Property and Freedom

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, September 27, 2013

Dissecting Taboos on the Aegean.

I have just returned from a speaking engagement at the most enjoyable conference I have ever attended—the eighth annual meeting of the Property and Freedom Society, held in Bodrum, Turkey. The meeting was unusual in many ways, but what struck me as an American was the diversity. Among the 120 or so participants were people from Denmark, Sweden, Holland, Belgium, Finland, Turkey, Australia, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Germany, Austria, Britain, Hong Kong, Canada, and Greece—and these were just the people I happened to meet. There was an American who lives in the Ukraine and another who lives in Estonia. A professor at Nazarbayef University in Kazakhstan brought his pleasant blonde wife. There was a member of the Lithuanian parliament, and a brother and sister from the family of one of the Viceroys of India.

Equally remarkable was the setting: a quietly luxurious hotel in the resort town of Bodrum, which is known as the Saint Tropez of Turkey. Meals, service, and evening entertainment were superb.

The founder and guiding spirit of the Property and Freedom Society is the German philosopher and economist, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who taught for many years at the University of Las Vegas and now lives in Istanbul. He is a prominent spokesman for the Austrian School of economics, and his best known book is Democracy—The God That Failed, which was reviewed in American Renaissance.

As one would expect, many lectures reflected a world view shaped by a study of Freidrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Professor Hoppe himself. There were talks from a libertarian perspective on labor law, entrepreneurship, limited liability corporations, public health, Milton Friedman, bitcoins, and even a very clever lecture entitled “What Literature Can Teach Economics.” But the program also reflected Prof. Hoppe’s wide-ranging and unconventional interests. Richard Lynn was asked to answer the question, “Why Are Jews so Smart?” and I gave “A Brief History of US Race Relations.” The British author and lecturer Sean Gabb spoke on “Understanding England and the English,” and the Swiss economist and think tank executive Robert Nef explained Switzerland and the Swiss. Prof. Hoppe himself took on the ambitious subject of “The Nature of Man, Truth, and Justice.”

Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Some of the talks were technical, but overload was impossible: no speaker took the podium before 10:00 a.m., no one spoke for more than 30 minutes, and there was a coffee break after every talk.

Those of us with an interest in the national question usually find libertarians open to dissenting views. They are used to thinking logically and do not mind if their principles set them well apart from the herd. Some doctrinaire libertarians believe national borders are incompatible with freedom, but the Property and Freedom Society does not attract many of these. This was Professor Lynn’s third PFS lecture, and Peter Brimelow and Richard Spencer have spoken to the society, so I was hardly a jarring presence. My talk attracted some opposition but much support; a surprising number of participants knew all about American Renaissance.

And it was the participants who made this conference so agreeable. It was easy to strike up new acquaintances, and each was a reward. Prof. Hoppe has an unwritten rule—no bores or dimwits—so any subject that came up over a meal or drink was sure to start a good conversation.

On the final day, there were no lectures. Instead, we walked down to the port of Bodrum, past the ancient stone walls of the crusader castle, and boarded several schooners. We motored out to an uninhabited island, dropped anchor in a cove, and swam in the Aegean. We visited friends in other boats and swam to shore, where the lucky ones caught sight of wild pigs. We had lunch on board, chatted, and sun-bathed, and imagined what it would be like to live on one of these handsome ships.

Never have I been to a conference that was both a feast for the mind and a luxury vacation. “To describe it is to insult it,” concluded one exuberant Englishman, and he may be right.

PFS meetings are held annually in September, and information on the next one will be available in due course. I can imagine only a hater of libertarianism not having a wonderful time.


Bodrum Castle

[Editor’s Note: Video of Mr. Taylor’s presentation is available here.]

Topics: ,

Share This

Jared Taylor
Jared Taylor is the editor of American Renaissance and the author of White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Next goal for HHH: Clearing the race denying race pandering open borders kooks, crackpots, cranks, trucklers and pusiefooters out of his movement and doctrine, then coming up with a different name for the movement, the “L” word has probably too much ill repute now. Then we’ll really have something to work with.

    • Oil Can Harry

      You could make the same claim about the word Conservative. Anytime a movement gains in popularity some opportunists and hucksters jump on the bandwagon.

      • joesolargenius

        It seems to be that way with virtually all organizations ,even the Tea Party was being hustled by Freedom Works and Dick Armey ( whom is pro amnesty

        • Alfred the Great

          When I heard that Armey was connected with Freedom Works, I didn’t have anything to do with it. Too many republicans are for the open borders agenda. No society can survive with open borders and to me that means they want to destroy us.

    • Sick of it

      The term Libertarian came from the older Libertarian Socialist (a la Voline). One has to expect people along a wide spectrum involved in such a movement.

  • David Ashton

    We need to unpack the different visions of the good society held by libertarians. The notion of a world in which adult individuals relate to another solely by contracts and trade is differs from a world in which individuals are born and bred into families and cultural communities. The advantage of discussion with many libertarians (e.g. Sean Gabb) is that they respect free speech and quality of intellect, and have a positive view of national heritage.

  • bigone4u

    When my Internet connection is working (hasn’t been, lately) I go to amren, lew rockwell, taki, david icke, drudge, infowars, and stormfront every day to see what’s cooking. I can’t quite bring myself to label myself libertarian because libertarianism seems to assume away (like economics: remember the old joke where the economist assumes a can opener)) some of the more difficult questions associated with race, intelligence, and ethnicity. Nonetheless, I would like to read the papers presented at the conference and view transcripts of the discussions.

    My comfort zone lies within the realm of the Neo-reactionary movement and its condemnation of “The Cathedral.” Libertarianism, neo-reactionism, and neo-traditionalism seem to all be at odds with the New World Order’s obsession with egalitarianism. But I’m still a student at all of this, so I have a lot to learn. If Richard Lynn can tell me “Why Jews are So Smart,” I’d feel like I had a good day of learning under my belt.

    • joesolargenius

      Jews are so smart because they bred for intelligence by discriminating against the unintelligent,they were extremely prejudiced towards Gentiles because they didn’t want the children making babies with them.

      • For about a thousand years, smart Christian peasant boys went into the clergy, where as priests they didn’t have kids. A rabbi on the other hand is expected to have a family. This dysgenic practice hurt gentiles.

        • Spartacus

          That only applied to Catholics, all other Christian cults allow their priests/pastors to have children. Also, there was no birth control at the time, and knowing how well most people control their base impulses, I’m sure the average priest had more than a few bastards to carry on his genes, even if not his name.

          • Of course, but the religious schism was rather thorough in western Europe until the Reformation.

          • IstvanIN

            Christian cults? Isn’t that a bit insulting?

          • Spartacus

            Twas my mistake. In Romanian, we refer to different branches of the same religion as “culte” . Cults we call “secte” .

          • Alfred the Great

            In English a sect is the same thing as a denomination.

          • JohnEngelman

            From the end of the Western Roman Empire to the Protestant Reformation – about a thousand years – priests to the west of the Balkans were forbidden to have children. If that did not always prevent them from having descendants, it certainly reduced the number of the descendants they had.

            Meanwhile, those who passed the imperial exams in China were expected to have several wives and many children. Most of them did.

    • Spartacus

      In reality, the jews’s success (if you can call parasitism that) has nothing to do with their slightly higher IQs, but with networking, and ferocious destruction of anyone they consider to be a threat. That’s pretty much it.

    • See John Engelman’s post of the LP’s trade-immigration platform. Any movement, ideology or party which is free trade and open borders is helping, not hurting, the NWO and the cause of global-universal governance.

      • Sick of it

        I’ve often asked people why they supported Gingrich after NAFTA, considering we’ve seen the results of said free trade agreement.

        • Probably because they don’t give very high personal priority to the trade issue. We saw that several months ago here in AR with an article on Lindsay Graham, various people in South Carolina didn’t like his immigration treachery but were still going to vote for him because hew as a “good Republican” (even though he isn’t). That was like a ton of bricks falling on my head, getting people to agree with us on immigration is only half the battle, the other and more crucial half is getting them to see how uber-important it is, such that you have to put everything else aside, such as partisanship, pet issues, crank obsessions, etc. and be an all immigration all the time voter.

          As for Newt Gingrich, he came to St. Louis last year for one of our campaign events, so I got to meet him. The problem with Newt, aside from the obvious ones, is that the zany Newt we remembered from the debates late in 2011 and early last year was that he has to get his caboose going before he gets interesting. He’s fairly ordinary when he doesn’t have his mental mojo working.

          • jackryanvb

            You had the opportunity to personally kick Newt Gingrich in the a$$ and you let it slip by?

          • Don’t forget, he was in town supporting our campaign when nobody else would. Sure, I told him of my disagreements with him, politely and tactfully.

            As far as kicking his, well, you know, I wouldn’t have even tried that, because there’s so much of that on him that if I started, I’d still be at it today.

          • Sick of it

            Personally, I’ve never trusted a man who didn’t know his own religion. If they’re that wishy-washy, they WILL stab you in the back at some point. And yeah, Graham needs to be primaried in South Carolina. Anyone who trusts him is a fool.

