Feel free to cross post this elsewhere.
As I pointed out to Evan McLaren last night, the disabling of the comment section at Takimag was about more than simple irritation with Captainchaos and friends trolling multiple threads. Justin Raimondo, John Zmirak, Paul Gottfried and others who write for that website have long held racialists in contempt (Tom Fleming at Chronicles is another) and used the opportunity created by the discord to purge our discourse from their environs.
Check out this new emotional outburst from Justin Raimondo aimed at the mild mannered Jared Taylor. Politics makes strange bedfellows. There is something odd about an atheist libertarian homosexual engaged in an interracial relationship invoking “his legacy” of Christianity and conservatism in Randroid spittle to damn racialists. Ayn Rand famously hated both of them. Lawrence Auster was correct when he pointed out the other day that libertarianism/Objectivism is the purest negation of traditional conservatism which is about the preservation of larger wholes. Libertarians and Objectivists strive to abolish/neuter/level all higher social orders (race, ethny, nation, culture, faith, family) with their prescription of anarchy and their ideological poison of radical atomistic individualism.
Sound familar? It should. Raimondo is correct when he quotes Buchanan in saying we come from different traditions. The pink banner he holds aloft is precisely the same one that was carried by the hippie/beatnik counterculture in the 50’s and 60’s, the antiwar movement of the 60’s, and the gay rights movement of the 70’s and 80’s. His social movement was pioneered during the twentieth century by radical Jews such as Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, F.A. Hayek, and Abbie Hoffman. It is a spiritual cousin of communism and has the same wrecking ball, destablizing, disorienting effect upon white gentile culture at all levels. Oddly enough, Raimondo manages to accuse racialists of soulless materialism when it is precisely his form of unfettered consumer capitalism and its pornographic expressivist ethos that has disfigured the American landscape from coast to coast and continues to inspire our nihilistic youth to carve out piercings and kitsch tattoos into their pale flesh on a daily basis.
In Raimondo’s mind, only the rootless, autonomous individual exists; the implication being that only individual accomplishment can be a source of pride. For him it makes no sense to take pride in one’s race, family, ethnic group, nation, faith, or culture or to be concerned with the maintenance of these collective entities. He doesn’t conceive of art or science as practices in which the individual contributes to, builds upon, orients himself toward, finds meaning in centuries old traditions. As a libertarian, Raimondo acknowledges no debt to the past. As a homosexual, he has no reason to care about the plight of future generations. All he cares about are the almost nonexistent restraints on his “liberty” in contemporary America.
The White Nationalist project is simple enough to understand. It can be boiled down to fourteen words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” What is objectionable about that? It is nothing more than a plea for the right to exist. It is not an injunction to lord over anyone. The whole Third World is flooding into the West. In contrast, what are libertarians demanding at this historical juncture? The quioxtic abolition of the state, a state of anarchy or near lawlessness, all because the amount of freedom they now enjoy (which is near absolute) apparently isn’t enough for them to satisfy their most carnal appetites. What a pitiful, pathetic, contemptible worldview.
It should come as no surprise then that the denizens of libertarianism come from the most sordid corners of American life. Walter Block once wrote a book defending his laaisez-faire constituency: the prostitute looking to ply her trade, the drug addict in search of his next fix, the homosexual who resents being labeled deviant, the habitual litterer who disrespects public property, the slumlord who exploits the poor, the libeler who maligns others, the Jewish ursuror, the scab who breaks the picket line, the corporate shark who exports jobs overseas, the illegal alien who violates our national borders, and others amongst this case of “heroes” who stand to benefit from the end of the rule of law and final abolition of all restraint. In Raimondo’s bizarro world, the decent and indecent have switched places: the man who takes pride in his race, the man who puts the long term interest of future generations above satiating his every whim, is now to be the object of cultural opprobrium, not the libertine iconoclast who flaunts every custom, tradition, and authority in the name of his ineffable “rights.”
How on earth did a degenerate homosexual cosmopolitan like Justin Raimondo of all people come to be identified with hardcore cultural conservatives whose animating collectivist impulses are anathema to everything urbane libertines stand for? It all goes back to a “populist” political strategy first articulated by Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell over a dozen years ago: libertarians would co-opt the electoral energy and funds of the isolationist paleocons and race-conscious rednecks on the far right as a leadership class and then redirect them towards “anti-statist” ends. This electoral strategy finally bore fruit in the so-called “Ron Paul Revolution” last year which most racialists were fooled en masse into supporting.
Buchanan and the paleocons adopted a similar strategy in the 1990’s. In Buchanan’s own words, “The way to do battle with David Duke is not to go ballistic because Duke, as a teenager, paraded around in a Nazi costume to protest William Kunstler during Vietnam, or to shout to the heavens that Duke had the same number last year as the Ku Klux Klan. Everybody in Metairie knew that. The way to deal with Mr. Duke is the way the GOP dealt with the far more formidable challenge of George Wallace. Take a hard look at Duke’s portfolio of winning issues; and expropriate those not in conflict with GOP principles.”
