The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism (LvMI)
It has caused most people in the world to regard the United States as a threat, and it has led to unconscionable wars on many countries. Wars of aggression were defined at Nuremberg as crimes against humanity. At the heart of fascism lies state control of the economy. As Mises long ago pointed out, socialism can come about while the form of capitalism remains. In this type of socialism, the government dictates economic decisions and the ostensible business owners must obey its orders.
It was precisely this pattern that Mises found in Nazism, and, unfortunately, it has become increasingly prevalent in America today. The reality of bureaucratic administration has been with us at least since the New Deal, which was modeled on the planning bureaucracy that lived in World War I. Bureaucracy is the heart, lungs, and veins of the planning state. And yet to regulate an economy as thoroughly as this one is today is to kill prosperity with a billion tiny cuts. Gu00fcnter Reimann Check Amazon for Pricing. Those devoted to freedom will of course reject fascism, with its blind power worship and dangerous economics, but what if one finds the fascist vision appealing?
Can it maintain itself in power for the indefinite future? The fascist style emphasized inspiration, magnificence, industrial progress, grandeur, all headed by a valiant leader making smart decisions about all things. So there is a way in which it makes sense to speak of a stage of history: We are in the stage of late fascism.
The grandeur is gone, and all we are left with is a gun pointed at our heads. The system was created to be great, but it is reduced in our time to being crude. Valor is now violence. Majesty is now malice. What, then, is the way forward? Rockwell looks to the great Austrians for an answer. By contrast with intellectuals who pander to the powerful, the Austrians. They must say the things that others do not want to hear. They must be willing to be unpopular, socially and politically.
Hayek, and, above all, Ludwig von Mises. They gave up career and fame to stick with the truth and say what had to be said. We all do well to emulate this master when we go about our work. Flynn Check Amazon for Pricing. He read everything he could from all points of view. He sought to become as much an expert in the topic as the other experts in the field.
To deny that, requires a lot of self-deception, and to say that, promotes false beliefs in others. Western culture as traditionally defined has Greco-Roman and humanistic origins. There are other cultures which tend to oppose liberty and reason. Which means, they are a physical threat if they act on their opposition, and a cultural threat if they merely express false beliefs. The difference is, Ron Paul ran on the LP ticket and was a rabid anti-interventionist, while Trump ran on the GOP ticket and opposes some interventions while supporting others. So this is really about institutional loyalty.
I guess I must be stupid, despite reading the equivalent of a book a day and scoring in the In reality, he was arrested for 1 simple assault and 2 his screwed up political beliefs. That goes beyond psychologically tormenting someone in a weak position itself a weird thing to do, such a psychological proclivity could lead to more serious weirdness, if not checked. Anyone who advocates or engages in initiating violence for political purposes needs to be denied position within the Libertarian Party. They should not be allowed to be delegates for any convention.
The Libertarian party should also refuse donations and in kind contributions from such individuals. The party should refund all past donations from them as well. And do so publicly. If they claim to speak for the libertarians there should be a strong public rebuttal from all levels of the Party. In general I agree with the premises of this article in that it is the neo-conservatives who are more a danger to the public perception of the libertarian movement then the violent leftists if only because the neo-conservatives are most often perceived to be closer to the libertarians.
This appears to equate all those who oppose the tearing down of statutes, with neo-Confederates and neo-Nazis, and also equates neo-Nazis with neo-Conservatives. Implicitly this also equates all who are not categorical anti-interventionists, with neo-conservatives. Again I make the point, many more murders are committed by private persons, than police. Yet police commit far more aggression in total, than private persons.
It depends on the context. He has appointed white supremacists to white house positions. If anything, it rises above a dog whistle. There are different kinds of intelligence. No doubt you can read technical manuals backwards and forwards in six languages in seconds flat and understand everything immediately. For once I will agree with Kevin and disagree with Tom. For this purpose I am taking it on faith that Kevin is describing what Tom said accurately. Well yeah, if not checked. Seems pretty innocuous to me. He may read them out of boredom.
It seems unlikely at this stage that a light would go on for him but nothing is impossible. As far as foreign policy, the racist right is generally opposed to the foreign policy priorities of the neocons. They tend to be pro-Russia and anti-Israel, exactly the opposite of the neocons. They are certainly not pacifists — like Trump, they bristle with hostility towards China, Korea, Latin America and Africa.
Whether or not Cantwell will actually read the books sent him is a separate question. If he reads them, he will be seen reading them, and other prisoners might assume he is libertarian, which would create a bad impression. If he agrees with them, his re-conversion can only create another bad impression. Tormenting any person in a weak position is troubling from a psychological viewpoint. Analogously, Jeffrey Dohmer started out tormenting weak creatures like cats or other small animals. He derived psychological pleasure from inflicting pain on living beings who are weak.
Though of course there is a big difference between psychological vs. Cantwell has violent tendencies and is looking for ideological justification to act them out. Tom appears to enjoy inflicting psychological torment on Cantwell, again using ideological cover. Similarly, probably most who were there to protest those fascists, were not Antifa. Antifa is better funded and organized, with many more members. Similarly, police are a greater threat than private murderers, because police are more numerous, better funded and organized, and commit more aggression total than private murderers.