      • IanJMacDonald

        Yes, that’s the Libertarian PARTY. You do understand that Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Property and Freedom Society is NOT the Libertarian Party? Criticize the LP all you want; it doesn’t have a damned thing to do with HHH.

        Hoppe is not an advocate of open borders. Were you the least bit familiar with Hoppe and his scholarship, you would understand this.

        • I already know HHH is sane on immigration and mostly sane on racial issues. When it comes to libertarianism in general, we need a lot more HHH and a lot less Ron/Rand Paul.

          • NorthSea

            Ron Paul considered himself a Constitutional conservative, despite running on the Libertarian ticket in 1988. He was pro-life and against open borders, antipathetic to true libertarians. His son, however, is closer to true libertarianism. He also harbors some queasy attitudes to our “relationship” with Israel.

          • Both Pauls are fundamentally for open borders.

            Father is closer to doctrinaire libertarianism than son.

          • NorthSea

            Rand enjoys Tea Party support, those people are not libertarians. They evidently don’t consider the Pentagon to be an organ of the federal government when they bray about small government.

          • Oil Can Harry

            You’re correct that the father is more libertarian than the son.

            However, I’ll give the son some benefit of the doubt before I declare him to be “open borders”. After all, he did vote against the recent amnesty abomination.

          • True, but at least four times he has told Hispanic race groups or has said in general that we ought to allow the illegal aliens already present to be able to stay, not be “deported” and have work permits.

          • jackryanvb

            You wish.

            Might as well lie and argue Viet Nam war hero John McCain was also strong on defending our borders, tough on illegal immigration.

            Those in the know understand McCain wasin league with the immigration devil Ted Kennedy.

            Ron Paul had the second worst immigration grade of Presidential contenders from Numbers USA.

        • jackryanvb

          But the American Libertarian community, economic Conservative community demands open borders and they will purge, brutally persecute anyone who dissents from this insane, treasonous immigration stance.

          Look what Reason Magazine and libertarian loons did to Ron Paul campaigns, forced him to deny he even read his own 1980s newsletter criticizing non White crime, 3rd world invasion.

          Libertarian presidential candidate Garry Johnson won 0%, one reason he still preached complete open borders immigration.

          • Libertarian Presidential candidates always get around 1% or less of the vote.

            I don’t consider Ron Paul to be an innocent victim in that. I think the decade of cuckoldry that resulted in the newsletters was part of a deliberate deception on the part of both him and Lew Rockwell, making themselves out to be something they weren’t and never were, just to hawk an ideology.

        • Sick of it

          He has a lot of great ideas, I just don’t like the private law society itself, as it resembles what we have today taken to an extreme. More suffering, more injustice.

    • Guest

      David Icke? Please.

    • Fair Dingum

      David Icke? Old lizard head Icke? Please.

  • JohnEngelman

    Libertarianism makes sense for those who have reason to be confident in their ability to earn a good living with no help from the government. If you own a company that is profitable with no business subsidies, if you have a diversified investment portfolio and have a reasonably good understanding of the stock market, or if you get lucrative job offers over the telephone, libertarianism makes sense for you.

    By job offers, I do not mean requests to be one of seven people being interviewed for a job. I mean calls from people who state a willingness to hire you over the phone, and pay you more than you are currently earning. If, when you have an argument with your boss, your boss is the one who gets frightened, libertarianism makes sense for you.

    Libertarianism does not make sense for government employees, unless they can easily make better incomes in the private sector. It does not make sense for those who send their children to state universities.

    Libertarianism is a popular ideal because in the United States particularly freedom is a popular ideal. Nevertheless, I suspect that fewer people would benefit from a genuinely libertarian economy than the number of people who imagine they would.

    • Oil Can Harry

      This also explains why most libertarians are white men and almost none of them are black women. Self-reliant whites object to onerous tax rates while black women want a supportive welfare state given that most of them are single mothers raising their kids with no help from their useless babydaddies.

    • IanJMacDonald

      A free society built on private property, free exchange, freedom of association, and rule of law produce high standards of living for the greatest numbers. History has shown this time and again.

      Welfare states produce sloth, dependency, and a constituency for ever greater government spending.

      • JohnEngelman

        Welfare states produce sloth, dependency, and a constituency for ever greater government spending.

        – IanJMacDonald

        That cannot be said of Scandinavian countries. However, until recently those countries have benefited from an exclusively white population.

        • QuinnTheEskimo9

          It can certainly be said of Scandinavian countries that crushing taxes have hindered economic development. The public sector sucks up 48% of all economic output.

          • Bo_Sears

            Thanks. Could you tell me where to find that feature?

            bosears [at] resistingdefamation [.] org

    • NorthSea

      A co-worker once said to me that he considered libertarians to be the kind of people who voted that way because they were confident they would never have to actually live under that system. I’ve always remembered that statement whenever I read libertarians trumpet their ideology.

      • JohnEngelman

        That is probably true for some. There are others who are so delusional that they believe that under a libertarian society they would live the lives of Ayn Rand heroes.

  • rowingfool

    Sounds as though you may have fallen under the spell of the Siren’s song. It’s hard to imagine any better bewitchment than one that involves swimming in the Aegean and lunching onboard a yacht anchored in an ancient Greek port.

  • JohnEngelman

    Since 1969 the United States has moved to the right on economic issues, and to the left on social issues. In short, the United States has become more libertarian.

    The Republican Party has benefited from the fact that white blue collar workers and white Evangelicals have left the Democrat Party, and that they have started to vote Republican.

    Nevertheless, white blue collar workers and white Evangelicals do not support the GOP because they think a graduated income tax punishes success, and because they believe strong labor unions force employers to move production to third world countries.

    White blue collar workers favor a criminal justice system that does more to control criminals, especially black criminals. They want more restrictions on immigration. White evangelicals want abortion and pornography to be illegal. They want more control of the sexual content of the popular culture.

    White blue collar workers and white evangelicals do not vote Republican for libertarian reasons, but for authoritarian reasons. They want more government control, rather than less. A government capable of addressing their concerns would be larger, more powerful, and more expensive. It would cost money to put more criminals in prison, locate and deport illegal immigrants, and keep people from having abortions.

    • Nicely put, both here and right above, but the fly in the ointment remains violent crime, which aside from a relative handful of sickos, is mainly black and brown. In a racially homogeneous nation with a civilized population, like Iceland or Japan, violent crime is almost a non-issue. Abortion would probably become irrelevant if these folks (1) became race-realists and (2) realized that single black women and girls have the highest abortion rate in the USA.

      • QuinnTheEskimo9

        You’re kidding, right? I’m surprised to be reading this from you.
        Do you too believe Engelman’s ignorant, one-sided economics pronouncements?

        • JohnEngelman

          I document my assertions, using credible sources.

          • Beloved Comrade

            You continue to post cooked stats published in the media by Obama’s regime, which makes you a shill for Obama. This is disingenuous because inflation and unemployment numbers are not counted the same way as they were in the past.

            Here are just a few of the results of the Keynesian Economics which you continually tout on this forum.

            1. Labor participation rate lowest it has been in 35 years. 100 million Americans in at least one welfare program.

            2. U.S Census bureau says media household income (adjusted for inflation) has declined five years in a row.

            3. If the government calculated inflation the exact same way it was calculated back in 1980, the inflation rate would be between 8 and 10% right now. This is far higher than when Barak Obama first entered the White House.

            4. Real income has dropped by $2,627 and the number of people on poverty increased by 6,667,000.

            5. Government continues to print $85 billion per month out of thin air. No

            6. The employment to population has fallen to underneath 59 percent at the end of 2009 and it has stayed there ever since.

            All this misery and poverty is the result of Keynesian economics.

            But I already know your weasel answer will be that Obama inherited George Bush’s right-wing economy or it is evil, right-wing Republicans hoarding all the wealth. In your world one is either an evil right-wing Republican, or an enlightened Keynesian who knows how to run the economy best.
            Every fiat currency has eventually failed.

            Source: JohnWilliam shttp://www (dot) shadowstats (dot )com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

          • JohnEngelman

            But I already know your weasel answer will be that Obama inherited George Bush’s right-wing economy or it is evil, right-wing Republicans hoarding all the wealth. In your world one is either an evil right-wing Republican, or an enlightened Keynesian who knows how to run the economy best.

            – Beloved Comrade

            One more point: When I am trying to find where truth lies on a controversial and complicated issue, any appeal to emotion inclines me to give greater credence to the other viewpoint.

            Your use of words like “weasel,” “evil,” and “enlightened” are appeals to emotion, which detract from your credibility.

        • His economic theories are situational. Scandanavia was able to (barely) tolerate the extensive welfare state because they were not paying nonwhite criminals to breed like rabbits. Now they are, and the situation is untenable. When the US labor movement looked out for the well-being of white men, their antagonistic relationship with management was an acceptable cost. Today it isn’t, and US labor unions have doubled-down on proven failure by backing the cheap labor plutocrats in wanting amnesty for criminal alien invaders.

