgh was a false flag operation and that if everyone in the synagogue had a gun . . . . .

    Gary Johnson lost me at the bump stock . . . .

  156. Anthony Dlugos

    hell, I was relieved that the perpetrated WASN’T some Andy-level wingnut from the the libertarian fringe.

  157. Tony From Long Island

    He was an Andy-level wingnut. Maybe even worse. However, there isn’t yet enough info to know if he’s from the LP fringe.

  158. dL

    However, there isn’t yet enough info to know if he’s from the LP fringe.

    Why would you expect a member of the LP to do something like that? There is no precedent for that. The republicans and democrats are the ones who want to kill each other. Literally. At the very least they want to imprison each other as traitors. And we are not talking about mere social media twaddle of fringe rank and file members. That’s the leadership talking. If you want to start looking for scapegoats, I would start there…

  159. paulie Post author

    OKC bomber Timothy McVeigh was one of those who dabbled in both libertarianism and fascism. Augustus Invictus has as well, and has advocated total war and shown propensities for violence. Would anyone be surprised if he committed terrorist acts? Chris Cantwell is another example, he actually did go to jail for terrorism, albeit very minor level, but an event he helped organize where his side got murderous and sent dozens to hospitals. Those are just the well known ones. I wouldn’t be too shocked if a Ryan Ramsey or someone like that killed people or mailed bombs…would you?

  160. paulie Post author

    Robert Higgs

    I am thoroughly sick of hearing that migrants can’t be admitted to the USA because of the welfare system there. This is an argument that because an injustice has been institutionalized in the USA in the form of the tax-supported welfare system, it is okay to override the natural rights of the migrants who have done nothing to establish that system. If you support punishing people fleeing poverty and oppression in their homelands instead of demanding the termination of the welfare system, I am going to conclude that you are simply a bigot. You can’t use one injustice to justify another one.

  161. paulie Post author

    “Republicans—

    I understand it feels like an unfair dirty trick that Democrats are sending out mailers to conservative voters touting how Libertarians are far more anti-tax and smaller-government than your candidates. If I might suggest how to counter it, feel free to send out mailers to liberal voters noting that we’re also far more anti-war and supportive of criminal justice reform than the Democratic candidates.”

    -Any Craig

  162. paulie Post author

    It would make it a hell of a lot easier for me to get around, since I don’t drive. I imagine the same would be true for a lot of people.

    Probably disproportionately those who would vote and/or organize outside the duopoly since people who are outside the mainstream in one way are more likely on average to be outside the mainstream in other ways.

  163. Tony From Long Island

    dL: ” . . . . .Why would you expect a member of the LP to do something like that? There is no precedent for that. The republicans and democrats are the ones who want to kill each other. Literally. . . . . ”

    You really must be delusional. But I also, I will clarify. I did not mean an actual member of the LP, but someone with libertiarian / anarchist views.

  164. William T. Forrest

    There’s not a few Republicans and Democrats that really do want to kill each other and probably would if they thought they could get away with it. Most would not. There are a few so-called libertarian violent nuts too though, especially where the movement intersects with the alt reich, and yes that does include some party members such as Ryan Ramsey and Andy Jacobs, and let’s not forget Chris Cantwell and Augustis Invictus have also been LP members – probably still are by the “once you signed the pledge you remain a member unless you explicitly ask the party to revoke your signature” – and they are not the only ones of their ilk, sadly. But they don’t represent most LP members or most people in the libertarian movement either.

  165. dL

    OKC bomber Timothy McVeigh was one of those who dabbled in both libertarianism and fascism.

    Yeah, but the reference was to the LP(Libertarian Party), not “libertarianism” in general.

  166. Anthony Dlugos

    Clarify, Part 2: I posted that I was “relieved” that it wasn’t someone from the fringes of the libertarian movement, not that I expected it or that it was a party member.

  167. dL

    not forget Chris Cantwell and Augustis Invictus have also been LP members

    Cantwell is the only example of someone explicitly committing political violence that I’m aware of who was at one time a LP member. However, he specifically renounced his association with it well before the incident. If someone went from atheist to Christian, I wouldn’t refer to them as an atheist nor would I try to pin blame on a past membership in, say, The Atheist Society, if said person went on rampage to purify society in the name of Jesus.

  168. dL

    There’s not a few Republicans and Democrats that really do want to kill each other and probably would if they thought they could get away with it. Most would not.

    True. Most would not actually try to do it themselves. Instead, they prefer to rely on the machinations of the state to explicitly punish their political enemies. The sentiment, “I don’t care if I lose an arm, just as long as my political enemies lose an arm and leg,” is no longer a fringe sentiment in partisan politics.