Raimondo has never been able to mask his hostility towards racially conscious whites. It is a common attitude among the paleos and libertarians found outside the mainstream right. They want the page views, subscriptions, money, and votes of racialists, which they correctly perceive as a burgeoning movement ideally harnessed for their own ends, but not their input. White Nationalists are supposed to stay in their seats at the back of the far right bus while their self-imagined social betters occupy the driver seat; a situation analagous to the relationship between the GOP and evangelicals. “The rantings of losers living in their parents’ basement” are not welcome in polite company (this doesn’t include pimple faced, pudgy libertoon high school students), but by all means do send in your $100 contribution to Ron Paul’s campaign coffers and vote for him in the Republican primaries.
The White Nationalist message has never been more prescient or warranted than it is today. Its predictions are coming true. While Barack Obama appoints a professional Hispanic to the Supreme Court and distributes race-based patronage to his multitude of supporters from the White House, Raimondo counsels whites to cling to the ridiculous fantasy of colorblindness in a color conscious world; we need more “individualism,” more “liberty.” Meanwhile, the other side pushes ahead for more “diversity,” more “multiculturalism” in every aspect of life. It’s like the Polish calvary fighting the Wehrmacht. Anyone with half a brain can see where this is going, what the end result will inevitably be for whites, unless more responsible men act.
White Nationalists need to shove aside Justin Raimondo and the rest of the libertarian fringe. Their retarded fantasy of dismembering the state is nothing but a distracting panacea. Discrediting the “Alternative Right” will be the first step for racialists in the years ahead. Raimondo and his associates should be confronted at every opportunity and exposed as the cowards, liars, imposters, and opportunists that they are.
Update: Some negative reaction to Raimondo’s article here and here.
I saw Raimondo’s piece at TakiMag this morning and just knew you’d have something to say about it.
With respect to our future, the first step is for the White American to finally see through the false god of movement conservatism. My sense is that we’re less than a decade away from that happening.
SEPARATION OF RAUNCH AND STATE
(It’s still legal – and always God-honoring – to air messages like the following. See Ezekiel 3:18-19. In light of government backing of raunchy behavior (such offenders were even executed in early America!), maybe the separation we really need is the “separation of raunch and state”!)
In Luke 17 in the New Testament, Jesus said that one of the big “signs” that will happen shortly before His return to earth as Judge will be a repeat of the “days of Lot” (see Genesis 19 for details). So gays are actually helping to fulfill this same worldwide “sign” (and making the Bible even more believable!) and thus hurrying up the return of the Judge! They are accomplishing what many preachers haven’t accomplished! Gays couldn’t have accomplished this by just coming out of closets into bedrooms. Instead, they invented new architecture – you know, closets opening on to Main Streets where little kids would be able to watch naked men having sex with each other at festivals in places like San Francisco (where their underground saint – San Andreas – may soon get a big jolt out of what’s going on over his head!). Thanks, gays, for figuring out how to bring back our resurrected Saviour even quicker!
[If you would care to learn about the depraved human “pigpen” that regularly occurs in Nancy Pelosi’s district in California, Google “Zombietime” and click on “Up Your Alley Fair” in the left column. And to think – horrors – that she is only two levels away from being President!]
Prozium, do you have any explanation for why racially conscious white Americans are always flocking to other movements rather than building their own movement? Why is there this obsession with joining pre-existing movements and organizations and why are WN so bad at taking control of the movements and organizations they join?
For one thing, it has a lot to do with the strength of the taboo against “racism.” WN is demonized in a way that conservatism and libertarianism are not (neither of these political tendencies are a threat to Jewish power). The lack of forward progress is undoubtedly the major reason why racialists are always joining other social movements.
Very good response to that article, I’d like to add the obvious however – the people of Raimondo’s ilk often tout the “rootless” existence divorced from history and culture for whites and whites only. The other browner cultures are always encouraged to fully explore and revel in thier histories, culture and traditions.
Keep up the good work and thank you for putting yourself out there as a voice for us and taking undo heat we should all be shouldering together.
Fine analysis Prozium.
I found this bit of Raimondo’s bilge particularly dishonest:
Americans don’t like racists, not because they have been indoctrinated by leftist professors and do-gooder social workers, but because “white nationalists” and their ilk are looking for the unearned: they want power, prestige, and money in the bank based on factors over which they had no control, that is, their genetic heritage. That’s why they spend so much time posing as amateur “scientists” and “anthropologists,” extrapolating entire theories of social organization from the results of “intelligence tests” that presume to measure the ineffable. It is a soulless, materialist, dogmatic view of life…
Beside the absurdity of being hypocritically mischaracterized as having a “soulless, materialist, dogmatic view of life” by an atheist libertarian with a dogmatic aversion to collectivism, what Raimondo implies about racialist motives is an inversion of the truth.