          I don’t see eye-to-eye with Mr. Engelman, but my grandparents were working-class. My mother’s dad was an electrician for Bell Telephone, and my ex-father’s dad started out working in a coal mine at age 13. After six years in the US army from the ages of 15 to 21, he fought as a heavyweight boxer, winning eight fights and losing six. Eventually he settled into work at a steel mill and married his foreman’s sister, which means he was probably a good worker. As a convicted federal felon, I know I’ll never have a good job again. I recently received a very nice university teaching offer in China that was rescinded when I admitted my criminal history. The only thing that’s saving us financially is that I paid off the house.

          I disagree with John Engelman more than I agree with him, but I can understand where he’s coming from.

    • rowingfool

      “Since 1969 the United States has moved to the right on economic issues, and to the left on social issues. In short, the United States has become more libertarian.” Check

      “The Republican Party has benefited from the fact that white blue collar workers and white Evangelicals have left the Democrat Party, and that they…vote Republican.” Check

      I think what you’re trying to say is….”Nevertheless, white blue collar workers and white Evangelicals support the GOP not because they think a graduated income tax punishes success (as libertarians do) nor do they believe (as libertarians do ) that strong labor unions have forced employers to move production to third world countries.” Check

      [Rather], “white blue collar workers favor a criminal justice system that does more to control criminals–especially black criminals [and] they want more restrictions on immigration [while] white evangelicals want abortion and pornography to be illegal [i.e.] they want more control of the sexual content of the popular culture.” Check

      “White blue collar workers and white evangelicals do not vote Republican for libertarian reasons, but for [human]itarian reasons. They want more government [intervention in crime] control,….[and] less [intervention in programs designed to ameliorate alleged social injustices suffered by grievance-afflicted minorities]. A government capable of addressing their concerns would [act decisively with a clear sense of purpose]. It would cost [less] money to put more criminals in prison [than to support a largely parasitic class of hereditary, criminally inclined loafers] [and to] locate and deport illegal immigrants, [than to bear the burden of assimilating them]” Check

      Wow, John. I think we agree!

      • QuinnTheEskimo9

        How about you explaining to us what “the United States has moved to the right”on economic issues means exactly since you parrot and approve of Engleman’s message.

        • rowingfool

          Read what I posted. I did’t parrot John. I completely rewrote the last paragraph and partially rewrote the one’s above. When I said “we agree”, I was being facetious (although I don’t disagree with John just to be disagreeable. I think he often posts good stuff).

          But what he means by “move to the right” is that currently there exists the highest disparity of wealth between the top 5% and the bottom 50% (since the Depression). This is not an accident of history. It is the result of conscientious endeavor on the part of our economic elites who through their active lobbying and funding have compelled Congress to rewrite the rules of our social contract through legislation. Taxes etc. are very regressive, wages are at historic lows etc. There’s no point going through the whole litany. There are myriad of good books on the subject e.g. Kevin Phillips’ Wealth and Democracy.

          If, having just lived through the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the Banker Elite in history, if I say, you have not grasped this point, then you are dense. We now OWN their bad debts. You and I. While they are free to crank up the money machine for another whirl. Mike Whitney at Counterpunch is good. If he’s too left wing for your tastes, they try Paul Craig Roberts, former Reagan adviser. This cuts across all liberal/libertarian distinctions.

          Bankers loan money into existence and you and I have to create the interest we repay them out of our own sweat and blood.

          Can we get along without a class of bankers as financiers? I don’t know but doubt it. Marx thought so. He thought that the financiers added nothing to the manufacturing process and that Engineers, technicians and workers could manage a technologically developed society. He wanted to cut the big money capitalists out of the equation and of course they resisted that. And the propaganda they employ in their defense is (as John is pointing out) often disguised as Libertarian claptrap. It fools the gullible. Suckers you in.

          You THINK (or are persuaded to believe you “think”) that the Elite have your interests in mind when they substitute phrases such as “Death Tax” for inheritance tax. But if you read the fine print, they wrote the law to benefit themselves! It hardly affects the common man. And so on…..

          • QuinnTheEskimo9

            So “move to the right” means, according to you something about:

            “there exists the highest disparity of wealth between the top 5% and the bottom 50% (since the Depression).”

            What does that statist drivel have to do with “moving to the right” which neither you nor the economically illiterate Engelman have explained.

            What matters is this: We White Americans are losing our homelands everywhere we have homelands. We are being genocided. We have been taken over by a hostile, alien, non-white ethnic group that has co-opted our schools, financial system, banks, media and government. They are busy printing $85 billion/month which will eventually collapse the currency and economy while importing hoards from the 3rd world to make white people a minority in the countries we created and built. These are facts and anyone with a brain can see this.
            We and our children are being overtly, blatantly, government-sanctioned discriminated against and genocided.

            We can argue all day as to whether libertarians are idiots, authoritarian government is best (Engelman’s view) or whether Democrats differ from Republicans (they don’t).

            What the hell does it matter at this point? These are distractions from the REAL issue: How to preserve our homelands for future White children and stop the 3rd world colonizations of our homelands.

            This should concern every white every minute of every day. There will be no White homelands in 50 years. Then what? What happens when the welfare state collapses and non-Whites, who have been primed to hate Whites, outnumber Whites and blame us for all of their problems, come after us. Blacks are already attacking us, our elderly, our children, our handicapped for fun and kicks while the media and government look the other way and claim we Whites oppress blacks.

            Nothing else matter but stopping this planned, ongoing genocide against us. The economy is in the process of collapsing; this is inevitable.
            Meanwhile we argue about football, petty economic issues and tear at each other’s throats like animals.

            Our enemies must love it.

          • rowingfool

            Regarding immigration and America’s takeover by a self-identified tribe of alien people whose interests are at cross purposes with those of the traditions of the historic American people, I completely agree with you. How could I not? My ancestral roots run deep here and I was raised in a home that preserved and celebrated America’s colonial legacy. When our current cultural elite deny that we Americans have an ethnic heritage and that we are, as they put it, a “proposition nation”, they speak the truth–as they see it. After all, they are relative newcomers here and they brought their baggage of alien manners and customs with them. So of course tales of our history and heroes don’t resonate with them as they are too busy celebrating their own. All their love for their fellow man is used up in celebrating their own wonderfulness, so with what little remaining psychic energy they have left, they “deconstruct” ours. How pleasant for us.

            Right? Left? Liberal? Conservative? Libertarian? What do these words mean? How can we talk about this stuff if we don’t use a common vocabulary? Engleman was just trying to draw a distinction–and I think it’s a useful one–between economic and social/cultural policy. One can be a liberal in one and a conservative in the other.

            Libertarians straddle a peculiar position. That’s all he’s saying. But conversation is difficult because in America, there is no clear unequivocal shared understanding of what the terms liberal etc. mean.

            For example; both Libertarians and Marxists look forward to the day of the “withering away of the State”! How’s that for strange bedfellows?

            And another; Marxists look forward to the day when workers directly own the companies in which they labor–and so do many of the most successful Capitalist corporations in as much as they encourage their workers to participate in stock purchases with a portion of their paycheck or pensions! Volkswagen is owned roughly 50% by its workers.

            So where’s the pure capitalism? or the “free” market? These are concepts, Ideas. They shed light on human affairs. They aren’t actual Things. They are not to be taken literally, as Libertarians are prone to do. Just as their is no frictionless machine so there is no self-regulating economic System.

            And I agree with you we need to put a stop to Blacks’ attacking Whites and the Media’s distortions and lies of omission.

    • QuinnTheEskimo9

      It’s utterly silly and simplistic to state that the fedgov has moved “to the right” economically. What does “to the right” even mean?

      This system the government supports is entirely unsustainable. Unlimited debt, unlimited entitlements and unlimited spending will eventually come to a cashing halt; this is an economic reality. All things that are unsustainable will eventually end and the more the government lies to the people about debt, the more devastating the crash. What’s amazing is that this economy has gone on as long as it has while the government continues to announce rosy numbers about the economy and employment which the media willing print to fool the dumb, economically clueless sheeple of America.

      The only real question is when? How much longer can this unsustainable scheme run before the world’s central banks dump U.S. treasury bonds on the open market and the entire system implodes immediately?

      And this is what you call an economy that has “moved to the right?”

      You are hopelessly naive.

  • I voted down not because I voted you down, but because I voted the content down.

    If HHH wants libertarianism to ditch its reputation as being just another race denying universalist egalitiarian ideological cult, he’s going to have to take a big eraser to that part of the platform. Otherwise, we paranoid types will be left to assume that TPTB are, like the street corner dope pusher, dealing libertarianism as a sort of dope to white ethnonationalists to hold us back and retard us.

    Pray, if we can deny entry to foreign nationals for security, health and property threats, then why can’t we deny them entry for economic, social, cultural, environmental and other threats?

    • Bo_Sears

      Question Diversity: I’ve finally figured out a possible reason for the Engelman’s wobbling to-and-fro over a variety of positions that seem designed to attract attention and replies.

      When you respond directly to him, a copy of your comment is sent to him by email from Discus, and by tapping on your icon in that notice, he has complete access to all your comments over a large period of time. It’s not at all reasonable that it would work that way, but check it out.

      A wonderful way to mine comments. Let others know please.