Even though police have murdered few, they have murdered far fewer than private murderers. I doubt anyone will actually send him anything. If they do he is not under any obligation to read it. Personally, I like to read a lot of stuff in long as well as short form from all sorts of different perspectives. Some people only like to read things they agree with.
I see no reason to force them to do otherwise, not do I see anyone here proposing that. The Unite the Right march was not only about the statues. If it were, they would not have walked down the street chanting slogans about Blood and Soil and Jews. It depends on what definition of Antifa you are using. By one definition of the term every single one of them was antifa by definition by virtue of their being there alone if nothing else. If you are using Antifa to mean Black Bloc, I have seen no evidence of this. It seems to me that you are conflating two different things — there are more people who are organized in some sort of antifascist movement or group, but only a small number who commit violent actions.
The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Fascism
There are numerous ethnic gangs of all kinds, including whites who are not Italian. But this has nothing to do with ideologically based violent gangs. Non-ideological gangs mostly kill other gang members of their own ethnicity or race.
If they kill gang members of another race it is no different to them, it is not because of race or ideology but rather fighting over territory, revenge and profits. This is a center-right country with a dormant fetish for nationalism far more powerful than any international socialist ideal. Whatever their current strength, there is no broad appeal for their political positions.
The question on the table is: Factor in who the people en masse will swing behind. Antifa is more like a government. Compared to Nazis, they are better funded and organized, and have more support on the street. Tom sent Cantwell a book and urged others to follow suit. Sure, non-white street gangs fight others of their own ethnicity, as did the old Italian mafia. WW2 Nazis would often have internal fights, Hitler designed it that way so that no one group could challenge his leadership. Street gangs are often ethnic and identify with their own ethnicity, more so than others.
Italians preferred to deal with fellow-Italians, even sub-dividing into Sicilians etc. They organize force, often collect money with force, enforce a moral code, and have their own internal court system. And again that all depends on what you mean by antifa. If you mean Black Bloc violent antifa I would like to see support for any of those statements about them.
If you mean larger numbers of non violent antifascists yes, they probably have more support and maybe better funding — how do we measure that though? But they are not the people we need to worry about. I even worked a short while for the Soros-funded language institute in Vilnius.
He started his career by helping to loot Jews in Nazi Germany. He wants to gain wealth in large part by exploiting chaos and destruction. Concerning Soros funding of Antifa: I am not sure if it was banned in jails though. That uses a very broad definition of antifa which is very much at odds with your definition of antifa as only black bloc style violent anarchists. It also does not say how much Soros allegedly gave these groups.
He threatened violence, talked about gassing people specifically as a tactic months ago, went on to spray or gas people, threatened to keep doing it. Which still does not make them an ideological organization like black bloc, fascists, jihadis, etc. Apparently he is not trained in Tai Chi or Judo, he seems to prefer causing damage to the other, than preventing the problem he alleges.
- Small Town People.
- House Selling For Dummies.
- December 31, 2017?
- February 4, 2018.
He has been filmed showing off his stockpile of weapons, and bragging that blood will flow. That was before he did his self-pity video, wherein he cried. Neither its mean nor its objectives are explicitly political in nature. Whenever there has been an organized fascism, be it the state or underground, there has been an antifa.
In the earlier part of the 20the century, the organized fascism was the state. So, yes, antifa at that time was an overtly militant organization…obviously. In the post WW II world, the organization of fascism went largely underground. So too did antifa. I doubt most people in the United States had even heard the term until the election of Trump.
Antifa more or less is a direct action reactive force to a fascist menace. I include among the neo-conservatives those that believe that the rights of individuals should be restricted and that the use of force is justified in cases of abortion, racial non-equality, sexual orientation non-equality, immigration and even free speech in public settings. I grant you that there are leftists that also are against free speech in public settings in all setting.
Most of all I entirely condemn the use of governmental and private force against the free expression of ideas. Yell sure, get mad, yes but restrain yourself from violence. If you feel the use of force is justified in the absence of them literally threatening to attack you then you are at risk of violating the non aggression principle. And not just in an esoteric way. As such you do not belong among those who represent the Libertarian Party and do not belong among those whom meet to select national or maybe even state wide candidates.
If you consider yourself a right winger and you feel the state should restrict the freedom of others for what ever reason… while I would like you to vote libertarian… I do not want you to carry the libertarian banner. Not till you move past the need to restrict the liberties of others. I would likewise lecture the left wingers… but not many of them are around to lecture… here… in other forums I do. Neocons were initially Trotskyites who moved into the Democratic Party but were not happy with the liberal attitudes towards sex, drugs, gender roles and so on starting in the s and 70s.