I can believe he wants power, prestige, and money in the bank. Myself, I’m satisfied with my supply of the latter two. I’m unhappy I don’t have the power to stop immigration, but at least I did have the power to get out of it’s way. I’m not willing to misrepresent others (as Raimondo is) to get myself more of any of these things. I’m not posing as anything but myself.
Because racialism is so taboo it is precisely the wrong path to follow to gain power, prestige, or money. It is, generally speaking, the path to powerlessness, derision, and unemployment. It is taken today only by those with nothing left to lose, or whose principles and convictions outweigh the price the path extracts.
Ridiculing ostracized racialists for being “amateurs” is like ridiculing someone you put in handcuffs who’s having trouble climbing out of a pit you shoved them in.
“The ineffable” to which he alludes are perfectly visible racial differences. In fact it takes mighty and continuous effort to ignore, suppress, and excuse these differences. That they are clearly revealed by intelligence tests and arise largely from genetic heritage obviously vexes Raimondo. They are ineffable only to twits like himself who would silence and ostracize anyone who doesn’t have a problem seeing them.
Finally, we Americans don’t like alot of things we probably should (like reproducing), and do like many other things we shouldn’t (like high fructose corn syrup). We don’t like “racists” because we’re lectured repeatedly that “racists” are evil. But only White “racists”. We’re informed it is proper to celebrate black, latino, and jewish racists. Oddly enough we’re also lectured that homosexuals are perfectly normal, and make great parents too. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just as bad as a “racist”. But that’s all just a big fat ineffable coincidence.
Vanishing American on Raimondo:
Wow. Raimondo is truly a lying and malevolent piece of shit.
Let me get this straight: if we seek to preserve whites as a people, if we seek to avoid our impending marginalization and extinction, this constitutes a “surrender” to multi-culturalism? Huh? I have rarely read something so mind numbingly stupid, or in the alternative cravenly dishonest. Which is it, Raimondo?
Anyway, to Prozium, great reply. Really good stuff. I particularly liked this paragraph, elegant in its clarity:
“The White Nationalist project is simple enough to understand. It can be boiled down to fourteen words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” What is objectionable about that? It is nothing more than a plea for the right to exist. It is not an injunction to lord over anyone. The whole Third World is flooding into the West. In contrast, what are libertarians demanding at this historical juncture? The quioxtic abolition of the state, a state of anarchy or near lawlessness, all because the amount of freedom they now enjoy (which is near absolute) apparently isn’t enough for them to satisfy their most carnal appetites. What a pitiful, pathetic, contemptible worldview.”
Hear, hear!! But what would be Raimondo’s retort to the above: You’re just like Al Sharpton!! You’ve surrendered!
Unreal. In the eyes of that twisted bastard, we “surrender” if we seek to preserve ourselves, but I guess we “man up” if we go extinct. This pathetic excuse for an article really brings it home to me: paleos are to be presumed scum, unless proven otherwise.
Brilliant comment Prozium.
Note that Raimondo and others like him are all of the Baby Boomer generation, the generation which was raised by the TV from birth and thus are among those who have imbibed the toxic Jewish messages contained therein most deeply. Have you all noticed how much Jew-controlled TV so many of the Boomers watch on a constant basis?
Us Whites of the post-Boomer generations are the up-and-comers who haven’t been as deeply scarred and affected by American ‘Jewsmedia’ and their guttertainment because we have luckily had the internet to fall back on with which we have been able be much more interactive, critical, and discerning in terms of learning and gathering information instead of just being a passive watcher who is constantly lectured to by Jewish or Jewish-approved talking heads. Thus it’s up to us (the White teens, twenty-somethings, thirty-somethings, and now some forty-somethings) to fight for the survival of the White race because far too many of the Boomers like this Libertardian apologist for race-replacement Raimondo seem to be too indoctrinated and far gone to be of much help in this respect.
Well done exposing this scroundrel. Judging by his physiognomy, he is some sort of mongrelised Hispanic piece of trash.
Great essay. Democrats engage in extraordinary rendition of white jobs for non-white votes. That is the essence of the Democratic Party. GOP tries to be epsilon to the right of the Democrats. To defeat that strategy we need to have a party all the way to the white right.
Raimondo is doing the same as DemoGOP. He positions himself where he will get the most money. He needs left supporters money. So he does like the neocons, he engaged in extraordinary rendition of white jobs and the future for the money of the far left who support his website, Antiwar.com. This is just business for him. Same as for DemoGOP. They position themselves where they raise funds. That’s their epsilon delta calculus.
I forgot to mention the part where he speculated that WN might be a conspiracy by the Democratic Party to discredit paleos and libertarians. John Zmirak has written this tripe before.
“Raimondo counsels whites to cling to the ridiculous fantasy of colorblindness in a color conscious world…”
Bullseye.There is something fishy about all the chit-chat about Whites over at Takimag and Chronicles recently.It seems that the total failure of establishment Rightists to slow down, much less reverse,the anti-European program of modern Leftism has perversely led to macho demonstrations of opprobrium towards hapless White Nationalists.