      • QuinnTheEskimo9

        If you use Disqus, there is a privacy function now which prevents the likes of Engelman or anyone else from accessing your comments.
        BTW, aren’t you the one who stated on another thread that engaging with Engelman is a waste of time and minutes lost that one will never recover?
        What I’ll never understand is why this site allows him to spread mis – and dis- information and then let it stand. The white public as it is is bombarded with disinformation daily by those who debase and denigrate us.

      • ViktorNN

        Very astute observation, thanks.

      • I don’t care who reads my comments. Engelman, NSA, or otherwise. As far as I’m concerned, the whole world needs to read my comments. Those who don’t…well, that’s their loss.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          It is also possible to track how a commentor’s opinions have changed. Many people take that as contradiction where it might be actually growth and exploration.

          • If you want to go back that far. I’m over 7,000 comments on Disqus-based blogs now, almost all them AR. Most people have better things to do than to keep hitting page down on my long queue of past comments. Even though it would clearly benefit everyone to do so. (Queue raspberries from the peanut gallery.)

            Opinions that change gradually are genuine matters of opinion shift, opinions that change on a dime generally are matters of either expedience, political prostitution or game playing.

            I don’t think I’ve much changed my worldview since I’ve been commenting on AR, since 2006. What has changed with me is that I have become almost a Jack Ryan level enemy of the liberTARDian cult, not that I ever was enthralled with it to begin with. The straw that stirred that drink, or rather, the Rubicon that was crossed, was the second time this year that Rand Paul told Hispanic Razatard groups that he wanted to “find a place” (i.e. grant amnesty) for all their millions of illegal aliens presently in country.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I’d say that I agree with you on this as it’s basically what I was saying or meant to be saying. I’ve shifted a little on some things as new information has convinced me over time, but I still feel that I know what I know about and can defend/debate it fully to the finish. Here, I often drop off after the point has been made since there are plenty of sorts that will chase their tails endlessly.

  • JDInSanD

    “Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.”

    Can I point to my Economic Freedom to demand the unrestricted removal of humans who are a net drain on my financial capital or who pose a credible threat to security, health or property?

    • JohnEngelman

      I am not any kind of a libertarian. This is because I am pessimistic about human nature and human potential.

      Nevertheless, many who call themselves “libertarians” do so because they favor low taxes for themselves, and they do not want the government to tell them what to do. At the same time they do want the government to tell people they dislike what to do. They also want the government to help them get through life.

      Those people talk the talk of libertarianism. They do not walk the walk.

      Those “libertarians” remind me of the following sentence by Samuel Johnson, “If slavery be thus fatally contagious, how is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?”

      • NorthSea

        During Ron Paul’s campaign in 2008, his rallies were flooded with enthusiastic college students. An astute commentator wondered how many of those collegiates were partaking of college loans.

        • Flooded with enthusiastic college students…

          1. Who wanted legal weed, and noting more

          2. Who were obviously so successful in helping him win the Republican Presidential nomination. Hint: As exit polling in Republican primaries in 2008 and 2012 showed, the percent of all votes cast by people under 25 in Republican primaries for President is so insignificantly small that Republican Presidential candidates running in Republican primaries can basically ignore them and suffer no real consequences.

          Robbers rob banks because that’s where the money is. Politicians troll 50-year olds for votes because that’s who the voters are.

          • Sick of it

            In all fairness, their lack of votes in the primary had more to do with their being registered as Democrats and Independents who could not vote in a Republican primary than their lack of interest.

          • In many states, my own included, there is no party registration, in primary elections you ask for the party ballot you want.

            Young people are a non-entity in Republican primaries, not much more of an entity in general elections, and not too big a deal in Democrat primaries.

            Politics are old people’s games, that’s not a hard dictum to understand.

          • Kevin_OKeeffe

            Most (virtually all) of the young Paul supporters were also anti-interventionists, not just weed heads. And they were correct on both issues, needless to say.

        • JohnEngelman

          Not as many as the number of elderly teabaggers who favor less government, except for the largest government spending programs: Social Security and Medicare.

          “Less spending” sounds like a good idea until those who advocate it become specific in what they will need to cut to balance the budget.

  • Sentinel9

    US “Libertarians” have forgotten all about Rothbard and are fully on board with white genocide.

    • IanJMacDonald

      If you think that Hoppe is ” fully on board with white genocide,” then it simply means that you have no familiarity with Hoppe. In short, you don;t really know what you’re talking about.

    • Garrett Brown

      Not realist Libertarians that want open borders only for white Europeans. The way it was before 1965.

  • Andy

    Where did the Chicago violence story go?

  • JohnEngelman

    A philosophically consistent libertarian sees the concept of freedom through the windows of the corner office of a CEO. He approves of the fact that during the last generation it has become easy for companies to export good jobs while importing cheap labor.

    • Garrett Brown

      Stop spamming the comment section, thanks.

      • JohnEngelman

        Post an intelligent response to my comment, or go away. Thanks.

        • Garrett Brown

          “Post an intelligent response” how can one suggest an action when they themselves have have never done it? None of your spam is intelligent, you have no idea what true libertarianism is. So stop spamming, thanks.

          • JohnEngelman

            What is “true libertarianism?”

            Is it consistent with prohibiting immigration?

          • Jefferson

            What stops me from voting libertarian in presidential elections is their God awful stance on immigration. Their stance on immigration is the same as that of the national council of la raza.

            Libertarians show common sense on many other issues, but on immigration they have been drinking the left wing vibrant diversity is good kool-aid. Libertarians have no problem opening America’s doors to more Somali Islamic yoofs for example.

          • JohnEngelman

            Open borders is the essence of libertarianism, because it gives employers the freedom to reduce wages.

          • All you have to do is look at modern politics in the western world. Where the immigration patriotism is, the libertarians aren’t. Where the immigration patriots rush in, the libertarians are rushing in the other direction.

          • Oil Can Harry

            You’re forgetting about Norway’s Progress Party. “Its libertarian streak is as strong as its anti-immigrant streak.”

            Please don’t dismiss all libertarians as Reason Magazine-style p.c. geeks. Some are like Hoppe or the late Murray Rothbard (he was a race realist) and we need all the allies we can get.

          • Libertarian streak? Yes.

            Libertarian? No.

            Just like, per Paul Kersey’s axiom, you can either have black people or nice things but not both, you can either have real libertarianism or real immigration patriotism, but not both.

  • robinbishop34

    It is not achieved by kissing rattlesnakes on the lips.

    The 8 people in the country that do that would disagree.

  • JohnEngelman

    In the United States libertarianism is a popular ideal because freedom is a popular ideal in the United States.

    Moreover, libertarianism has a certain cachet because those who are affluent and well educated often say that they are, “fiscally conservative, socially liberal.” This usually means that they are in favor of low taxes, few regulations, abortion rights and gay rights.

    A person who calls himself a libertarian while favoring an end to immigration is appropriating a fashionable title to an unlibertarian agenda. Libertarianism is also inconsistent with the goal of a white ethno state where only whites will be allowed to live.

    Libertarianism is like a woman who looks better from a distance.

    • Bossman

      You’re generally correct in most of the things that you say. People who want their own white ethno-state and are against immigration are really Nazis. National Socialism is not the same as Libertarianism.

      • BernieGoetzFan

        Are non-whites who have their own ethno-states and don’t allow immigration (South Korea, China, India, Mexico, Indonesia …etc.) also Nazis?

        • William Allingham

          in some way they are.

          At least mexico during the early 30’s started persecuting chinese people just for having long eyes.. The government itself encouraged citizens to assault any asiatic in the streets and finally expelled most of them without any contemplation

          just a few months ago while speaking about ethnic differences with a mexican middle class family they told me that the chinese “are dirty drunkards” (among other unflattering adjectives) demonstrating to me that in mexico anti chinese stereotypes are still held.

          not to mention the situation of blacks in mexico. they are esteemed so lowly that the government refuses to acknowledge their existence in mexico and wont allow them to develop an identity congruent with their color.

  • JohnEngelman

    I meant “right wing” on economic issues.

    Social spending was reduced during the Reagan administration. The result was an increase in homelessness. I have read on several occasions, so I suspect that it is true, that during the 1980’s one third of homeless men in the United States were combat veterans of the War in Vietnam.

    I agree with most of Jared Taylor’s perceptions, although with fewer of his likes and dislikes.

    When I say that IQ is more important than race I am describing the U.S. economy, and explaining why Orientals and Ashkenazi Jews tend to earn more money than white Gentiles.

    • QuinnTheEskimo9

      Many homeless pretended to be “combat veterans of the U.S.” to evoke sympathy and money from a stupid, gullible public. The vast majority of homeless were never in the military and this has been researched and published.
      The media won’t report homeless numbers honestly if there is a Democrat in office so it’s very hard to get a clear picture.

      What with unemployment as high as it is I suspect homeless numbers are exploding – and are about to get a whole lot worse. My once-thriving city is filled with empty businesses. Only 48% of Americans have full time jobs and most jobs created in 2013 were part time. Many struggling Americans are about to see their mandatory insurance premiums double and triple.

      But you will continue to believe the fedgov’s predictions of a “recovering economy and job creation,” then naively blame right-wing “Republican policies” when the inevitable shake-out occurs and report dutifully on American Renaissance your pronouncements that Republican, right-wing are responsible for the economic collapse.

