Ron Paul has released a ridiculous editorial slamming the “political demagogues” who are opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque. According to Paul the Elder, this ginned up national controversy is all about “hate” and “Islamophobia” and “neocon warmongering.”
There is an epidemic of “sunshine patriots” who are all for freedom so long as there is “no controversy” and “nobody is offended.” “Political demagogery rules when truth and liberty are ignored.”
With this clueless editorial, Ron Paul will endear himself to his base of hardcore ideological kool aid drinkers at the Mises Institute and Lew Rockwell.com, while alienating millions of his conservative supporters who have always been skeptical of libertarianism. I would be hard pressed to identify a more spectacular political blunder of this magnitude.
Paul had nothing to gain by wading into this controversy. Instead of taking advantage of a historic political opportunity, Ron Paul chose to douse himself with gasoline and strike a match, bowing out of the mainstream in a blaze of glory.
It seems he wanted to discredit himself at literally the exact moment when White America revolted against the socialism of the Obama administration. Now Paul will be forever tarred and feathered as a kooky extremist who can’t be trusted to defend America from Islamic terrorists.
Look on the bright side: Ron has endeared himself to progressives by rushing to Obama’s defense and discrediting himself as a credible alternative to the status quo.
In Kentucky, Rand Paul can’t afford to risk his Senate campaign in a statewide race over another rhetorical concession to ideological purity. Paul the Younger has come out against the Ground Zero Mosque. Although he is probably of the same opinion as his father, Rand Paul is smart enough to say what needs to be said to get elected, at least this time around.
As a U.S. Senator, Rand Paul will be in a position to move the goal posts and lead his constituents down the field in a more pro-liberty direction. As a rhetorical radical and failure as a political candidate, Rand Paul will be just another irrelevant anti-government loudmouth from Kentucky.
The schism within the House of Paul reflects a more significant division within the American public between “natural libertarians” and “ideological libertarians.”
The “natural libertarans” are ordinary Americans who want to govern themselves and dislike being told what to do by the federal government. “Natural libertarianism” isn’t so much an ideology as it is an attitude. These people don’t see any inconsistency between opposing the expansion of government at home and pulverizing their enemies abroad.
The “ideological libertarians” are people who make decisions on the basis of their fidelity to the abstract principles of libertarianism. “Ideological libertarians” would have no objection to building a porn studio at Gettysburg or clearcutting the Redwoods in California to make grape stakes.
Some philosopher convinced them it was ideologically consistent to do so. Hewing to the radical rhetorical line is more important than modestly changing our circumstances in the real world.
If this story strikes a familiar chord, you have probably been involved in the pro-White movement in America for a number of years, which has a similar division between “mainstreamers” and “vanguardists.”
The libertarians began to make progress when cooler heads prevailed and the rhetoric was toned down to reach out to a broader audience. Ron Paul took conservative positions on abortion and immigration which enabled him to build a wider populist coalition behind his presidential campaign.
Rand Paul has toned down the rhetoric further still. In doing so, he earned himself the animosity of the rhetorical radicals in the Libertarian Party of Kentucky, who have been trying to undermine his successful campaign for U.S. Senate. With the backing of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, Rand Paul will most likely emerge as the victor in November.
Sadly, Ron Paul seems to be drifting in the opposite direction, kowtowing to the radical vanguard within libertarian ranks. Maybe the success of Paul the Younger has inspired a little bit of jealousy in Paul the Elder.
Ron Paul was never able to shake his image as a kooky libertarian extremist. Rand Paul didn’t have the same baggage and has projected a more moderate image.
David Duke was never able to shake his image as a Klansman and Neo-Nazi. Perhaps the next David Duke could succeed where others have failed by packaging his principles in a more diluted form.
Paul has a point, this is about neocon warmongering. They’ll latch on to anything and blow it out of proportion to keep the meatgrinder going in Iraq and Afghanistan and their wet dream of bombing Iran. I understand the mosque is a couple of blocks away from the 9/11 memorial so what’s the big deal? They have every right to have it there. This is a case of misplaced anger that should be focused on our immigration policy and keeping these people out and of course let’s not forget Mayor Bloomberg and the support of the Jewish community, which without, this whole scenario would never have played out in the first place. The menorah lit up on the White House lawn every Christmas should draw so much criticism. An overwhelmingly Christian nation with a 3 percent Jewish population and the devil’s pitchfork gets put on display like clockwork every year with lots of fanfare and no Christian symbolism in sight. What does this say about the public when this symbol of a conquered nation goes unnoticed?
Very well said Hunter.