They were also concerned about urban crime. Most of all, they were cold warriors based initially on traditional Trotskyite hostility to the USSR. Thus they became Republicans. Their main concern was foreign policy — primarily strong opposition to the USSR and to jihadism and strong support for Israel. Individual vs National Borders by David Hathaway. It pits the libertarian position on immigration open borders against the anti-libertarian immigration authoritarianism of e. I definitively would enjoy reading it again. That guy is quite a talented writer. As far as white nationalism and the far right is concerned, four of my five favorite English language rappers Tupac, Akala, Lowkey and Immortal Technique are non-white the other rappers are Eminem and Vinnie Paz.
Neither have my parents. Lesiak, but just based on this post he seems very defensive and unsettled in some way. My point in writing that comment was to state that I am a soon to be baptized Jehovah Witness, and since JWs reject political involvement and any form of racialism, I am rejecting white nationalism, including Polish nationalism — which is beholden to Catholicsm, a money hungry, New World Order Masonic cult. I support the libertarian movement in Poland led by Janusz Korwin Mikke. Subsequently, he ran for president on a strict libertarian platform.
At the time we were in Warsaw, his Union of Real Policy was housed in a former dwelling that was a literal maze of small offices, all occupied by young people actively working on spreading the libertarian gospel. We had very good, lively discussions with them. Obviously the bigoted glee with which the Hoppeans boast about WHO they will keep out of their private communities is obnoxious. But lots of libertarians say that in a world with many private membership communities people have the right to determine membership rules.
And that if most communities, networks of communities, were private immigration rights would be very different, some very liberal, others more restrictive. A quick search only showed his book and his generally libertarian writings on the topic without mention of Hoppe. Is Hathaway arguing against private communities, just bigotry or what…. Did find this Anthony Gregory article on the topic: A good Reason article about Antifa in Europe, starting out with a recent attack on two Libertarian activists:. Seems like a very false equivalence to me.
You had to go all the way to Europe for that one, no one was killed, and antifa have been around for nearly a century. Meanwhile you use other sources which count peaceful antifascist groups as also being antifa, for the purpose of claiming they are much larger in numbers and funding than the violent few are.
The alarmism is not borne out by evidence. Far left terrorist groups in the US have been dormant since the s, unless you count black nationalist groups who are not really far left, and even then they kill a lot less people than nazis and jihadists do. If there is a Hitler-like threat in the US today it comes from the admirers of the original Hitler, not from a tiny few black-clad assholes who punch nazis, smash windows and burn cars. Which, to me, becomes a question of which philosophy the people en masse get behind.
Its a question of which of these two sides will light the fires of fear and then hate in the people. Not who is more powerful now. The pissant alt-right as it exists now will be swept aside by people who really know how to deploy violence. Hitler succeeded to power only because other trends outweighed traditional European individualism. Germans today are not tribalistic, they are prosperous.
The aftermath of WW1 era caused great economic distress, Germans were looking for someone to blame and someone else to solve their problems. The only way that neo-Nazis could come to power in the US, is if there were a severe economic depression and whites were hunted down for persecution more than just affirmative action. Most likely, capitalism would be blamed for the depression, and Trump would be Hoover-ized. This paves the way for neo-communists to come to power, like how FDR came to power. If body counts are to be the only metric, then yes Antifa and the far left generally, would be a lesser threat.
But since they are better organized, and funded by those who know better, they refrain from that extreme so far. But still there are other threats that do not necessarily result in death. So far, neo-Nazis have not shut down public talks or demonstrations by libertarians or conservatives; while the far left including Antifa have done that, on many occasions. A good Reason article about Antifa in Europe, starting out with a recent attack on two Libertarian activists….
The author did not link to any corroborating news account. Searching 3 different search engines for news of this recent antifa attack on Fredrik Nyqvist in Sweden turned up nothing sans the reason. A search of liberalapartiet. And it may well be true that if Reason magazine is at the front-line of organized self-defense, you probably would be better off throwing yourself at the mercy of trusting the government. I sent an e-mail to the author in Sweden, asking for documentation on the alleged attack.
Also, many Jihadist attacks are not officially classified as Islamic motivated; I get ADL messages in my inbox, invariably they are dovish and minimize the Jihadist threat. The lists I have seen, show a big majority of terrorist attacks to be Islamic motivated. Here is the Wikipedia on terrorism in the US: There was mostly left violence in the 60s and 70s. BTW, when I participated in a pagan festival in the Lithuanian countryside, neo-nazis were there, and chanted during a concert. If we look at statistics of which ethnic group commits more violent crimes, what is immediately apparent is that whites and others, such as Japanese and Jewish commit far less violent crimes than average.
These labels are used as a screening mechanism, to heighten fear of white violence by denying the political nature of street gangs of whatever ethnicity. Over time, such organization becomes a system with a formal label. Since government is political, and street gangs govern, they are political. Repeat assertions, still without evidence. All you have so far is that Soros gave some unspecified amount of money to organizations that are not the black bloc and do not espouse violence, but which did put on protests where the black bloc was a small participating group not the main organizers to whom Soros donated.