  169. dL

    You really must be delusional.

    If delusional means taking what you wrote literally, then I suggest–to avoid further delusional misunderstandings in the future–that no one henceforth take seriously what you literally write.

  170. dL

    What impact will technological change have on third parties?

    I just wrote an article about the transportation revolution that has already started.

    http://westbocanews.com/2018/10/a-transportation-revolution-is-coming-to-west-boca-and-the-world/

    Is there a third party impact?

    Not much in a duopoly, winner take all system. Political competition is not market competition. I wrote about this, oh, 7-8 years ago…
    https://rulingclass.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/matt-and-nicks-declaration-of-futility/

  171. Jim

    paulie “OKC bomber Timothy McVeigh was one of those who dabbled in both libertarianism and fascism.”

    I looked this up several years ago and as far as I have been able to tell, that one wasn’t true. Someone asked McVeigh about vegetarianism. And he said something along the lines of (this is not a direct quote) ‘As far as that goes, I’m a libertarian’, meaning, people could eat what they wanted and he didn’t much care.

    A bunch of jackasses took the “I’m a libertarian” part out of context. It even sat on wikipedia for more than a decade before anyone checked the source and removed it. In the meantime, an untold number of other people used it as a reference.

    The same happened with McVeigh’s supposed vote for Harry Browne in 1996. For years wikipedia said “McVeigh was a registered Republican … but voted for Libertarian Party candidate, Harry Browne”. Then it was realized that the source was dubious and it was changed to “but may have voted for Libertarian Party candidate, Harry Browne”. And then about three years ago the part about Harry Browne was removed entirely for being unsubstantiated.

  172. paulie Post author

    Well, Steve Bannon was poking around down there for sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if Putin’s agents were too, although I have not heard that they were.

  173. Tony From Long Island

    My “you must be delusional” statement was very clearly a retort to your nonsensical statement ” . . . .Why would you expect a member of the LP to do something like that? There is no precedent for that. . . . ” when clearly there are. What followed that might have needed clarification but the preceding did not.

  174. dL

    when clearly there are.

    Clearly, there are not any precedents. Give an example of a member of the LP committing acts of political violence. And don’t cite Cantwell. Cantwell repudiated his former associations long before Charlottesville. I would no more try to pin the LP for what Cantwell did than I would blame the Democrats for what, say, Strom Thurmond did as a republican.

  175. William T. Forrest

    Exactly when did Cantwell repudiate the LP, is there a link to it, and did he go back and forth about that?

    Regarding McVeigh, it may or may not be true that he had been associated with the LP. I have seen in multiple places that he was but I’ll accept the possibility that they all traced to the same bad source. What I can tell you for a fact, because I have heard it from multiple horse’s asses/mouths over the years, is that there have been and probably still are LP members who admire(d) him and what he did. I don’t know whether any of them have ever even attempted or planned any terroristic acts, much less of that magnitude, but they certainly had nothing against it in principle.

    In fact, Jeff Wood just in recent years started a whole “caucus” LP facebook group dedicated to the idea that since the government initiates all sorts of force on an ongoing basis revolutionary military action against it is currently justified. If any of the members of this group ever act on their beliefs they would not be alone among LP members in their interpretation of applying the NAP in real life, regardless of how the LP’s founders may or may not have interpreted the membership pledge.

  176. William T. Forrest

    Jewish Defense League leader Irv Rubin was loudly trumpeted by the LP as a prominent person who joined the party. My memory is sketchy on this but I seem to remember that he died in custody, either after conviction or awaiting trial, on terrorism charges. His death again iirc was ruled a suicide, which people who knew him disputed.

    Sometime in the rough timeframe of the OKC bombing the government arrested and convicted members of a group known as the Viper Militia, stockpiling weapons and bomb materials, undergoing paramilitary training and building a list of government targets along with surveillance of some such targets. One of those convicted in the case, Powell Gamill, was an LP activist and congressional candidate after prison (I’m not sure about before) and an associate of Ernie Hancock in Arizona. He claimed the government’s case that led to his conviction and imprisonment was bogus. No acts of terrorism were actually carried out, and if the case was bogus he certainly wouldn’t be the first person to be wrongfully imprisoned, but it’s also possible that he was in fact guilty and would have engaged in terrorism if he had not been stopped.

    Augustus Invictus was an LP member and candidate, and a county and state LP officer, who was closely associated with another group that stockpiled weapons, trained for war, and allegedly had plans for a race war – not only as their attorney but he called their leader “like a brother.” Invictus did not (at least so far) engage in the war he has written and talked about extensively, and he has left the LP since then, but while he was in the LP he continued his extensive organizing activities in the violent white nationalist movement and was a chief co-organizer along with Cantwell of the deadly Charlottesville rally. He also personally threatened numerous people and allegedly physically and sexually abused several women.