Everyone here must, MUST understand that this 1% cult of race denying Libertarians is a complete waste of time and money for our people.
Libertarians, economic conservatives never, NEVER win anything at the Presidential level. The only folks who ever go for this race denying “libertarianism” are White people, mostly loner college age students or rich White folks who’s only care is protecting, increasing their money.
24 out of 25 Black Americans – including very rich Black Americans apparently voted for the socialist, Black Liberation theology lib Dem Obama. Yet, our side – the economic conservative, White Libertarians led by Ron Paul denied it had anything to do with “race” – it was all supposedly about economics, too much government, not enough individual liberty etc.
I say:
“Don’t Feed the Libertarians!”
– don’t give them any encouragement – especially don’t encourage 75 -85 year old Libertarian true believers to run for President of the United States and waste tens of $ millions to win what 22 delegates in the GOP primaries.
All here should know that Ron Paul completely humiliated himself and our race, responding to the predictable smear that Ron Paul was – horrors of horrors…
RACIST!
The Jewish homosexual editor of the New Republic Magazine went through back issues of Ron Paul’s “tell it like it is” newsletter and found politically incorrect, negative comments about:
Black rioters/murderers during the Rodney King/LA riots
AIPAC – the Israel Lobby
Militant homosexuals
Instead of standing firm, and defending these positions, standing up for the rights of our people not to be ripped off or even murdered, positions which have to be supported by at least 80% of White Americans, Ron Paul backed down – admitted that these were indeed horrible, unforgivable RACIST comments. Next Ron Paul denied that he wrote these terrible RACIST comments and said that he hadn’t even read these comments before and would never even think such terrible things as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks were his greatest heroes etc….
Here’s the youtube video of Ron Paul sucking up to ex AIPAC lobbyist “Wolf Blitzer” denying that he wrote or even read his own newsletter, denying he ever wrote, said or thought anything “RACIST” in his whole life.
Pathetic. American needs way less pathetic, old, cowardly White men like Ron Paul
This so-called controversy was a typical Republican ploy, a good example of their successful brand of propaganda. They latch onto a marginal, ultimately unimportant event and get their base all worked up about it, driving liberals nuts in the process. Terri Schiavo is another good example.
The “ground zero mosque” would not literally be built where the two towers stood. It would be several blocks away, and it makes sense to have a mosque there since probably all the NY cabbies and hot dog venders are foreign Muslims. The Republican media, however, successfully coined the phrase “ground zero mosque” and thus invented the controversy.
They are attacking a symbol – Muslims “taking over” New York – but is anyone doing anything to prevent Muslims from immigrating? No, of course not. It’s all a show. New York City is already the most disgusting multi-racial hell hole ever created, so what’s one more mosque to sully its reputation? Hell, it’s probably an improvement. At least they didn’t make it into Section 8 housing.
I could really care less about this issue. It is private property. Either we have it or we don’t. The entire issue is another worthless divide/distract from more serious problems this country is facing right now.
The man is not perfect but most of us would be far better off under a Ron Paul presidency than any other. The shitty media usually put him down but cannot tell us why following the US Constitution would be bad for the country. You also have to give him credit for not taking any money from lobbyist and having a real job as a doctor when not in Congress.
I’m not a open border libertarian, but I do believe in basically following the Constitution, private property, market based money, limited government.
The mosque is meaningless non issue.
There is certainly a part for the libertarians and small government folks to play in this. The federal government is the largest supplier of many of the things this movement struggles against: quotas, affirmative action, institutionalized diversity and the like. Paul the individual may not be the answer, but his goal of a smaller, weaker federal government is necessary to get any sort of serious breathing room. If we ever found this country was one that could not enforce the fourteenth amendment, that would be a rather significant victory.
The Imam of the “ground zero mosque” is a member of the CFR and the mosque idea went through the same Jews that approve everything real-estate related in NYC. This whole event is laughable, especially considering the true source of the terrorism on 9/11.
NBG – at this point in the game, it doesn’t matter that what they are attacking is just a symbol. Granted it would be great if they were starting ballot initiatives to curtail muslim immigration, but its got to start somewhere right?
Under the concept of America as a geographic space where ‘liberty’ reigns, there is absolutely no reason to oppose this. Americans ‘have the right’ to build a mosque or a porn shop where ever they please. Americans are being whipped into a frenzy because of the fact that it is a muslim institution, not because of (actually in spite of) some philosophical inconsistency.
Never mind that it is not actually at ground zero. Never mind that NYC is a piss-hole of a city as-is. Never mind that this is not a perfect embodiment of the kind of assertion of white identity that we would like to see. The perception behind this (mostly white) backlash is of muslims planting a flag on hallowed ground, and they are pitching a fit about it. That is not a bad thing.