So your claim that they are better organized and funded is still without evidence. They are non-ideological, but if you keep insisting, we can go ahead and count them as white supremacists as well, since they mostly kill other non-whites. To take one example, in Pennsylvania earlier this year the fascists set up a fake antifa front group and phoned in threats that got a libertarian festival canceled from two locations, disrupted the festival plans, and caused many of the planned speakers and attendees to not show up.
The fascists got what they wanted out of it — sympathy and publicity — and their main speaker, Augustus Invictus, went on to do his own speech in the same city where the original event was to be held, accompanied by sieg heiling followers. Meanwhile the libertarian event was held but with a lot fewer speakers as well as a lot fewer people in the audience. There are several studies cited much earlier in their thread. They cover different years. But we can go ahead an acknowledge that Jihadis kill a lot of people, since Jihadis are not by any remote stretch of the imagination on the left, being some of the most religiously conservative people on the planet as well as in many cases nationalists, and in most cases Jew-haters.
Yes, that was repeatedly acknowledged by everyone in this discussion, including the author. Why do you feel the need to repeat it? It seems to be a pretty good fit: Unfortunately, I did not find a video clip just now. Thanks for sharing that. Regarding the persistent claims that Soros funds antifa, the evidence seems very thin, if there even is any. All the proponents of this claim can do is cite garbage like Breitbart, but when those claims are investigated further the evidence does not materialize.
The best that can be said for this claim is that Soros funds some organizations that in turn give token amounts of money to various groups organizing events such as Occupy Wall Street and Disrupt J 20, but despite the names none of those organizations advocated violence. They did have small numbers of black bloc show up at such events, but so far zero evidence that those would want funding from Soros who they consider to be a capitalist pig or that he would have any interest in funding them. Likewise, still zero proof of claims that antifa is better organized or better funded than white nationalists.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Hoover jawboned businesses into hiking wages preventing wages and prices from adjusting to equilibrium , implemented the Smoot-Hawley tarriff decimating trade , and generally made a mess of the economy. This was a continuation of his policies as WWI Commerce Secretary overseeing wage and price controls, generally central planning like a dictator. The analogy is apt. Trump is Hoovering himself: When a depression naturally results, he has only himself to blame. But emphatically Trump is not the victim; rather, he is the instigator.
Evidence has never been a requirement for Andy and other troofers spouting their crazy conspiracy theories. Of course Hoover was not a free enterprise believer. Neither is Trump, but so far he has not started a trade war, in fact, he got China to buy US coal without instituting tariffs. Trump acknowledged this, and gave China a pass on trade if they would buy coal from the US instead of NK etc. But the perception is that Hoover and Trump do represent free enterprise, which will be seen as failing due to the depression. This opens the door to the left, probably financed in large part by Soros.
Here is proof that almost all his party donations are to dems: Clearly there is more toleration of Antifa on the democrat left, than the republican right. All told, more than 1, protesters gathered at Sproul Plaza on the Berkeley campus, chanting and holding placards that read: Let me break this up into two posts, for technical reasons. Yes, as i said, I used to work for his language institute in Vilnius.
Soros funded some organizations which in turn funded a very small percentage of the budget of some other organization which organized protests. Most of the people who attended those protests did not engage in violence and did not necessarily condone it. No one was killed. Was anyone even seriously injured? On the other hand, we can all agree, these actions by the black bloc were initiations of coercion and should be condemned. But how exactly does this translate to Soros funding the black bloc? At most, he funded a very small percentage, indirectly at that, of the funding of the organizations whose events the Black Bloc asswipes crashed.
He was a kid during WWII, and would have been bound for the ovens himself if he had not helped with the roundups. He led a rather long and full life in the nearly 60 years between the end of WWII and Soros is no commie leftist. And you should know better. One of the groups participating in the statute removal protest, was the League of the South.
I dislike the group and their love for southern culture. But still they are not neo-nazis or necessarily racists; some self-identified libertarians even have written for that group, like Tom Woods, who has frequently been promoted on the national LP Facebook page. At least when you promote conspiracy false-flag theories, make sure they are consistent, and relevant to the point you are trying to make.
So we should not be surprised when street gangs are not ideologically consistent. There are really just two extremes, force-initiation and pacifism. Liberty resides in between the two poles, allowing for the political and personal use of force, but only in retaliation or defense. So, when street gangs organize force, whether initiatory or defensive, that is an act of governing; and over time, this establishes government as a noun. Many of their activities are prohibited by the official government, that in itself makes a political statement.
And the evidence is clear, certain groups in the US today, like whites, japanese, and Jews, tend to exhibit less force-initiatory behavior, whether organized or individual. Again, it depends on how you define antifa. Refuse Fascism indirectly received 50k from Soros and put on an event where the majority of participants were not violent, but which the Black Bloc crashed and did in fact engage in violence. That does not equate to Soros funding violent antifa. Thanks for making my point for me. The League of the South has long since become explicitly white separatist and white supremacist.
There are numerous white separatist and white supremacist statements on its websites, videos and publications and by its founder Dr. In his recent response to Tom Knapp about his involvement with the League, Woods acknowledges that they are now a racist organization and claims that they were not at the time when he was involved. BTW, it was not a statue removal protest.