There are two reasons for this.Firstly,it allows all the paleo-libertarian ballast to look purposeful and significant in a pathetic attempt to mask their incompetence,futility,and lack of any true importance in the political arena.Secondly,there is an instinctive realization that White Nationalists represent a potentially powerful and effective alternative to their useless and worthless posturing.Therefore,why not nip a rival in the bud,and secure at least a small measure of status (and all the goodies that go with it) in that special little niche of society set aside for prissy Conservatives?
While Rome burned Nero fiddled.While Whites are being dispossed paleo-libs are singing Hosannas.Undoubtedly,Nero was the better performer.
Re:Euro – “There is something fishy about all the chit-chat about Whites over at Takimag and Chronicles recently.”
I agree. In fact, I was thinking the exact same thing. Why the sudden deluge of articles about White issues suddenly emanating from these websites which routinely shunned these issues in the recent past?
Maybe they just noticed that the articles which they recently published about White issues, pro-White activism, White racialism, White racial consciousness raising, and so-called “White nationalism” are starting to get A LOT more hits than their other narrow paleo articles? Or maybe it’s also that they are starting to experience a certain sense or ‘itch’ that these issues are now somehow more relevant or ‘close-at-hand’ or just currently ‘up in the air’ and thus presently occupying the (conscious or unconscious) thoughts of more White minds worldwide?
As I wrote in a recent comment under the name “White Western Man” – http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2009/05/22/white-nationalism-at-takimag/#comment-12246 – I possess a sharp intuitive sense about the general public mood/Zeitgeist and this sense is currently informing me that the White racial (un)consciousness is definitely ‘on the move’ so to speak in the USA (and we all know about the recent gains of the pro-White BNP in the UK). Additionally, I’ve started to notice a few definite and overt signs of this rise of the White racial (un)consciousness out in the public places I’ve recently frequented as well.
As I wrote in the above-linked post…these are exciting times we live in. Something deep is certainly swirling about in the collective White racial (un)consciousness and it will likely begin to materialize and become more public and overt sometime in the near-future. It’s about time.
Rearmundoze’ last thought, after being gelded by the pissed-off lynch mob of Dual-Seedline Christian Identity hillbillies out to enforce St. Paul’s injunctions against faggots but before the poker shoved up his ass caused him to scream, was, “Ix-nay on ‘Destroying the State’ nay.”
“To defeat that strategy we need to have a party all the way to the white right.” ( — Old Atlantic)
Go far enough to the right and you come back to the left and the center. Why call it right then?
Call it Center. Call it Left. Call it anything but Right.
Our side badly needs to get away from being labeled “right.” If we’re to be all tricked out in a brand-new set of clothes and a brand-new set of policy positions, how about a brand-new name?
“There is something fishy about all the chit-chat about Whites over at Takimag and Chronicles recently.It seems that the total failure of establishment Rightists to slow down, much less reverse,the anti-European program of modern Leftism has perversely led to macho demonstrations of opprobrium towards hapless White Nationalists.”
You are soooo right in this call, my friend!!!!!
In a nutshell, the ‘paleo-cons’ are essentially ‘faileo-CONS’, with all the impotence and uselessness that goes with their overblown image of themselves.
Thomas Fleming in particular is a mondo hypocrite; arrogant to the nth degree–about what I still have no idea???
Over at VNN, Alex Linder has continued his attacks on the conservative “career girls.” He’s persuaded me to a considerable extent, but I still see some important distinctions. To me, the litmus test is clear: if someone will stand up explicitly for whites, they pass muster. Jared Taylor does that. Vdare does that. The broader white nationalist blogosphere does that. That’s not good enough for Alex, and while I understand his position, I’m still not there. He sees politics as zero sum, which I think is a mistake. Zero sum will only apply to white nationalism once we reach saturation (see a great post by Kievsky over at VNN), and we are not even close to that yet. Right now, it’s all about gateways and steady radicalization.
While it may be that the Taylors can’t get us to our ultimate destination, precisely because of what they fail to address, it remains the case that they are helping to raise white racial consciousness. Right now, that’s critical to our further development. Greater radicalization will come over time, probably sooner rather than later. Yep, I see these people as gateways, not duplicitous blockers – IF they will at least explicitly and meaningfully advocate the preservation of whites as a people.
But as for the paleos and career girls at Takimag, Chronicles, et al? Fuck ’em. Alex is spot on: kick them around like the pathetic curs that they are. I can understand why some white nationalists like Taylor might take the soft sell approach. But when whites as a people are in the dire straits that we find ourselves today, being driven relentlessly to marginalization, oppression, and ultimate extinction, if someone can’t at least say “Whites deserve to survive as a people – it’s important,” then to hell with them. That should be the bare MINIMUM litmus test, and if someone can’t do that, and instead publishes Raimondo’s absurd and dishonest drivel, then they are the enemy every bit as much as the Left. The house is on fire, and these loons want to talk about what color the wallpaper should be – prattling on about how they identify as Catholics and not as whites, or demanding a tax reduction. Mincers and prancers, one and all.