It is far from perfect, but it is a starting place. To reiterate, the only reason this is an issue is because of the fact of islam. No abstract philosophical principle is being violated here. This is a group of people with a nascent identity reacting to a perceived slight by another group, lashing out and eschewing the need for abstract philosophical rhetoric. This is small, but good for us. I actually heard a local radio host say, to paraphrase: ‘yeah, there is nothing being violated under law, nothing unconstitutional happening here. but so what? we’re going to stop this because we don’t like it’. ‘it’ being muslims building something on ‘our’ turf.
Maybe Hunter here could tell me the problem with Mises and Lewrockwell.
A pretty good base of articles and other material showing why private property and free market economics are the best system (created by white Europeans for the most part).
Call me stupid but I think 10 percent unemployment with millions of foreign workers, many illegal, taking jobs away from Americans would work the base up more than this Jewish scare tactic.
The “problem” with Lew Rockwell is the lack of white racial consciousness or Christian consciousness. A recent article supporting the NYC mosque is just one of its many problems!
sth_txs-
How about this: because they advocate adherence to a school of thought whose primary concern is NOT the white race. Philosophical libertarianism is not a practical solution to all of the problems of white identity and survival.
By all means, apply these ideas as needed to specific situations in which they are effective, but be pragmatic about it. If we support specific libertarian ideas and approaches to a situation, let it not be because we are libertarian in the abstract, but rather because a libertarian solution is effective in promoting the interests of white people.
Hunter,
This is your web site, your call.
But I would strongly advise you to nip this in the bud, take a firm, hard line against Libertarian know it all, true believers posting on O.D. Like the Spotlight Magazine conspiracy mongers, these 100% race denying Libertarians are always lurking around successful White Nationalist places – ready to come in a post their endless nonsense.
We’re supposed to ignore, deny 1300 years of NW Muslims slaughtering and enslaving our White people, to embrace some race denying cult of Libertarian individualism. We’re supposed to ignore the blatant – “in our face” program to build a NW Mosque on Ground Zero on the 10th anniversary of 9/11/01 to CELEBRATE this attack on White Western Civilization – the organization pushing this horror is called…
The Cordoba Initiative
– named after the Spanish City where invading, occupying Arab Muslim Moors ruled over our White Spanish kinfolk for…
700 Years!
But these #*$(@ know it all Libertarians are always coming in to deny that this has anything to do with race and the NW Muslims are just misunderstood – victims, like us and all our problems have nothing to do with race/culture/Muslims it’s all the fault of…
Big government
Too much interference in free market economics
Blah, blah, blah
300 Spartan, 300 White Irish American New York Fire Department gave their lives on 9/11/01 to save our White people from these disgusting NW Mudslime terrorists.
Let’s now join with the millions of yes – RACIST White Americans that don’t want these filthy, dark, hairy, racially alien NW Muslims to ever – EVER insult, or threaten our White people in our country again.
Regular, White Americans don’t want NW Muslims, towel heads, urine colored NWs from terrible countries that end in “…..Stan” to come in to America and hurt our people.
We’re RACIST not idiot, race denying Libertarians.
14 Words
They are ideologues who take their abstract principles to unreasonable extremes. Liberty is a good. It just isn’t the only good.
I generally support private property and free enterprise, but I am not a fundamentalist about it like the Lew Rockwell crowd. I enjoyed a good run along a scenic lakeside public bicycle trail this evening.
For the record, I voted for Ron Paul in the 2008 Republican primary. I support him on most issues. I just think this was a really stupid mistake on his part. It will only make it easier for his opposition to paint him as a kooky extremist.
In the backroom of the backrooms, where the Elders meet, they offer Muslims USA in exchange for Israel as capital of Regnum Judaica. Jews are ecstatic to be in the position of defending Muslims against Whites, be they Americans or Europeans. They do it ever chance they get. Remember Kosovo. The Jews give the West away in exchange for the Zionist dream of world power.
“For the record, I voted for Ron Paul in the 2008 Republican primary. I support him on most issues. I just think this was a really stupid mistake on his part. It will only make it easier for his opposition to paint him as a kooky extremist.”
But look at the opposition. Even the GOP is a corrupt cesspool of CFR whores. Also, the majority of American public, thanks to publik skools, are ignorant of American history. So most people are little more than programmed idiots.
Also remember that white people can be lazy under socialism as well. The pilgrims first almost failed colony is a good example. I certainly have no motivation to work harder or produce more under the current system. I’ll take the ‘extremism’ of Mises and Lewrockwell under we what have now any day.