That was just the backdrop. They believe that the removal of the statues is part of the same Jewish globalist plot. I thought you claimed to have good reading comprehension? I never claimed or even slightly implied that Invictus is a libertarian. However, he did join the LP and pretended to be a libertarian and was invited to speak at a libertarian event. His presence there did cause a reaction by antifascists but then Invictus and his friends created a false front antifa group, as was pointed out by all the actual antifa groups in that area. This false front group engaged in a variety of malicious activities such as promoting pedophilia and allegedly was the cause of the police telling event venues that they could not guarantee safety.
The libertarian events were in fact disrupted by fascists centered around Invictus pretending to be antifa. Invictus did in fact go on to speak at his own event nearby and bring a bunch of sieg heiling clowns along with him. This is not a theory, these are all facts and entirely consistent. You lost me again with whatever point you are trying to make about street gangs. What point are you trying to make with that whole bizarre tangent again? League of the South President: Southerners are Whites — League president Michael Hill was clear about his white supremacist views.
I think I have found where Kevin Bjornson may have become confused. They made the mistake of inviting Invictus and a few other fascists masquerading as libertarians though. That was very unfortunate. The fascists went on to set up a fake antifa front, cause disruption to cancel the libertarian event, gathered sympathy and attention for themselves, then went on to have their own sieg heiling event featuring Invictus in the vicinity.
Separately, the libertarian event also went on but with a lot fewer speakers and participants in the audience all because they made the big mistake of treating opportunistic fascist parasites pretending to be libertarians at face value. Would you have cut the length down or was it a total loss? For those that prefer to read interviews than watch them the fine folks at Reason have provided a transcript. Besides, the best stand-up comedy, like the best rock n roll, is explicitly anti-authoritarian, and hence implicitly libertarian. It was an interview, not a comedy segment.
For the purpose of this interview libertarian is more to the point than comedian. Comedian in the title is just to establish that he is noteworthy for something or another. And yet many — perhaps most — rock n rollers and comedians are not L. No matter how good one is, it means nothing if no one ever sees it. Marketing is important, and niche marketing is a good way to begin. We could start with the Swedish LP itself for starters. It may be a tall tale. I mean, we have a worldwide movement that has been around for close to years and we have to go overseas for one alleged assault that may or may not have happened?
I am not going to put that high on my list of things to worry about. Ever read The Ice Opinion? Culture is libertarian, politics is not. So, the art is libertarian while the artist may not be. I mean who would listen to a rock album to get preached at RE: Way too much money at stake to use the art as a vehicle to promote proggie talking points. You know, imagine this:. Alfred, I cannot in good conscience take the bat mobile out onto the public roads. To use it would be an unconscionable broach of democratic collective will.
Was their art libertarian? I included a clip above of the great Bill Hicks to demonstrate exactly that. Libertarianism is a political ideology. Art is libertarian to the extent it is libertarian, politically. Art per se is not political, though political elements can be added. Lenny Bruce criticized prohibition in some of his comedy acts.
That is a political statement.
Disclaimer
Using swear words is not a libertarian statement in and of itself, but can be political if it is speaking in favor of free speech. Many of the commentariat limit the term L very narrowly, i. My attempts to get a response article have so far drawn a blank. The offer to receive an actual argument in response and publish it remains open.
Actually, the Dave Smith special, Libertas, is easily verified independently through an online search. The latest entry was posted yesterday, so the site it is kept up to date. If the attack was so insignificant to not an even merit a mention on the Swedish Liberal Party website, one wonders how in the heck Fredrik Segerfeldt learned about it? Fake news is ubiquitous. However, the thing that enables its ubiquity is the same thing that allows for it to be just as easily debunked. I sent an e-mail to the author, but that was returned as undeliverable. I then notified Reason of the matter, and after a couple days got a response.
This thread is getting long. Please re-post and I will refute if I disagree. If he has an article he wants to submit in response we could publish that too. If anyone is interested: If your response is reasonably well-argued I will publish it myself. My guess regarding giving the piece some legs is to follow up on the possibility that Reason Magazine is publishing fake antifa news. That should stoke an external response.
Within the LP and libertarian movement, there is little danger of a Marxist association; but there is clearly a problem due to association with Judeophobia, and to a lesser extent, dislike of blacks. That was clearly evident in the Ron Paul phenomena, which I foresaw in and why I voted for Russel Means instead of Ron Paul at the national convention, which was held in Seattle due to me funding travel to LNC for a Washington state rep. There is also the curious case of the ubiquitous Matt Hasty, a neo-Confederate LP activist from Florida, who has frequently been and as far as I know, still is an Administrator for the national LP Facebook page.
He also covered his tracks better in the groups he administers. Matt was the one responsible for an infamous national LP FB post, a graphic featuring a quote from Jew-hater isolationist Charles Lindbergh. Our comments in dissent got a few of us from the libertarian hawk crowd banned from the LP page.