      You are exactly like the government mouthpieces in the media who report to those who are ignorant of economics or libertarian policies.

    • BernieGoetzFan

      I would be very surprised if social spending was reduced under Reagan as government grew during his administration. Didn’t we even get 1-2 more federal departments (Education and Energy)?

      • John likes to forget that it is the House of Representatives where spending bills originate, and not the White House.

  • dmxinc

    Still it is distress to see once Christian lands occupied by Muslims.

    The Turks should have been removed decades ago, but instead, the Christian West along with Russia applied their energies to expelling 8 million Germans from lands they had settled 8 centuries ago.

    To understand how weak the Turkish position was, did you know that during WWII they did not possess a single tank?

    • JTK

      Don’t forget that before VIII century all of North Africa and Middle East where Christian. Damascus, Alexandria and Antioch were the centers of Christian culture at that time. On another subject, I think, there were at least 12 million Germans expelled from East Prussia, Silesia and other parts of Germany, East of Oder.

  • QuinnTheEskimo9

    Libertarians do not support a welfare state which attracts third world poor and colonists who are able to better their lot in life by crossing the border to tap into the government’s cradle to grave welfare benefits; they do not come here to work, as the media and fedgov tell us, they come here as economic parasites because conditions are better here for them. There is a huge difference. I do not know of one libertarian that supports open borders and a massive welfare state, this is a recipe for disaster as the U.S. is finding out.

    End the welfare state and see how many cross the border.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Quinn, the problem is that the Libertarian Party wants to have open borders BEFORE the abolition of the welfare state takes place.

      That means millions of Third Worlders moving here and signing up for “free” welfare goodies. Since these parasites now have the right to vote, it makes it even harder to reduce, let alone eliminate, the welfare state.

      • Hoardes of third world non-whites would still flood in if we had open borders but no welfare state. That’s because white first world societies are far and away better than their own countries.

        I don’t really bother arguing with libertarian cultists anymore, if I ever I did to begin with. They can’t be talked to, they’re living in such a fantasy world complete with a revisionist version of every discipline you can think of. Thankfully, they’re so few in number that they can’t much hurt us, but where they do damage is in our movement; I am now convinced that the white ethnonationalist right would be significantly closer to our day of victory and to being able to make real positive change if our prostration to libertarian ideology didn’t hold us back, that we didn’t advocate for one sensible idea or another because we’re worried about how it violates some doctrine or that we were somehow creating an uncontrollable Frakenstein.

        The worst part about libertarian cultists is their notion that it’s them or total dictatorship. That’s a common affliction of fringe ideologies of all kinds, that they have to set up a logically fallacious either-or argument that they’re our only alternative to a living hell. Then on top of that they engage in the slippery slope logical fallacy that anything we do that isn’t square with their doctrine puts us on an inevitable slide into dictatorship.

        • jackryanvb

          But Libertarian cultists do hurt us. They always manage to get the Republican VP pick to push this nonsense, and the result was Paul Ryan losing his home state of Wisconsin. He’s still a Congressman working with LaRaza Lib Dems here in Chicago to amnesty 20 million more illegal alien parasites.

          Don’t feed the Libertarians, don’t let them cross your threshold, or they will never leave.

          Amren needs to purge these race denying libertarian loons. They purge race realists from National Review and the Heritage Foundation purge us from Rand Paul’s staff. We have to start returning the favor.

          • Romney lost Wisconsin and in general because of Romney.

            Paul Ryan will soon lose his Congressional seat because of Paul Ryan’s immigration treachery.

            If libertarian cultists were the driving force behind Romney picking Ryan, a man whose proposed budget balances the Federal budget 29 years from now maybe, than even libertarian cultists don’t believe in libertarianism anymore…except for those open borders…which is a clue to who’s paying the bills at Libertarianism Inc think tanks.

          • Alfred the Great

            Just my opinion, for what that’s worth, but I think that the establishment party got Romney to select Ryan.

          • I figure on Romney being 100% personally responsible for wanting to pick and actually picking Ryan, without outside influence or pressure. Elevating a relatively young person to high positions of influence was Romney’s managerial style when he was in the world of business.

          • Alfred the Great

            I wrote a book on the border back in 2006 and based on data from the Congressional Research Service I estimated the number of illegals was at least 30 million. Under Bush they were coming in at about a million a year–those are the ones that they didn’t catch out of the 10 million or so that tried. The only difference between the figures that I used in my book and now is that the situation is much worse. By the way, Paul Ryan is a sellout, which is too bad because I actually thought that he might have some potential.

          • Newt Gingrich estimated 36m illegals back in 2007.

            I don’t think Paul Ryan is a sellout per se. I think who he is on immigration now is who he always was all along, it’s just that fate and circumstances have resulted in him having to show his hand. The reason he never seemed treacherous on immigration before is that he never had the serious imperative to show his true colors.

        • Alfred the Great

          I find that when I try to talk to them, they just repeat lines from the Fathers without any regard to context. In other words, they have no depth of understanding in many cases. I explain to them the concept of societal liberty, which is what the Fathers believed in when they created These United States of America with a general government at the helm for matters of defense, treaties, war and peace, coining money, weights and measures, commerce and some others I am sure, but not many. The general government was never supposed to get involved in the internal or domestic affairs of the States. Each State was a distinct society. They were very similar, but distinct nonetheless.

      • ThomasER916


        Libertarians have idiotically push mass drug legalization while never touching the Welfare State.

        Libertarians are just Free Marxist Marxists. Any argument a Useful Idiot for Cultural Marxism makes you can find a Libertarian agreeing with, especially “evil white man.”

        • Sick of it

          There are a wide variety of Libertarians out there.

      • jackryanvb

        Good points, but it simply doesn’t work to use reason with open borders Libertarian loons.

        It’s a cult.

        A cult started and maintained by a tribe famous for race denying, anti White cults like Marxism, cultural Marxism, Bolshevism, liberalism, BRA, affirmative action, critical race theory, Federal Hate crimes/thought crimes, and my least favorite, Neo Conservatism.

        Sure in theory, Libertarianism is better for us than the Tribe’s other horrible philosophies. But, we don’t live in theory, certainly not in Libertarian theory.

        When 20 million mestizo immigrants come in to the United States, they don’t pay for their own private schools. We have to pay to educate, babysit their low IQ children. The result is schools in Los Angeles county are as bad as in lower class Mexico.

    • jackryanvb

      Economic nonsense.

      The whole bloody island of Haiti will try to come here, no matter your tinkering with entitlement programs. Here is better than Haiti. Blacks might have lower IQs than Whites, but they ain’t stupid.

      High IQ Libertarian Whites…

      Very stupid.

      • I used to think that all we need to do is eliminate the inducements and magnets and non-whites would stop flooding in. I no longer think that, and what changed my mind was my one and only trip to Mexico, to the town of Sonyota, a border town with Arizona on the other side. I basically went there just to say I’ve been to Mexico, though I don’t know why, I can say I’ve been to Mexico for all the times I’ve been to Arizona.

        What. A. Dump.

        Point is, we’re not going to be able to end run and legalese our way to real immigration control. We’re going to have to do it the time honored old fashioned way, fences and men with guns and official imprimatur. Fences and men with guns that Ron Paul said over and over in 2012 that he doesn’t want there.

        • Alfred the Great

          Don’t forget the deportation part of the equation.

      • QuinnTheEskimo9

        Nonsense. Haiti is a self-created 4th world hell hole and Haitians should be made to stay there.

        The “whole bloody island” of Haiti only comes here or attempts to come here because the American government allows is. The borders need to be sealed off and militarized, as they are in Israel. Illegal aliens need to be held in camps and deported immediately back to their hell hole countries, as they are in Israel.

        The Founding Fathers of this nation, in the second session of the first Congress approved The Naturalization Act of 1790, which specified “any alien, being a free white person,” could apply for citizenship, so long as he or she lived in the United States for at least two years, and in the state where the application was filed for at least a year.

        You think Libertarians are “very stupid,” then what it is you support? Government-uber alles like John Engelman?

        • The “whole bloody island” of Haiti only comes here or attempts to come here because the American government allows it.

          With the countenance of most libertarians.

          You think Libertarians are “very stupid,” then what it is you support? Government-uber alles like John Engelman?

          See my post elsewhere in this tread about the either-or logical fallacy that most libertarians present when pressed. They want us to think that our only choices are either libertarianism or state despotism. That’s a Hobson’s Choice. In reality, we can and should have many more choices.

          I won’t speak for Jack Ryan, but I would answer your question thus: My ideal economic system is mixed socio-capitalism that is race-restricted capitalist on its foundation supporting a house of a race based moderately involved welfare state.

          The borders need to be sealed off and militarized, as they are in Israel. Illegal aliens need to be held in camps and deported
          immediately back to their hell hole countries, as they are in Israel…The Founding Fathers of this nation, in the second session of the first
          Congress approved The Naturalization Act of 1790, which specified “any
          alien, being a free white person,” could apply for citizenship, so long
          as he or she lived in the United States for at least two years, and in
          the state where the application was filed for at least a year.

          That means that you are not a libertarian, and the Founding Fathers would not be libertarians if they existed today, being mindful of what today’s libertarians demand.