Oats and Honey,
Thank for you grasping the real issue. The Ground Zero Mosque debate is a crack in the facade of post-national America. Ever since the Second World War, America has been defined as nothing more than a set of abstract principles.
If you believed in the American creed, you were considered an American. In the Ground Zero Mosque case, the fidelity of the American elite to abstract liberal principles is radically out of sync with the Heartland sentiment that America has a discernable cultural identity.
The majority of White Americans are asserting a cultural identity. They are saying their cultural identity trumps the private property rights of Muslims. This is a wonderful and positive development.
The smart thing to do here is to push the envelope and do everything in our power to expand and widen the crack into a serious national debate over multiculturalism and political correctness. This is an issue that provides us with an opportunity to stand in front of the herd and lead White people in a more radical direction.
Of course White Nationalists don’t have the patience to do anything like that. They will only cock their heads and repeat their mantra that the Jews are the real issue here.
If there was a serious public debate about the Jewish Question going on in the mainstream right now, I have no doubt that White Nationalists would dismiss it on the grounds that mainstream politicians only want to deport the Jews to Israel, not hold show trials, shoot them with silver bullets, and vertically expel their ashes into the atmosphere.
sth_txs,
The GOP establishment happens to be on the side of Ron Paul on this issue. Men like Michael Gerson, Bob Dole, and Grover Norquist support the Ground Zero Mosque.
While I agree with many of Ron Paul’s positions he badly dropped the ball on this one and revealed himself as a libertarian purist in that Muslims have the right to procure every piece of real estate they can afford and begin building mosques on it. To most Americans the ground zero mosque represents Islamic religious and cultural imperialism and rightly so. I don’t think the libertarians would be very content to live in a society dominated by Islam and they wouldn’t be granted to right to speak out about it without reprisal but that’s a subject for another day.
As a regular reader of LewRockwell.com I’ve seen its contributors advocate on behalf of blacks, Jews, Muslims, Mexicans, one legged homosexuals and everything in between except advocacy for the white race. And you thought libertarianism was a raceless creed.
Ron Paul has moderated his message very little since his early days contrary to the opinion of some. Paul simply wasn’t granted media access in the early 90’s which made it difficult to spread his message. The few times he was given access it was often a hostile interview designed to make him look foolish and he admitted to falling into the trap the media masters set for him. In the age of the internet he and other political outsiders have been able to circumvent the dinosaur media. His cinderella run for the Republican presidential nomination was primarily an internet phenomenon rather than a testament to a watered down message for mass appeal.
So if the lesson for today is moderation = political rewards and mainstream respectability then try again. Moderation coupled with bad foreign policy is what brought the Republican party to the brink of disaster in the 2008 elections. So the answer doesn’t lie in WN’s reinventing themselves as humdrum conservatives willing to compromise at the drop of a hat or the first utterance of the word racist.
If moderation is the answer then why isn’t Jared Taylor being wined and dined by Republican big shots?
Buchanan on the Mosque:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=38680
When Pat passes it will be a sad day.
A politician can take a position he doesn’t agree with because he looks around and sees that it is the best way of survival. More, he determines in his own thinking that those he really agrees with don’t have the savvy, the intelligence, or the political maturity and influence to make it, and that if he goes public on their side, he is just throwing away any hope at all of getting anything done.
As for Ron Paul I think he is on the wrong path, whatever thoughts are going on in his mind. I was happy to see Rand take a different tack.
The Islamic people are in a civilization clash with us only because they are taking over Europe in large numbers (and some in the US too). It is, I believe, the Jewish influence/ownership in the media that built the “open immigration” ground for this Moslem invasion. We, and the Moslems, need to see the larger picture. I don’t know if we or they will. You don’t have to like people who are potential allies in certain ways.
Buchanan consistently outshines his critics. It is always a pleasure to read his columns.
@ We’re supposed to ignore, deny 1300 years of NW Muslims slaughtering and enslaving our White people, to embrace some race-denying cult of Libertarian individualism.
The enemy (Muslim) of my enemy (Jew) is not my friend. But many white nationalists are clueless about Islam. I’ve just reviewed one of my old posts, “Nuking Mecca,” which includes a very elucidating interview with Robert Spencer.
I think I agree more or less with Hunter. Given that the majority of Americans (most of whom are probably white) oppose the ground zero mosque, this debate is an excellent opportunity for white advocates and all opponents of political correctness and multiculturalism. This debate exposes very clearly a deeply hypocritical side to the cultural Marxist left in the political class, the media and academia: that average (white) Americans are only allowed to be “sensitive” to and “offended” by those things that the left elite deems appropriate.
