A very satisfying and indulgent read:
www.frontpagemag.com/point/259995/libertarian-implosion-daniel-greenfield
define( 'DB_CHARSET', 'utf8mb4' ); define( 'DB_COLLATE', 'utf8mb4_unicode_ci' );
". . . a republic, if you can keep it."
A very satisfying and indulgent read:
www.frontpagemag.com/point/259995/libertarian-implosion-daniel-greenfield
Important analysis.
Trump and the libertarian implosion:
—“Libertarians had their hour, but their embrace of dubious causes made them irrelevant. The movement needs to think hard about how to reengage conservatives again. But there’s no sign of that. Instead it’s pursuing its alliance with the left in support of freeing drug dealers… a program that has no possible positive outcome either for America or for them.”—
www.frontpagemag.com/point/259995/libertarian-implosion-daniel-greenfield
* In an open letter to the Natal Parliament in 1893, Gandhi wrote:
“I venture to point out that both the English and the Indians spring from a common stock, called the Indo-Aryan. … A general belief seems to prevail in the Colony that the Indians are little better, if at all, than savages or the Natives of Africa. Even the children are taught to believe in that manner, with the result that the Indian is being dragged down to the position of a raw Kaffir.”
* At a speech in Mumbai in 1896
Ghandi: “to degrade us to the level of the raw kaffir (ie Africans) whose occupation is hunting, and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then, pass his life in indolence and nakedness.”
* Protesting the decision of Johannesburg municipal authorities to allow Africans to live alongside Indians, Gandhi wrote in 1904:
“(We) must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly. I think it is very unfair to the Indian population and it is an undue tax on even the proverbial patience of my countrymen.”
* In response to the White League’s agitation against Indian immigration and the proposed importation of Chinese labour, Gandhi wrote in 1903:
“We believe also that the white race in South Africa should be the predominating race.”
Didn’t Defend The Kingdom of Israel and were cast out.
Didn’t Defend Spain and were cast out
Didn’t Defend Eastern Europe, and were cast out.
Didn’t and Couldn’t Defend in Wester Europe and were cast out.
Didn’t and Couldn’t Defend Russia and were cast out.
Using (Germanic) Americans for Neo-Con Defense (and losing it).
Failing to Defend the State of Israel and losing it.
There are no free rides.
You either produce warriors or are conquered by those who do.
Warriors always rule.
I AM TRYING TO REPAIR THE ENLIGHTENMENT
COMPARISONS:
1) Ashkenazi Separatist Pseudoscientific (belief) Libertinism
vs European Universalists Empirical (Legal) Libertarianism.
2) Ashkenazi Neo Conservatism (Make the world safe for separatists)
vs Anglo Burkeian Conservatism ( Parent the world into prosperity).
3) Ashkenazi (Pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Communism
vs Anglo-German (pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Secular Humanism.
METHODS:
1) Anglo American (critical) Empirical (Law).
2) German (justificationary) Rationalism (Philosophy).
3) French (subjectivist) Moralism (literature).
3) Ashkenazi (overloading) pseudo-moralism, pseudo-scientism, pseudo-rationalism (Pseudoscience)
All cultures tried to universalize their sectarian ideologies as rational and scientific platforms. Yet these different group evolutionary strategies all failed the test of universalism. The anglos were right in method (science) and wrong in vision of man (aristocracy of everyone). The germans were wrong in method (kantian rationalism) and right in vision of man (paternal hierarchy).
The Ashkenazis were at best hermeneutic, and at worst deceitful (separatism without paying costs of commons) and pragmatic by creating a new ‘religion’ – a new means of suggestion by loading,framing and overloading; thereby taking advantage of western high trust and pathological altruism.
Through this rather broader lens, we see that all the enlightenments failed. (I don’t address the french because no one takes them seriously). We see that the last century was plagued by lies, pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, and justification, and as Hayek warned us, was a century of mysticism (which was the best word he could come up with at the time.)
That is why I am aggressively anti-ancap: because I see it as another great lie that has been propagandized upon my people, and has misdirected their energies and aspirations away from the only possible source of liberty: the prohibition on parasitism, the common law, universal standing, every man a sheriff, and universal militia. There is no state and no ruler if we rule by law.
So where the person looking at leaves sees minor errors in the ancap-libertines, and where the person looking at trees sees a set of competing ideologies, I look at the forest and see group evolutionary strategies covering a spectrum from anglo empirical and legal ‘truth’, to german justification (kant and the german idealists), to french pretense of reason(Rousseau), to ashkenazi systemic deception: Freud, Boaz, Marx, Cantor, Mises, Frankfurt-School, Rothbard. The second great deception (authoritarian pseudoscience) duplicating what was done to rome by abraham, jesus, peter and paul: the first great deception: authoritarian monotheism.
That explains why I am hostile to well intentioned fools.
Because they’re part of the problem: useful idiots of the libertine rather than communist and neo-conservative types.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.