        • jackryanvb

          “You think Libertarians are “very stupid,” then what it is you support? Government-uber alles like John Engelman?”

          Jack replies:

          I support sane, common sense immigration policies like those implemented in Japan, Singapore, Israel, Switzerland.

          I simply will not tolerate insane, treasonous immigration policies, and I don’t care whether those pushing insane, treasonous immigration are LaRaza, ACORN, ADL, NAACP cultural Marxists or Libertarian loons.

          Libertarian loons need to suffer immediate personal punishment for their immigration treason. Don’t enable these traitors. Our women are being raped, the lives of our children destroyed.

          Why do we tolerate fools or traitors.

          Israel doesn’t tolerate fools or traitors, why do we?

          • Sick of it

            Why should we have immigration at all? We have a large native population, we do not have enough work for everyone already here, the immigrants tend to be horrible criminal socialists from third world garbage heaps, and many immigrants hop onto whatever government programs they can find.

  • Virtually all libertarians are white, but does that necessarily mean that libertarianism is the ideal paradigm for whites?

    The immigration and racial awareness of a Hans Hermann Hoppe makes him far far far far far more desirable as a politician than most race denying race pandering open borders leftists-rightists lamers, and far more than that compared to the typical universalist libertarian. That said, even counting his good attributes, I don’t think the economic prescription of an HHH, even implemented in a locked-down white ethnonationalist society, is the ideal. The good part about HHH and his race awareness credentials is that he definitely gets to come to the game in helping to determine the happy median on economics, even if he doesn’t have all the right answers himself, because we know he wouldn’t be negotiating from a position of treachery.

    I think that virtually all white ethnonationalist societies will have an economic system that is mixed socio-capitalist, with capitalism as the foundation but with a lot of bricks of ethnonationist-motivated socialism on top. And while I agree with the late Murray Rothbard that when you try to mix socialism and capitalism, that the two ideologies will try to pull the society in its direction and away from the other one. But I do think there’s a point between them that’s sort of a political Lagrange point, in that the forces trying to make the society more socialist and more capitalist are the same and cancel each other out. Some white societies’ mixed socio-capitalism will be more socialist than capitalist, and some the other way around, but all, left to their own devices and unhindered by ideology, will adopt elements of both.

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      It all reminds me of several historic issues at once. What happened in Germany after WW1 when there was a power vacuum coupled with economic distress and how religious sect contention played out in America from 1630 (when one of my ancestors, Rev. Thomas Carter arrived) up to at least the end of the 19th century.

      One thing we can count on, where there is a power vacuum, all those that think they ought to be leaders or dream of leading, or think they’ve got the answers will contribute to the civil wars that will follow. My big hope is that whites won’t go back to murdering whites and we might be smart enough to avoid it. But I have a large measure of doubt to support that hope.

      • Sick of it

        Your doubts are well-founded, considering that many lunatic whites want to massacre other white people. Take Bill Ayers and his little group for an example.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          That is why my ultimate attitude on these posts is that while I might disagree strongly on some points, I am ready to move on because I want to believe that everyone can still learn and change. In fact, one of the best measures of practical IQ is how quickly and well one can adapt to new circumstances. This doesn’t infer that one ought to sell out, to “bend with the wind,” but rather be elastic enough to allow that most whites, regardless of their present political delusions, are probably worth saving for the good of us all.

  • William Krapek

    There’s a lot of cherry picking and propaganda going on regarding Jewish IQs. Along with trumpeted results from unacceptably small and nonrepresentanive samples. Throw them all together and their IQ comes to about 98.

    Jung was smarter than Freud. Henri Poincaré had a least a couple standard deviations over Einstein. The great liberal blogger Paul Krugman just says what John Meynard Keynes would say if he were still alive today.

    Hell. We even had to show Jews how their own Torah was put together.

    No my friend. We got them on that game. And by the way they behave on Wall Street and Hollywood I know they know that. That’s why they’re so vicious and secretive.

  • jeffaral

    Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard…..All Jewish intelectual cosmopolitan geniuses. What next, Karl Marx? Conference sponsored by George Soros….Another Jewish genius.

  • ViktorNN

    Why does Jared Taylor support libertarianism?

    Whenever I engage libertarians they characterize my racial awareness and sense of solidarity with other white people as a kind of “collectivist fetish.” They say organizing racially is a form of “socialism.”

    In my experience, they’re usually the ones saying things like “open borders are good for my business” and that “Mexicans work harder than lazy white people.” They’re the ones who say that “racists are losers” and that winning in life is dying with the biggest McMansion, the largest flat screen TV, the biggest SUV, and the prettiest asian wife.

    Why on earth would someone like Jared Taylor identify as libertarian?

    • Oil Can Harry

      As far as I know, Taylor has never claimed to be a libertarian. His post simply noted that he recently spoke at a libertarian conference in Turkey

      • That and I wouldn’t call what happened in Turkey a libertarian conference. It should be called something, but not libertarian. If you get race, you’re by definition, not a libertarian, especially with today’s definition of the word and today’s adherents of it per ViktorNN’s post above.

      • ViktorNN

        I suppose Taylor is above the vulgarity of identifying as anything one way or another, but the last line of this article of his most certainly cements him as more favorable towards libertarianism than not.

  • Garrett Brown

    “No! This is Patrick!”

  • William Krapek

    I am dubious of Libertarianism. It has a quasi-religious element that makes me very uncomfortable. Specifically a sub rosa assumption that the liberalism inherent in Christianity messes things up. Especially the marketplace.

    The Church has first priority with me. And it’s got centuries of successful communal movements to its credit. So while the alien communism of the Bolsheviks failed, communism pre se is still defensible provided it’s properly yoked to reason and revelation. But that, of course, implies a respect for the autonomy of the individual inherent in both.

  • Freedom Hayak

    It’s my dream to attend this conference – maybe next year, fingers crossed!

  • jackryanvb

    Sounds lovely….like the final good days in the French Riviera before the millions of diseased third world boat people landed in Jean Respail’s end of White civilization novel “Camp of the Saints”.

    I personally cannot understand how healthy, red booded White men can stomach to bein the sae room with these Austrian School economists I prefer to ride the Chicago elevated Gree line train with hard core Black gang members..

  • jackryanvb

    The next Austrian school, libertarian conference should be in Mogadishu Somalia. These Libertarian loons should like it there, little or no government, everybody does what they want, no restrictions on guns, drug use.

    Loons… Libertarian loons.

  • shmo123

    Turkey is on my “bucket list” mainly for rich trove of historical sites to visit, and the food is pretty good as well; but it’s a Muslim country, and lately seems one baby step away from tossing out it’s nominally secular government for an Islamic leaning authoritarian one. Islam is not compatible with any form of government; any parliamentary or democratic government built around it would only be used as a rubber stamp to legitimize the wishes of the Imams who rule, much like Iran. One wonders how long a person like Mr. Hoppe would be welcome in such a place.

  • jackryanvb

    “I can imagine only a hater of libertarianism not having a wonderful time.”…

    I’m not going to get invited and I wouldn’t have a good time.

    I go for Singapore system – they have Chinese martial arts experts cane drug dealers, rap music was explicitly banned from the country – extremely strict immigration laws.

    • Mergatroyd

      Singapore? Let’s see. Low tax rates, little government interference in the economy, free markets, pro-business, low unemployment, booming trade, no welfare state, a no-immigration policy. Not bad for a small place with a dearth of natural resources. Sounds like a libertarian economy that that the Founding Fathers could be proud of, the one they implemented and made the U.S. the freest, most prosperous nation ever to exist on the earth
      Pity the U.S. economy has been hijacked by the Keynesians which is why it is crashing.
      Not all Libertarians agree with open borders, the Founding Fathers certainly didn’t. But this country is so screwed up that there will be no turning back.

  • jackryanvb

    Judas was a prime example of Libertarianism going bad. Judas maximized his personal utility be selling his services to the highest bidder, in a market system. His compensation of 30 pieces of silver, should Austrian economic theory increased Roman Palestine’s GDP and (blah, blah, blah).

    Don’t try to reason with Libertarian traitors.

    Just work to see that they experience the joys of racial “diversity”, they experience what regular Whites experience at shopping malls in Kenya, Chicago etc.

    • Note that those were 30 silver tetradrachma of the Phoenician standard: about 14 grams of hi purity silver each. In terms of standard Roman coins of the day this would be around 125 denarii or 1/3 of a year’s wages.

  • “Rub their nose in dog poo”

    If the fact that California is totally politically unwinnable for anyone but but a big spending welfare gibsmedat leftist thanks to its new south of the border whoopee demographics and the quintessential Republican demographic, gentile hetero white nuclear families with children, being driven out, isn’t enough figurative “dog poo” to “rub their noses in” to make them learn the consequences of their own political behavior on immigration, then they’ll never learn.

    • jackryanvb

      My point is that we must punish immigration traitors immediately, personally, rubbing their noses in dog poo, when they are bad.

      If Ron Paul had suffered sharp, personally pain in 1988 for his insane, immigration treason, he would have:

      A) stopped his immigration treason, changed to our side.
      B) dropped out of politics – served as an example of what happens to immigration traitors.