    Former close Invictus friend and ally Ryan Ramsey has also allegedly threatened numerous people with violence, and along with other known violent white nationalists maintains an active leadership role in the American Guard, an anti-immigrant militia group which has non-white members but promotes openly white nationalist materials on its website. Ramsey continues to openly associate with neo-nazi front group Rock Against Communism and is himself a military veteran and Second Amendment activist with an acknowledged violent racist skinhead gang past that many people believe is not so much in the past. He has a whole circle of likeminded individuals who are active in the Florida LP and is a county chairman and state executive committee member there, I believe currently.

    Is anyone here going to be shocked if Invictus, Ramsey or one of their associates does commit bombings or shootings while still involved with the LP? Granted they have not done it yet. But they have threatened it who knows how many times, have trained for it, and are neck deep in the small but very deadly far right racist movement which, along with radical Islam, has been responsible for almost all of the terrorist activity in the US in the last couple of decades.

    So if anyone thinks that it’s absurd that the LP would ever have members who could engage in terrorism I suggest you think about that some more. If anything we have been relatively lucky so far but how long will that luck hold?

  177. dL

    Exactly when did Cantwell repudiate the LP, is there a link to it, and did he go back and forth about that?

    Feel free to peruse his website if you have a need to assuage your curiosity.

    What I can tell you for a fact

    No, you are speculating…

  178. William T. Forrest

    “Feel free to peruse his website if you have a need to assuage your curiosity.”

    My curiosity doesn’t go that far. I won’t spend a bunch of time looking through who knows how many archives to find something that is allegedly there. I had never seen him renounce the LP. That remains an unproven claim as far as I know unless I see a direct link. Even if he did, he wouldn’t be the first person to go back to the LP after renouncing it if he did renounce it and decided or decides to rejoin.

    “No, you are speculating…”

    About LP members who admired McVeigh and his actions? Absolutely not. They have told me so themselves in no uncertain terms in multiple times and places over many years. Not just one or two people. I don’t have it on tape, and if any of it was in writing I did not save links, but I 100% can tell you for a fact that sentiment was expressed directly and in no way ironically by active, dues paying LP members many times. You don’t have to believe me but it is nevertheless a fact.

  179. dL

    So if anyone thinks that it’s absurd that the LP would ever have members who could engage in terrorism I suggest you think about that some more. If anything we have been relatively lucky so far but how long will that luck hold?

    I didn’t say it was absurd. It said there is no reason to finger the LP as the usual suspects behind an act of political violence. And you are being a bit loose with the reference to terrorism. That word by definition is reserved for acts against civilians. An act aimed at a non-civilian population like the government would count as political violence, but it would not be terrorism.

  180. dL

    My curiosity doesn’t go that far.

    Apparently it goes far enough to post about his supposed motivations for the upteempth time…

  181. Jim

    William T. Forrest “Exactly when did Cantwell repudiate the LP, is there a link to it, and did he go back and forth about that?”

    I’ve seen a grand total of 3 Cantwell videos, so I don’t know exactly when he stopped calling himself a libertarian. But one of the videos that I did watch was his interview with Vice, which took place immediately before and immediately after Charlottesville, and at that time he was calling himself an ‘ex-libertarian’ or ‘former libertarian’ or something like that.

    On Ryan Ramsey, I didn’t follow that all that much, but the only threat of violence that I saw from him was one time he threatened to punch someone in the mouth after the guy said some pretty vile stuff. If that’s all there was, that may not strictly be in line with the NAP, but it doesn’t fit the definition of terrorism.

    Ultimately dL is right – the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter boils down to terrorists targeting civilians and freedom fighters targeting government.

    The closest fit to a libertarian terrorist in recent memory was Nathan Larson, who threatened to bomb an LP meeting and rape some LP members. But he was expelled from the LP and now he calls himself a “quasi-neoreactionary libertarian”, whatever that is.

  182. paulie Post author

    On Ryan Ramsey, I didn’t follow that all that much, but the only threat of violence that I saw from him was one time he threatened to punch someone in the mouth after the guy said some pretty vile

    Him and his friends have threatened a lot of people. Invictus threatened me personally among others.

    Ultimately dL is right – the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter boils down to terrorists targeting civilians and freedom fighters targeting government.

    Ramsey, Invictus et al have threatened both.

  183. paulie Post author

    Apparently it goes far enough to post about his supposed motivations for the upteempth time…

    WTF is trolling.

Leave a Reply

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