Yeah, a tax reduction will solve our problems! Hey Raimondo, you friggin loon, did it ever occur to you that these millions of nonwhites pouring into the country SUPPORT taxing whitey, and actually want fully funded government programs! Apparently this simple and seemingly obvious reality went over Lew Rockwell’s head as well, as he recently penned an article in which he essentially bemoans the possibility that the United States might experience lower levels of nonwhite immigration due to the economic downturn. Unbelievable, and unforgivable. These people are too stupid to even successfully defend their own massively flawed ideology: “I’m a libertarian, and I staunchly advocate importing millions of non-libertarians, who will inevitably displace me and support bigger government.” Make sense? To a normal, sentient individual, no. But to these wackos, apparently it makes perfect sense. Again, paleos and libertarians need to be regarded as scum until proven otherwise. The only real debate should be over whether they are malevolent or merely lunatics.
I don’t have a problem with Jared Taylor. He doesn’t address the Jewish Question, but he doesn’t attack other racialists who do like Lawrence Auster and Ian Jobling.
Did they finally let you out of prison?
Well said Trainspotter.
Forget, please, “conservatism.” It has been, operationally, de facto, Godless and therefore irrelevant. Secular conservatism will not defeat secular liberalism because to God both are two atheistic peas-in-a-pod and thus predestined to failure. As Stonewall Jackson’s Chief of Staff R.L. Dabney said of such a humanistic belief more than 100 years ago:
“[Secular conservatism] is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today .one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt bath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth.”
Our country is collapsing because we have turned our back on God (Psalm 9:17) and refused to kiss His Son (Psalm 2).
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
PS – And “Mr. Worldly Wiseman” Rush Limbaugh never made a bigger ass of himself than at CPAC where he told that blasphemous “joke” about himself and God.
I have heard that Jared Taylor is in fact good friends with Mark Weber of the IHR! Clearly this is not the kind of friendship that a actual Philo-semite would make!
There are some within the WN spectrum who are becoming ‘crypto-philos’ to get past the Jewish gate-keepers who yell ‘Anti-Semite’ all the time.
Jared Taylor is apparently of this type. Another is Nick Griffin who has steered the BNP into a Philo-type orientation. Clearly given Griffins history in the Political Soldiers faction of the NF and of Holocaust Revisionism he is only going ‘crypto-philo’ as a tactic to end marginalization and to get past the Jewish Gate-Keepers.
Anyhow back on topic of Raimondo. I had once heard Neo-conism as described as Inverted Marxism and it seems that the Paleo-lib Orientation that Raimondo inhabits could be an even better candidate for that description!!
PS If one doesn’t want to use ‘the 14 words’ as some find it is distantly related to violence, then there is also the 8 words!!!
“The Existence of my people is not negotiable” -Stephen McNallen
“I don’t have a problem with Jared Taylor. He doesn’t address the Jewish Question, but he doesn’t attack other racialists who do like Lawrence Auster and Ian Jobling.”
I put some responses to Raimondo’s outburts on my humble blog: http://unreconstruction.blogspot.com/2009/05/farewell-justin-raimondo.html
Please clarify the following:
` ` Raimondo counsels whites to cling to the ridiculous fantasy of colorblindness in a color conscious world; we need more “individualism,” more “liberty.” Meanwhile, the other side pushes ahead for more ”diversity,” more “multiculturalism” in every aspect of life. It’s like the Polish calvary fighting the Wehrmacht. ` `
Are you saying that the Polish horse cavalry that fought the Wehrmacht had a ridiculous fantasy that they could win against tanks? If so, are you saying Raimundo’s followers resemble the Poles insofar as both entertain ridiculous fantasies of success?
Sorry to be obtuse, I really don’t get it.
No, I was comparing the mismatch in weaponry between the Polish calvary and the Wehrmacht to the advice Raimondo is giving us. No offense to the Poles. I was simply pointing out that his counsel would lead to certain defeat.
Good post. I will have more to say tomorrow.
…to borrow from Jared Taylor, “We have a right to be us; and only we can be us.” The “we” in this context is white Westerners; and what he and others have pointed out is that white Westerners cannot expect to live in ever-decreasing proportions with Negroes, Hispanics, Orientals, and Third Worlders without its having some effect on our culture — specifically, without its weakening white Western culture, as our folkways, our art, our mores, indeed our very personality are first overshadowed then displaced by those of nonwhite non-Westerners.  In other words, multiculturalism means, essentially, the dilution and probable extinction of Western culture. –Ronn Neff, “Repatriating the West,” 1997.