You don’t get many winning hands better than this. If there were such a thing as a kick ass 24 hour pro-white media, this issue would be playing wall-to-wall.
There’s a reason why Fox and the GOP have been all over this – they know it’s a winning hand too. Of course, they don’t have the balls to really go for the jugular, but hey, it’s still a minor win. Sure would be nice to see an articulate, tough as nails, white advocate on TV making hay off of it.
1. Any stick that we can use to beat up up multi-cults is worth swinging.
2. We don’t have First Amendment rights, so we have no reason to respect our foe’s.
3. Moslems are not Americans, and have no First Amendment rights anyway.
Some of you are ignorant of history. The Jews were the ruling class in Spain before the Moorish invasions and the Spanish kicked the Jews out of their lucrative trading and replaced them with the Visigoths. The Jews retaliated by bringing in the muslim hoards to fight the Spanish. I believe this is what’s going on in Europe now and in the US it’s merely a scare tactic to support the wars and Israel. That mosque in Jew York City would never have been given the green light without Jewish support in the first place. There seems to be some neocons creeping into this board. Get over it. The neoconservative movement is dying a slow painful death and we’re going to keep wringing it’s little neck till it drops to the floor dead and lifeless.
To Bill who writes about Spanish history at a time when White Spanish, Arab Muslim Moors and THE JEWS were all involved in conflict, the same conflict that is now occurring in Europe and to a lesser extent the USA.
I will post a great history article from Instauration on this subject in the next few days.
I wouldn’t waste any of my money on either of these boobs. They may mean well—but—they are boobs.
<>
Where do you come up with this nonsense? There were no Jews in Iberia before the arrival of the Muslims; the Jews came with the Muslim invaders.
As for this Ron-Rand Paul business, it’s a complete waste of time. Both of the Pauls are libertarians and nothing else; with them, what you see is what you get. Why do we American traditionalists/racialists waste our time by supporting these clowns? Many people of traditionalist or racialist persuasion supported these people and what have we received in return? Nothing! Not so much as a mere statement “I support a future for White American children” or anything similar. We American tradtionalists/racialists need to field and support our own candidates if we’re going to be involved in politics; no one else but us are going to fight our battles for us and advance our agenda.
Ron Paul and libertarians just want our money and support, but they won’t and will not advance our agenda and they’ve made that perfectly clear. Ron Paul and the libertarians just want to take our money and piggyback on us on their way to the mainstream, just like Barry Goldwater and the conservative movement
used and abused the Southern segregationists in the 1960s on their way to the mainstream.
Ron/Rand Paul and the libertarian movement are no friends of ours and anyone with a good background in American political history can see this.
Heh, I for one love the idea of a mosque next to ground zero. Let the New Yorkers hang their heads in shame as they pass it; let the Jewish overlords of NYC deal with the resentment it causes.
The war between NYC and the Arab world is their business.
Hopefully the Pauls do not become spokesmen for political correctness as has Lew Rockwell:
http://www.vdare.com/misc/080514_pendleton.htm
.
White Christian America needs to sit the whole NYC “Ground Zero” Mosque Brouhaha out. We are playing into Jewish hands by getting involved. They are playing both sides against the middle by being on all sides of every issue. Christians are antagonizing Muslims while the Jews remain their same old sweet old tolerant selves. How convenient … for them. A mosque in NYC? Good! Mosques in Christian heartland America? Great! Minarets in a White Christian stronghold like Switzerland? Better! Just as long as it’s not in eretz Israel, they can deal with it.
Kudos to Ron Paul though he could have phrased it differently. The Constitution has an establishment clause where religion is concerned, but nothing about immigration. The truth is, we have no business objecting to mosques or crescent displays when there are synagogues and menorahs all over hell’s half acre. We let both the Jews and the Muslims in, they have the right to erect places of worship and to pray there as they see fit. If the Muslims are that big of a threat then why in the hell did President George W. Bush call them a “religion of peace” and why is the Federal Government continuing to let them in after the 9-11 attack?
Keep in mind that the “culprit,” Bin Laden and other Arab “apologists” said that 9-11 was the result of our pro-Israeli policies.
If you think about it, it would work very well to Jewish interests for them to reclaim all the old Biblical territory “from the Banks of the Euphrates to the shores of the Nile,” leaving a very pissed off Arab diaspora to overwhelm White Christian Europe and America and then beat up on them for their financial and military support of Israel in the first place. Christians may be acting as the Jews’ unwitting partners in a territory swap with the Arab Muslims, being complicit in their own dispossession.