      Instead Ron Paul’s supporters/enablers let him get away with his immigration treason, and he went on and on spreading this poison, encouraging other immigration traitors like Paul Ryan or his son Rand Paul that they too, could promote immigration treason, and there would be no personal price to be paid. In fact their immigration treason helped them get easy jobs, book deals, lots of MSM access. Immigration treason was good for Ron Paul and Paul Ryan – they’re safe, rich, have an easy life… Unlike regular Whites being terrorized, raped, their lives falling down in to third world

    • We had an opportunity to move to northern CA from Florida. Our income would remain the same but FL is one of the lower taxed states in the Union and you cannot believe how much property costs close to San Francisco. How do all these people afford it?

  • ViktorNN

    Good point. It’s also worth pointing out that Ayn Rand was Jewish, and thus it was in her group interest to convince white men to not see themselves as white men, but as deracinated individuals, isolated and separate from, and in ruthless competition with their fellow white men.

    • jackryanvb

      Agreed. This is the “FALSE DILEMMA” logic fallacy. We’re given only two options

      Anything goes Capitalism – free movement og goods, services and people (libertarianism)

      Communism/Cultural Marxism.

      There are many other, better options – look at Japan, Switzerland.

  • David Ashton

    Doctrinaire libertarians, especially “anarcho-capitalists”, do not have the usual concept of “our country” shared by most people. All the world according to them is under some form of political tyranny, and only the area known as the USA even begins to resemble a zone of limited government or a potential anarchy. Therefore every one in the world is entitled to cross into this zone from their respective nations, without any restriction other than criminal intention or contagious infection.

  • Sick of it

    Free trade (though forced) destroyed pre-Communist China just like it’s destroying us today.

  • Sick of it

    “Rand was born Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum”

    en DOT wikipedia DOT org/wiki/Ayn_Rand

  • Sick of it

    A limited government which upholds the law and a militia of all free men which protects the nation would stop such things from happening. Of course our government was taken over long ago and they more or less destroyed the militia system.

  • Sick of it

    That actually sounds like an argument in favor of migrant workers, not permanent immigration.

  • Evette Coutier

    As a moderate libertarian, I can confirm that your hard core libertarian is a decent person but a bit of a dreamer. The philosophy would work perfectly in a society of highly intelligent and completely honorable people, much like many libertarians. However, it is an idealist philosophy that does not take fully into consideration the abilities and behaviors of lower intelligence and socially violent people. If you temper the libertarian values of personal responsibility, self determination, honorable conduct, and personal freedom with the realities of life, it is a good philosophy.

  • The dynamic of trade between countries is different than the dynamic of trade between individuals in a country.

  • newscomments70

    How about part Sami? That is common with Scandinavians.

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      The last time I looked, Samis were now far more blonde than they formerly were. This is probably one case where the genetic drift has gone the other way and in favor of whites.

      • newscomments70

        I look at very old photos and they look like Eskimos. I look at current photos…they look very white. Jimmie Åkesson of the Sweden democrats looks like he might have some of that ancestry.

  • Reverend Bacon

    There are many problems with open borders, as you allude. But the problem a thinking libertarian should have is that the country is being looted from within; increasing the number of looters is not consistent with libertarianism.

    The first priority a thinking libertarian should have is to turn off all the faucets. Welfare, TANF, EBT, Section 8, Medicaid, birthright citizenship, anchor babies, etc. Do that, and the faucet of illegal aliens from the south should turn itself off.

    It’s clear that there is anti-white discrimination in the existing de jure immigration policy, not to mention the blatant such discrimination in the de facto policy of sanctuary cities and other heinous treasons. But the worst part of Paul and others’ Ivory Tower approach is that each of their theoretical principles depends upon a society that is built upon libertarian principles, not upon the welfare state.

  • Mergatroyd

    Comrade gives you the respected John Williams and you respond with Keynesian economics professors and NY Times statisticians? No wonder respected, successful financial sites never follow the likes of Krugman approved statisticians, who, like you, show the economy is just fine, growing and unemployment numbers coming down. This is simply not true and you need to stop repeating this.

    Despite what you and your media-approved experts say, unemployment and inflation are not compiled the same way as in the past and neither are coming down. John Williams uses the same methods the U.S. government used to use. Why did the government abandon its own method of gathering information about unemployment and inflation? Could it possibly be to fool the American public about what it is really up to?

    You can go ahead and believe whatever you’d like and post your government-approved garbage right here and blame Republicans and Libertarians for any numbers you don’t like. Meanwhile, I’ll continue to get rich listening to real economists and financial experts who follow Austrian economics and not the government sanctioned Keynesians. A sure bet is continued debasement of the currency and never-ending, ever- expanding warfare. I’ve made a lot of money on this “theory” which your economists continue to debunk. The price of gold alone since Obama took office…well you can look it up yourself. This is when your economists said gold was a “worthless, junk investment.”
    All the way to the bank, baby.

    Good luck to you when the entire American economic and financial system -the one you support – implodes. You may continue to believe the government lie that the American dollar is strong but you are going to be in a world of hurt when its value drops to zero, SNAP cards are cut off, SS is no longer. Expect blood to run in the streets, which may not be a bad thing.

    • JohnEngelman

      There are any number of right wing cranks on the internet who say that if you do things their way you will get rich while the economy collapses.

      Back in 1979 Howard Ruff published “How to Prosper During the Coming Bad Years.” He told his readers to get their money out of banks, sell their stocks and bonds, and invest in gold, silver, and diamonds. Those who followed his advice lost big time when the banks did not fail, the stock market grew, and the price of gold, silver, and diamonds declined.

      Every now and then I get an e-mail from the 700 Hundred Club telling me of someone who was badly in debt, and became prosperous by tithing.

      Anyone can find something on the internet they want to believe. Copying it and pasting proves only the credulity of the copier and paster.

      I compose my own comments on economics as well as anything else, using the internet to document my factual assertions.

      I have not quoted John Maynard Keynes. The only passage I quote from Paul Krugman is from a column where he says that open borders are incompatible a well funded public sector of the economy.

      John Williams seems like nothing more than an obscure ideologue. Follow his advice at your risk.

      Paul Krugman won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2008. He is a columnist for The New York Times. He teaches economics at Princeton.

      • Mergatroyd

        “Paul Krugman won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2008. He is a columnist for The New York Times. He teaches economics at Princeton.”

        Still doesn’t make him right, because he’s not. If he were, unemployment would be very low, the dollar would be strong, business would be booming — but they aren’t, because the Keynesian economics that HE pushes is bound to failure, which it is.
        How long do you think the government can continue to print $85 billion per month, as per Krugman’s theories before out of control inflation quit. Every economy based on fiat currency has eventually failed. The Weimar Republic for example.

      • Mergatroyd

        “John Williams seems like nothing more than an obscure ideologue. Follow his advice at your risk.”

        I have. All the way to the bank. If I bet on Krugman’s silly theories, or tithed thinking I’d get rich that way, I’d be dead, flat broke.

        The price of gold alone since Obama’s election has put a lot of geld in my coffers, since it doubled during Obama’s first term alone, silver has gone up 198% — another investment I made when the Keynesian economists said precious metals were junk investments, Ha Ha. A rise in precious metals signals a weakening dollar by the way, something Paul Krugman knows but will never tell you, unlike John Williams.

        “Betting” that Obama would expand wars in the Middle East has boosted my retirement fund considerably, even though Obama hinted that he would end these “right-wing, Republican wars.” These were all predictions made by John Williams. Krugman would have told you to invest in the “sound” American dollars.

        I’d like to see Krugman’s portfolio, I’d be shocked if he didn’t have 1/3 of his investments in precious metals and a store of gold, silver and platinum in his home safe. I’m sure he’s got holdings in the iron words as well (that’s war material for the uninformed)
        The man is not dumb, he’s just wrong, despite a worthless Nobel Prize.

  • If it doesn’t, we’re toast.

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    “A professor at Nazarbayef University in Kazakhstan brought his pleasant blonde wife.”

    “But I got a big house on the hill right here. I got a big blonde wife inside it. Got a big pool in the back yard, and a little pool right beside it.” – “It’s Money that Matters” – Randy Newman

    Ever notice how most of these Middle Eastern, Asian potentates almost always have blond or British wives? Think the professor brought his to show her off?

    “Vanity of vanity, all is vanity.” (Yeah, I know where the quote comes from).

    • Sick of it

      And notice how many white westerners can’t stand the thought of a white man having a blonde wife. We are living in Bizarro World.

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        I don’t know if I’ve heard of it being forbidden, but unfortunately, we’ve got a plethora of Obama’s mammas thanks to the Feminist Movement that blatantly told white women that birthing a white man’s baby was evil. That was decades ago now, but it’s had its effect as the radical idea was exploited and generalized into American culture.

        The Feminists have been raging for decades now, but there are still plenty of white women that will gladly sell themselves to any man as long as he has the money (and fame), while pretending that they are also liberated women (which I find hilarious).

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    So, are you going to allow non-believing, white race realists into your utopia?

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    I don’t waste my time checking like or dislike buttons, myself. The only way to get people to think is often to say things you know they won’t like.