Fred Scrooby, what suggestions do you have? Right and left have the advantage of describing the behavior of the GOP to be only a little more restrictive on immigration than the Democrats and only a little bit against affirmative action. GOP didn’t end affirmative action when they had Congress. Was there even a vote on it?
Right and left help analyze coalitions and how they position themselves to get votes and maintain themselves. Within a spectrum of positions (notice a spectrum is on a line that is not equivalent to a circle) right and left describe how people will react to party positions.
If you want to use game theory to explain the positions of the two major parties a line works for immigration, affirmative action, hate speech, etc. In that analysis, the Democrats and GOP will get close to each other to gather votes, but far enough apart to communicate their differences to a public that has components who only barely pay attention.
All forms of racialism (black, white, hispanic, asian etc) are compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians can’t denounce racialism without contradicting their own principle of free association. Minimally, racialism merely helps steer free association by providing it with good reasons to follow certain lines. Most people’s tendency is to implicitly follow such lines and Raimondo is wrong to induce guilt in those freely preferring their own.
A side-benefit is that, after a period of sorting, racial conflict is severely reduced. As I write, there are hundreds of Indians rowdily “protesting” the beating of a few of their own. There isn’t the slightest chance I’ll ever enjoy friendly, fulfilling relations with these people and Raimondo is a fool (or a liar) if he thinks he or people like him ever will. The trick to getting along with people so thoroughly different is seeing them or dealing with them as rarely as possible.
That said, Raimondo’s outburst is understandable. White nationalists have done a poor of making themselves palatable to outsiders. Thus the impression left is “genes matter therefore RaHoWa.” That is hardly the case but white nationalists have failed to communicate it (perhaps because so many believe it, but in that case it’s a tactical error on their part so egregious Sun Tzu would have them whipped).
Prozium, you have an axe to grind against libertarianism and it’s neither pretty nor productive. Libertarianism in many ways is merely an explication of historical American life. The freedom to devote oneself to acquiring the skills and knowledge that make one more productive and increase earning capacity results in more than just feelings of pride, and it’s a freedom worth protecting perhaps now more than ever, since many are likely to question the value of a “freedom” that rewards their efforts with sitting in a 50th storey head office with a pack of gooks and hindoos telling themselves they’ve “made it.”
If you want race — and we should all want race, regardless of who we are — then stick to race and avoid endless arcane philosophical debates that can only result in time being wasted.
“Libertarians can’t denounce racialism without contradicting their own principle of free association.”
Libertarianism is incompatible with racialism. It implies free movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. To deny such freedom of movement is contrary to the core principles of libertarian philosophy.
Taylor replies at TakiMag: http://www.takimag.com/article/what_do_white_nationalists_want/
Libertarianism is incompatible with racialism. It implies free movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. To deny such freedom of movement is contrary to the core principles of libertarian philosophy.
That’s a patently silly thing to say. Political philosophies don’t come in a neat box with an instruction manual/rulebook. One only need remind himself that there are higher things, more worthwhile values, than “maximizing liberty/personal autonomy” and build explicit exceptions based on them.
Don’t you think it a wiser idea to avoid mixing political ideology with race? Wouldn’t it be easier to build a racialist coalition that cuts across political lines than to insist race matters=National Socialism?
Taylor replies at TakiMag: http://www.takimag.com/article/what_do_white_nationalists_want/
Hard to argue with any of that. Taylor’s said it so many times it fairly rolls off the tongue. But would it have been any less powerful for demonstrating some understanding of the difficult position it puts Raimondo in (surely Taylor doesn’t consider him white) and suggesting that perhaps it’s such difficulties that are themselves the cause of much of Raimondo’s opposition, that but for those difficulties Raimondo would find little to take issue with? I think it’d only make Taylor the bigger man; certainly it could hardly be thought to compromise the position he makes “no apologies” for.
“That’s a patently silly thing to say”
It’s not my fault that libertarianism is a patently silly ideology. But that is what logically and inevitably follows from the core principles of libertarian philosophy: unrestricted free movement of humans across national borders. To deny such freedom is contrary to libertarianism and therefore incompatible with pro-white racialism.
“Don’t you think it a wiser idea to avoid mixing political ideology with race? Wouldn’t it be easier to build a racialist coalition that cuts across political lines than to insist race matters=National Socialism?”
You seem to be confused. I am not adocating libertarianism; I am rejecting it in saying that it is contrary to any form of pro-white nationalism. You, on the other hand, have absurdly stated that Libertarians “can’t” denounce racialism because it “contradicts” freedom of association. That may be true in individual households or neighbourboods, but not when we are talking about entire national borders. A libertarian can easily denounce race-based restrictions on immigration without contradicting core principles; in fact, by libertarian philosophy, he is OBLIGATED to denounce such restrictions on personal freedom.