We wrote a letter to the LNC complaining that the page often singled out Israel for criticism for receiving US foreign aid, and having warplanes. I offered to revise the letter, but my offer was rebuffed. So I wrote my own letter to Arvin Vohra, who was righteous enough to appoint me as Admin so I could re-instate several Israel-defenders who had been banned a year previous.
I was able to reinstate some but not all apparently FB software does not allow reinstating those banned over a year ago, as their names no longer appeared on the list of the banned, in the Admin panel. Arvin then fired me, claiming that I was part of a larger purge due to an alleged security lapse at the national page.
Arvin has not responded to any of my subsequent e-mails, wherein I indignantly denied I was the wrong responsible for the alleged deletion of popular posts. Though we are FB friends and occasionally he responds to my posts. I had to unfriend someone in the pro-Trump movement who used similar icons. Nor is Ron Paul the only one in the libertarian movement with a Judeophobia problem. This can be traced at least as far back as libertarian guru, Albert J.
Nock, who, in his last nationally-published article… https: There was a similar problem with H. But not all libertarians agree d. Some even claim, both events were false-flags, and use war criticism as a mask for their Judeophobia, claiming the US intervenes because Israel is the puppet master. Now that Ron Paul can no longer be used as a cash cow, the LP has dropped Judeophobia and has adopted a new mask, countering critics of Islam, equating Islam with other religions, and reaching out to them all, even including the satanists.
This amounts to a repudiation of Ayn Rand, secular Jews, and humanists in general. A descent into insanity. Or extending the requirement for a license to marry, from heterosexuals to non-heterosexuals. According to polls, such views are trending among college-educated young people which can be attributed to the decline of academia. Or requiring the US to allow entry to cultural supremacists, like Jihadists, who want to conquer what is left of civilization and install Sharia law.
Of course, Islamists vote. So, the LP appears to be holding a wet finger up to the wind, to see what is trending. Which means, the LP has no reason for existence. If I want to vote for the lesser evil, I will vote for a centrist like Trump, who is not an ideological libertarian, but is clearly better than GJ or Hillary. The pro-statute crowd appears to have better protective gear, and are probably more reluctant to seek hospital attention due to macho stoicism. All we can do, is read a collection of eyewitness reports. Charlottesville Daily Progress photographer Ryan Kelly: There were groups on both sides scattered.
There were a few small fights that broke out from time to time. People were throwing stuff at each other. A few people were beating on each other. BuzzFeed News reporter Blake Montgomery: It seemed that they had practiced for this. Washington Post reporter Joe Heim: Others threw balloons filled with paint or ink at the white nationalists. Everywhere, it seemed violence was exploding. The police did not move to break up the fights.
As it filled with rally-goers and counter-protesters, the mix quickly became volatile. Jordan Green in the Nation, a leftist publication: Water bottles and other projectiles flew in both directions, while police tear-gas canisters thudded into an adjacent parking lot, oftentimes lobbed back into the park by plucky leftists.
Unable to continue rallying in the park, the white supremacists took to the streets, where they were quickly followed and confronted by anti-racists. Several more extremely violent fights took place, with police looking on from their nearby substation. Redneck Revolt, an armed leftist group that brought rifles to Justice Park, one of the spots where anti-racist groups had gathered: University of Virginia student Isabella Ciambotti: I saw another man from the white supremacist crowd being chased and beaten.
People were hitting him with their signs. A much older man, also with the alt-right group, got pushed to the ground in the commotion. Leftist anti-fascist organizers from Washington, D. Clearly, there was violence on many sides, in approximately equal proportion. Impossible to statistically identity the proportion from hospital statistics. Though I will acknowledge, one unhinged neo-nazi was the only one to employ a tactic endorsed by Islamic State, that of vehicle ramming.
Its an easier solution than dying on the hill of ending marriage licensing when there are a thousand other things that more pressingly imperil this experiment in liberty, regardless how less-than-perfect it is. The problem that Albert Jay Nock exposes is the problem of anti-Semitism.
He warns that an economic downturn could unleash brutal attacks against Jews, because of the economic ignorance of the average person, and the desire to look for scapegoats. Too many people, including many libertarians, think that if they read the title of an article or a book, they can understand and critique the view of the writer. But you actually have to look at what was written to make a reasonable analysis. I asked for people to send in a well thought out response article if they disagree with this one. Actually yes, he did say in the Stossel debate that he would extend the same argument to a Jew being asked to bake a cake for nazis.
Petersen pushed Johnson on the issue and asked whether he felt Jewish bakers should be forced to bake wedding cakes for Nazi customers. Caryn Ann said she is too busy, but might send a visual aid to help us see both sides more clearly. I responded to that question in the legal context of whether a public business has the right to refuse to serve a member of the public, as distasteful as it might be. The simple answer to that question is, whether all like it or not, U.
The principle that, when a business opens its doors to the public, that business enters into an implied contract to serve ALL of the public. Further, when that business voluntarily opens its doors, the owners voluntarily agree to adhere to applicable laws and regulations — whether they like those laws or not. To be clear, anti-discrimination laws do not, and cannot, abridge fundamental First Amendment rights.