  • Sick of it

    It’s the other way around. If the Chinese imports were cut off, we’d build factories in America and hire American workers.

  • Sick of it

    Because the Federal Reserve is a private bank owned by foreigners. Historically speaking, a nation could debase their own currency without paying anyone for the “privilege” while suffering the effects of inflation. Under this current system, we suffer inflation and pay interest on top!

    • Defoe

      So, you’re saying the interest we pay on the debt goes to the foreign owners of the federal reserve?

      Again, I don’t understand why a sovereign entity, the US, needs to borrow money from anyone.

  • Garrett Brown

    America is no longer a Republic. Hasn’t been for quite some time.

  • “A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.”

    At the close of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, when he was asked as he left Independence Hall, Benjamin Franklin is credited as responding above as to what type of government the new country had.

    Maybe the founding fathers would be impressed in that it lasted over 200 years, maybe they would be dicouraged in seeing it dissolve into a giant bureaucracy dedicated to promoting largess to a growing non-working, non-lettered class and extirpating whites.

    My guess on the castles is that they’ve been there a long time & it would be seen as crass and uncultural to tear them down to make room for a new K-Mart. Thus since they’re there they possibly rent out space competitively for events so as to offset maintenance and caretaker salaries.

  • There’s a reason for that, crank. That’s because we’re not dedicated to “individual liberty,” in that we run around looking at the world and constructing our desires for the public policy process in the lens of “individual liberty.” We’re racialists and tribalists first, individual liberty is subordinate to that and exists to serve the cause of racialism and tribalism. To the extent that “individual liberty” harms our tribe, (and it often does), we reject individual liberty.

    Race comes first. Everything else is ultimately negotiable.

    • Speak for yourself. Thomas Jefferson certainly was not a “racialist and tribalist first.” I don’t believe Jared Taylor is, either.

      • ^^This^^

        Is your brain on ideological cultism. Any questions?

        I’ve heard a lot of goofy things from you liberTARDians over the years. But this takes the cake’s cake.

        “Jared Taylor is not a racialist.”

        Sure, chief, because his former printed newsletter, his website and his speeches and public appearance and his books since 1990 being 99% about race must mean he’s obviously not a racialist.

  • David Ashton

    Even Galt’s Gulch had borders.

  • I work out of the house: pretty much the same thing.

  • I’ve been doing a little bit of thinking in recent hours about the general subject matter of this thread. Before it goes stale, I wanted to get it off my chest.

    First off, for those of you non-libertarians or anti-libertarians reading this, wondering why it’s appropriate material for AR, the only theory I can come up with is this: You have to remember that AR is Jared Taylor and Jared Taylor is AR. When we’re at AR, we’re in Jared Taylor’s virtual house to put it one sense of speaking, or we’re in an extension of his set of ideas and personal interests in another sense of speaking. Why did he go to this conference and make an AR thread out of it? Because it’s interesting to him, that would be my next guess.

    That said, I’m wondering in the general sense of the future of ethnonationalist movement: What’s the point or desirability of any of this? First off, like I said earlier in this thread, libertarian racialists like HHH are by definition not libertarian, precisely because they are racialists. I wish HHH et al. would come up with a new name for their school of thought. But for the matter of conversational convenience, in this comment, I’ll still call the ideology libertarian racialism.

    And here are my issues:

    1. What is the typical libertarian racialist really interested in? Libertarianism or racialism? I should ask my own question more clearly: In the mind of a libertarian racialist, which is in the lead, and is the dominant concern? Libertarianism or racialism? Let me ask it yet another way: Is the typical LR a libertarian first and just so happens to let racialism ride along, because they have internally mentally found a way for racialism to fit into libertarianism? Or are they racialists first and think that libertarianism (the parts of it that don’t do race denial and race treason) is good for white people? I suspect that for a majority of LRs, the answer is the former, in which case, they would not be racialists at all if they couldn’t find a way to justify racialism in libertarian terms, and furthermore, if someone ever convinces them, or they convince themselves, that racialism really can’t fit into libertarianism, they’ll deny racialism like Peter denied Christ. If the answer is the latter, and I suspect that’s the case for HHH, but not a majority of LRs, then that’s perfectly fine, and we’re cool with them advocating that the parts of libertarianism that aren’t racially treacherous are good for white people, even though I don’t totally agree with that notion.

    The first camp is libertarian first and adopts racialism because it’s good for libertarianism, the second camp is racialist first and adopts libertariansm because it’s good for racialism.

    For me, it’s not even that complicated. My overarching concern is white people in general and my particular white tribe in specific; all else is examined in the lens of whether it’s good for white people in general and my white tribe in particular. I let no abstract ideology take the lead in my mind.

    2. Then there’s the practical political concern. Even the good faith LRs, the ones that put race first then conclude that libertarianism is good for white people, will probably not be the vehicle that gets us to political Valhalla. A LR is still libertarian on matters of social welfare spending and free/foreign trade, but they’re not libertarian on immigration (Thank goodness). The hard and cruel truth of the matter is that good faith LRs need racialism a hell of a lot more than racialists need the elements of libertarianism that aren’t treacherous. That’s what makes me ask the question: What’s the point of all this? So what we get libertarians on our side and convince them to ditch race denial (if they haven’t already), then go around saying that white people come first and libertarianism is good for white people? How many elections are we going to win by saying that we’re for white people, we don’t want mass non-white immigration, but taking away your Social Security and Medicare and also free trade with every cheap labor country on Earth is good for white people? Maybe one election for dog catcher in Wyoming, but that’s about it. The hard truth of the matter is that in the great play of white ethnonationalist political life, on economic issues, mixed socio-capitalism needs to have the starting role, with LR in a supporting role. To put it yet another way, the alpha dogs should be racially minded people who want some form of a social welfare state because it’s good for white people and various white tribes and is the essence of tribalism, and LRs are the beta dogs that get to be in our pack because of their racial and tribal loyalty, but the only get whatever crumbs are left over after the alpha dogs eat first. LRs simply cannot ever be alpha dogs, politically speaking, because there isn’t a tribe of white people anywhere in this world today that doesn’t want some semblance of a welfare state (the only debate is how big and generous it should be), so their only real hope for the survival of any form of libertarianism is to take a beta dog role to the alpha dog of “national socialists” (for the lack of a better term).

    Lew Rockwell used to agree with that. He stated almost this very line of reasoning when he endorsed Pat Buchanan for President in 1996.

    To net this all out, we’re far more likely to win the future with someone in the mold of Huey Long than we are with someone in the mold of Hans Hermann Hoppe.

    • jackryanvb

      Good comments. I think in the long run Libertarians, Austrian School free market theorists, think tanks aren’t that important one way or another.

      If Mr. Taylor got a nice mini vacation out of this, maybe a speaking fee, well good for him.

      There aren’t many places in this fallen age where our speakers can speak anywhere, except anonymously on the Internet.

      The rest of us need to just soldier on, do what we can considering our age, location.

      Again, it’s a fallen world.

      • I should walk back what I said maybe a half step.

        I don’t think Jared Taylor went to this conference because he thinks that it will accrue our cause from an organizational standpoint. I said it myself: He and AR aren’t about activism. He went to this thing and reported on it purely as a personal intellectual pursuit that’s tangentially relevant (but not necessarily crucial) for our cause. I don’t think he thinks about what happened at that conference in the same terms that you and I think of it, whether it’s good for winning votes.

        That said, any credible movement will have both people who intellectualize everything and people who like to get their fingernails full of mud and dirt, and every other type in between.

        Still, my long commentary/screed above is still relevant, just in case anyone actually thinks that even racially and tribally aware loyal libertarianism is the route to victory, because it’s not really. We’re in such dyer demographic straits, we’re up against so many non-whites (growing in number by the year) and so many white people who are currently or may never be sociologically receptive to ethnonationalism, that we can’t afford to leave any of our people or people who are kinda-sorta our people on the table with proven failure turkey political strategies. All it means is that racially and tribally loyal libertarians get to live in our future ethnostate and get a fair hearing and consideration of their ideas in terms of whether they’re good for our tribe, and maybe a few of those ideas adopted, but not a guarantee that most or all of them will. We both know that none of their ideas will be adopted in a third world America; like I said above, they need us a lot more than we need them.

        One more thing: Just because you’re white and pro-white, that’s not grounds for the society in which you live adopting every one of your ideas on matters other than race. That’s one more thing that’s been crawling through my skill about the LRs, that I get the sense that they think, “okay, racialists, we’re racialist, so it’s time for you to reciprocate by adopting libertarianism on everything else.” It doesn’t work that way. That would actually be an acid test to see which LRs are loyal and which are not, the ones that stay are the ones that are racialists first, the ones that leave are playing a game of cuckoldry. A genuinely loyal libertarian will advance racial ideas, hopefully help ethnonationalism win, see an ethnostate develop, and should the ethnostate not adopt any libertarian ideas or not enough for his tastes, be mature enough to live with it and remain loyal to the tribe. If, as I fear, many of these LRs are libertarian first, in that same situation, they’d try to sabotage our newly minted ethnostate.

  • Brutus

    That was Paul in a letter to Timothy. Though many contemporary scholars doubt the Pauline authorship of the “Pastoral Epistles.”