“the difficult position it puts Raimondo in (surely Taylor doesn’t consider him white)” ( — Silver)
Silver fundamentally hasn’t a clue as to what’s going on with the present planetwide crisis of race-replacement of Euro-race peoples. He’s fixated on his pathetically narrow wog worldview, like Dienekes and the Subcons who run GnXp.com, and nothing will change that. I continue to strongly doubt he’s any variety of Euro, btw. Pakistani is the most llikely.
“All forms of racialism (black, white, hispanic, asian etc) are compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians can’t denounce racialism without contradicting their own principle of free association. Minimally, racialism merely helps steer free association by providing it with good reasons to follow certain lines. Most people’s tendency is to implicitly follow such lines and Raimondo is wrong to induce guilt in those freely preferring their own. ”
In some cases, “Racialism”-oriented movements contradict freedom of association; the Nazis didn’t much care for free association between Jews and ethnic Germans.
However, I noticed you said “minimally.” You make a great and accurate point. Jared Taylor just wants the right of free association and democratically represented immigration policy, in national policy. Yet, Raimondo seems to actively support collectivism-oriented Hispanic Nationalism, in National policies. He also attacks Whites wanting true freedom of association.
As one can easily learn, Libertarianism is not a self-sustaining and/or fair political ideology, especially when taken to the extreme.
“In some cases, ‘Racialism’-oriented movements contradict freedom of association; the Nazis didn’t much care for free association between Jews and ethnic Germans.”
Again, the “freedom of association” argument can only apply to individual households or the immediate neighbourhoods of racially-minded individuals. It cannot apply to whole nations, since individuals, by libertarian philosophy, should still be free to mix racially amongst each other. Therefore, freedom of movement across borders cannot be restricted. That minimises personal autonomy. It is contrary to libertarinaism.
Since racialism restricts freedom of movement, and since it is a form of collectivism, it is against core libertarian values.
Silver fundamentally hasn’t a clue as to what’s going on with the present planetwide crisis of race-replacement of Euro-race peoples.
I understand it perfectly well. In fact, much better than you, it seems.
He’s fixated on his pathetically narrow wog worldview, like Dienekes
There’s nothing wrong with that. Those are my people. It’s only proper that a person should be most concerned with people like himself. The problem, Scrooby dearest, is that these idiot people-like-me have this annoying habit of standing in the way of people-like-you and large part of the reason they do so is because people-like-you have so little to say about how anything that people-like-you want can possibly be good for people-like-me. It’s far more severe than “with us or against us”; it’s “one of us or not” and all that that threatens to imply. That isn’t very intelligent. And for you to attack me is the height of stupidity.
Since racialism restricts freedom of movement, and since it is a form of collectivism, it is against core libertarian values.
Freedom of movement is only one libertarian value and not even a core one. It can easily be dispensed with on realizing that maximizing freedom isn’t or shouldn’t be the highest human value. If one holds race as the highest human value (I’m not sure I’d go quite so far, but I’m probably thereabouts) then I don’t see any reason not to attempt to maximize freedom as long as doing so is racially sound.
Again, the point is that racialism really does cut across political ideologies. I fail to see how any political ideology requires multiracialism. If none requires it, why do we insist on it given all the problems it causes?
“I fail to see how any political ideology requires multiracialism.” ( — Silver)
Disastora Judaïsm is one political ideology that requires it, but requires it only for Eurogoys — NOT for the disastora Jews, are you meshuggenah?
“Freedom of movement is only one libertarian value and not even a core one. ”
I never said that freedom of movement is a core libertarian value. Personal autonomy is. And by that it logically and inevitably follows that freedom of movement across national borders cannot be restricted on the basis of discriminatory racial considerations.
“It can easily be dispensed with on realizing that maximizing freedom isn’t or shouldn’t be the highest human value.”
Correct, personal freedom is not the highest value. But to say such a thing — and to say that the collective (race) is more important than personal freedom — is against libertarian philosophy.
“If one holds race as the highest human value”
Correct. It is the highest value. And to regard race as the highest human value is opposed to libertarianism.
“then I don’t see any reason not to attempt to maximize freedom as long as doing so is racially sound.”
If you consistely applied and followed libertarian ideology, then you would see plenty of reason to reject racial collectivism and its restrictions on individual freedom. You seem to be confused; we were not talking about what is sound and reasonable according to racialist principles, but what is sound and reasonable according to the logic of libertarian ideology. If libertarianism is true, racialism is false.
What Do White Loyalists, Racialists Properly Want?–Security According To Reason And Rule-Of-Law
(Apollonian, 2 Jun 09)
Interesting dialectic regarding the white liberationist quest, Rusty. See RustyMason.blogspot.com, “Justin Raimondo, 2 Jun 09. I think Jared Taylor replied quite adequately to the little non-white, mixed-race queer, Raimondo, who hates whites with his stupid, nihilist, anti-collectivism and anti-rationalism. Don’t doubt Raimondo, at root, is really anti-rationalist–and that’s why/how he hates whites.