I know of no one who reasonably disagrees. In the highly unlikely event that a Nazi would demand that a Jewish baker decorate a cake with a Nazi symbol, the courts, common sense, and common decency — not to mention the First Amendment — all combine to protect that baker from having to do so. Does a public bakery have to sell a cake to a Nazi? Does that bakery have to draw a swastika on it? Note the use of highly-unlikely twice. As usual, Libertarians take these things to an n-th degree that would never occur in the real world.
Concerning GJ and his position that bakeries should be forced to bake a cake for a Nazi wedding from his FB post:. K So, GJ is trying to make a fine distinction here: Even if we accept that he meant to make that distinction, Jews should not be forced to work for Nazis, whether paid or not. That is the libertarian position. But then GJ proceeds to demolish that distinction, by comparing with the issue of Christian bakers forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding.
In this case, the bakers had previously sold to the couple, and have no objection to selling to gay people. Probably the cake would feature figurines of the couple indicating a homosexual wedding , just as a Nazi wedding cake would feature Nazi symbols indicating a Nazi wedding. If he made any mistake, it was to underestimate how silly doctrinaire libertarians and their questions can be. At the Stossel debate, he should have cut the whole thing short from the get-go by indicating he was only going to answer the question once, so listen up.
Then he could have moved on and the angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin libertarians could go back to their virtual coffee klatch debates about Zoroastrians and the cakes they want baked. And if anyone has those types of concerns, send your article anonymously. The title is not the only problem he repeated the phrase in his text , but in his other comments, which, while subtle, are troubling. K Apparently Nock chooses to be ignorant of the pogroms of Jews in Israel, to which the Christians were not subject to nearly the same extent. True, there was the Armenian massacre, but there were Armenian Jews subjected to the same massacre.
I have often thought, however, of what would happen if some rash and personable young Occidental fell in love with her—no one could help doing that—and married her. If he were sensitive, how distressed and dissatisfied he would be as he became aware of the vast areas of her consciousness from which he was perforce shut out forever; and on the other hand, if he were too insensitive to feel that he was shut out from them, how intolerable her life with him would be. Such as Ivanka Trump. That is the whole story. Mencken also had a problem with Jews. The intelligent Occidental perfectly understands this peculiar sensitiveness, and knows how it came about, but the Occidental mass-man does not; and this puts innumerable exasperating difficulties, usually trifling in themselves, in the course of his relations with Jews.
This article is not the only troubling writing to come from the hand of Nock. Such as this gem, from his Journal of Forgotten Days: The question is not what one thinks of it as an American, but what one would think of it if one were a German in Germany, where the control of cultural agencies is so largely in the hands of Jews—the press, drama, music, education, etc. I think I would fight for it. We loathes liberalism and loathes it hard. Buckley, the pretentious hatchet man, who allowed Whitaker Chambers to slander Ayn Rand in the pages of his self-funded National Review , had an interesting father and upbringing.
He believed Nazi Germany much less harmful than Communist Russia. One of Will Sr. Another of Will Sr. Your rejoinder, best I can ascertain, is that the past associations of some make criticism of the alt-right by anyone an exercise in hypocrisy. I categorically reject that. At an appearance in Berkeley, Adam related a great quote from some government body, it might have been DOJ, or perhaps the Federal Bureau of Prisons, in relation to that ban.
As someone who spent 12 years locked up, I can tell you that media review is one of the most frustrating parts of being incarcerated.
Courts give prison officials very wide discretion and almost always defer to their judgement when challenged. Trust me, I tried. Some facilities bar hardcover books entirely because shanks can easily be hidden in the binding. It can be hard for people who have never been incarcerated to wrap their head around life in a correctional facility. I give no opinion on whether Mr. I have not read it. Andy, did you actually READ my whole post? I never said THIS book would be used to smuggle weapons. I was giving a generalized explanation of how Media Review works in correctional facilities.
It does at least try to undermine faith in monopoly government as a whole, which may be a revolutionary idea to those who have never encountered it, but was not in any way new to me. I guess I can see how bureaucrats may think that advocating anarchy and thinking outside the lines is bad for institutional discipline, but I think they went too far in this case.
Speaking of Kokesh, Andy, have you had any luck downloading your interview to youtube? I can concede that Kokesh must have some level of persuasive ability and a magnetic personality, and maybe is a good activist, but the book clear demonstrates his limited knowledge of policy, lack of experience in electoral politics, and what a disaster of a presidential candidate he would be. I was just pointing out to those who may not be aware, that the book is only pages in length, and that it has only been printed in softcover format. AD, We already have a president who knows nothing about policy.
Hard to imagine someone being less informed on policy than DJT! That takes some level of organizational ability and political skill. Unfortunately, bombast is very often DIShonest. I unequivocally repudiate both left and right, as well as non-ideological non-political force-initiation. Statistics indicate, Jihadist groups are responsible for the vast majority of terrorist attacks, worldwide, from Leftist groups are a distant second. No right-wing group has done terrorist attacks in this time period, and unaffiliated individuals are in last place and have done a statistically insignificant number.
Broken down by country, all statistically significant numbers are in Islamic areas or India, where Muslims come into conflict with Hindus: Concerning terrorist attacks in the US, this shows them all: Since , there have been only 5 attacks by white supremacists. The body count for all such attacks comes to Clearly the left causes more body counts, but most are not terrorist attacks. For instance, the US body count from the Vietnam war is about 50, I thought we were talking about, which group causes the most damage to Americans?
Or perhaps he is saying that all those deaths were the fault of the communists, even though they were fighting a war for control of their own country and the US was not obliged to be there at all. Whatever he is saying it does not seem to have much to do with either right or left wing terrorism in that instance. This statement also seems to be blatantly false. I am including white supremacist in that definition. If Nazis are to be considered part of the right, then we have to include Islamists in that category as well.
Nazis and Islamists have traditionally been allies, for they share a virulent hatred of Jews, and offer a mixed economy, neither fully communist nor fully capitalist. They also have similar views toward women, though Islamists tend to be more conservative in that regard.
Both Nazis and Islamists tend to be racists, though typically they are pragmatic enough to work with other ethnic groups. But even if we look just at incidents in the US, by far the greatest number of attacks and fatalities have come from Jihadists. Anti-abortion activists probably come in second. Islam typically allows abortion after the 4th month, which is similar to my view.
Which explains why most anti-abortion terrorists are Christian. As I have pointed out before, ethnic street gangs are prototype governments, since they organize force to control human behavior according to a code and extract money by force. The map is not the territory. Clearly, when they do offer goods or services for sale, those tend to be illegal according to the official government so that by itself makes a political statement, just as the official government prohibiting those things makes a political statement.
Obviously, since prohibition is political, anti-prohibition is also political, for example. OK, so Islamists are right wing and so are nazis. Are they right wing? Selling contraband is not making a statement that drugs should be legal. If anything, people who make their living selling contraband do not want drugs to be legal as it would mess up their profits. You can make an exception to that for some hippies selling a little bit of drugs to keep themselves in drugs and get by, but when you are talking about street gangs which make a whole bunch of money off dope they are not going to be so idealistic about legalization.
To worry about antifa has to be some kind of land speed record for missing the forest for the trees.
Because if things get wet-n-wild in this country, antifa is gonna lose, and their gonna lose big. Those are the percentages for the total population. The percentages among only those respondents identified as white were much higher. Check out the cross tabs. Yes, of course, street gangs that finance themselves through sales of illegal drugs, do not really want drugs legalized. They are making money from prohibition, just as the cops are. Which explains why so many cartels are paying off politicians and cops, and why police so closely resemble a mafia.
The left has a bloody history, even worse than Nazism. Stalin and his fellow-commies have murdered many more millions. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, they have lost the commanding heights of power, but still there is potential for another massacre: The fall of the Third Reich discredited Nazism, but the fall of the Soviet Union did not discredit communism to the same extent among mass media and academia. The left is in a more powerful position to influence the young, which explains the rise of Antifa.
Soros and others finance them, and the puppetmasters are not stupid, they realize that too much violence will discredit the cause, so they attach strings to their largesse, which is funneled through reliable channels that can be counted on to control their thugs. While neo-nazis are fewer in number, and are largely self-funded, and armor themselves. Islamists, and their fellow travelers the neo-nazis, now have replaced the Soviet Union as the greatest immediate threat.
Though in the long-term, socialism is a more widespread, diffused threat, and hurts efforts by the civilized world to extinguish Islamists. Because of harm to the economy. When has it ever NOT been like this? You think this is new? Things that may be new to us but which are not new historically would be, among other things, the attachment of these privately held feelings to an overt folk nationalism.
And a national security state already in place capable of enforcing the thing en masse. That is, either by:. Well, it means that libertarians are largely aligned with the intellectual culture of the right. Libertarianism and conservatism are viewed as natural cousins. Any libertarian critique of the left, merited or not, merely borrows from the right-wing talking points. Anecdotally, I found little, if any, support for drug prohibition in the underground trade. Indeed, quite the opposite: Of course, anecdotal accounts are not proof.
Empirically, the better hypothesis is: I can assure you that communism has never had any credit in the American mass media. And after the dissolution of the soviet union, the generalized conception of state socialism itself no longer had any cachet in American mass media, either. In other words, if you already have an obviously rigged system, it is not difficult to imagine people making a calculation that if we are going to have rigged system, might as well have one rigged more to their benefit.
Soros and others finance them, and the puppetmasters are not stupid, they realize that too much violence will discredit the cause, so they attach strings to their largesse. Bjornson, you are so full of shit. Some naive participants in illegal drugs trade do justify their behavior by saying it should be legal. But that too is a political statement. Either in cahoots with government or in opposition to it, the political dimension cannot be denied. This Drew Pearson article documents Saudi government funding of American neo-Nazis beginning in , and in there was collaboration with the Nasser government:.
Kevin S Bjornson writes September 15, at I knew those people, I knew who they worked for, I knew who their organizations got money from.