For individualism is indubitably good–but it doesn’t mean all/any collectivism is always all bad–they merely require balance, proportion. And Racism is virtue of loyalty to one’s extended family, the race, no less than 5th of the original Ten Commandments, “honor thy race” (parentage).
Prozium’s summary, “Raimondo and his associates should be confronted at every opportunity and exposed as the cowards, liars, imposters, and opportunists that they are,” should merely be re-capped to, “Raimondo is typical, slimey, stinking, insignificant, little queer”–typical of the Jew-loving nihilists and anti-white racists who, by means of Jew money, have captured, compromised, and ruined Libertarian party, I’d add.
But comrade Rusty, the cultural-psychological PROBLEM GOES DEEPER–it’s really a sublime battle, once again, btwn Christian truth and REASON vs. Jew lies and mysticism (objectivity vs. subjectivity).
For the buzz-word “faith” has taken on a new meaning quite different fm its original synonym for LOYALTY. Masses of stupid people nowadays imagine “faith” is some kind of an alternative mentality to rational thinking–like perhaps, “revelation.” Thus all “faith” ends up as is pretended “virtue” of–simply mindless obsession–a corrupted, twisted, thoroughly perverted type of “loyalty.”
Thus we have presently a profoundly–and tragically–Jew-sympathetic society because of the horrific MYSTIFICATION of Christianity which has happened throughout the centuries.
Thus the original Christian ethic of HONESTY, most appropriate to TRUTH ideal (and Gosp. JOHN), has been replaced since J.J. Rousseau, Eng. Utilitarians, and Immanuel Kant, by “good-evil” neo-Pelagian heresy and moralism, esp. in way of anti-racism (a form of anti-determinism–which Raimondo notes) and guilt indulgence, these simply MORALISTIC baggage which have gone with the hubris of “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler.
So Rusty, the question about what white racialists and loyalists really need, hence “want,” is really quite well-taken. For we need JEW-EXPULSION, a revolution in ethics to regain the old Christian ideal of HONESTY–hence we need a genuine COUNTER-REVOLUTION to regain that old Christian objectivity and respect for reality and Truth–decisive OVERTHROW of present reign of mysticism and putrid, suicidal moralism.
Note then the real problem, hence necessary TARGET, for white and Western culture are the “Judeo-Christian” (JC–see Whtt.org and TruthTellers.org for expo/ref.) hereticalists who are the real ENABLERS for the Jews presently in the West. JC idiots of course, insist Christ was a Jew, hence Talmudist, when opposite is obvious, yet amazing truth. Death to the Jews. Christ was foremost anti-semite–hosanna in the highest (whatever that’s supposed to mean).
People, and Christians, need to get it straight: Jews are really and simply the most sublime psychopaths, and nothing good can or will happen for West until Jews are effectively neutralized–EXPELLED–as was achieved by St. Constantine the Great. That’s where Taylor himself if full of it: there can be no accommodating Jew insanity/psychopathology. Death to the Jews. Death to Israel.
CONCLUSION: JCs then are the obvious and glaring WEAK-POINT for Judeo-conspiracy (see TheNewAmerican.com and AugustReview.com for expo/ref. on CFR-Bilderberg conspiracy). Once we have successfully attacked and destroyed this Jew-friendly JC enemy, the cultural battle will essentially have been won. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian
You seem to be confused; we were not talking about what is sound and reasonable according to racialist principles, but what is sound and reasonable according to the logic of libertarian ideology. If libertarianism is true, racialism is false.
This comes back to two things I said:
(1) “Libertarianism” isn’t some neatly packaged ideology with instruction manual and rulebook that we can just look up “what does libertarianism say about this“? The ideology is an outgrowth of holding personal autonomy as the highest value. Swapping personal autonomy for race doesn’t require you to junk everything else that has flowed — some of it surely worth holding onto — from two centuries of American experience with libertarian-ist ideals.
(2) If you make racialism about political philosophy you can’t avoid these tiresome, time-wasting debates. How on earth can you think winning a debate with libertarians is a better use of your time than making the broadest possible case for race? Maybe you’re correct, Yosemite. Maybe NS is the mostest perfectest political ideology ever devised. But how many will you win over by insisting that race must mean NS?
And just to prove I can be as hard-headed about tiresome philosophical debates as anyone else: Holding race and personal autonomy as the equal highest values makes racialism accord with libertarianism. Race prevents personal autonomy from being racially destructive; personal autonomy prevents the individual being enslaved to race.
“Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
“They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.”
“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”
Whoever Bob Whitaker is, that was an excellent statement by him posted by sk..
Bob’s writings are collected here: http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/
and here: http://www.nationalsalvation.net/
He’s quite good.
That’s Bob’s Mantra. His main point is to stay focused on the genocide. I agree with it. I wouldn’t presume to speak for him but his response to Raimondo would probably be to point out that Raimondo’s screed amounts to a defense of White genocide. Which it is.