RamZPaul produces excellent videos – I met him at the last Amren Conference.
Here’s one of his new videos explaining why Libertarianism doesn’t work in the real world… it never works anywhere there are parasitical low caste Blacks/non Whites who breed, without any intention of feeding their children.
“if you can’t feed them, don’t breed them”
The Old South was run successfully under the idea that Blacks shouldn’t have too many freedoms.
“Libertarianism” works just fine in the real world, you just need to be 100% honest about WHO the system is meant for. SO, just put the word “WHITE” in all of the policy statements, then everything about the libertarianism system works just fine:
Unlimited immigration from WHITE countries is fine
Limited government oversight and control for the WHITE population
Legal drugs for the WHITE population
Shall Issue CCW & Open carry is fine for the WHITE population
The WHITE population shall be free from surveillance and harassment
etc etc.
I don’t know that a system like Libertarianism was ever meant for savage races, even by the original Libertarian thinkers.
Come to think of it, does libertarianism really work even in an all white world?
It is my observation that left to their own devices, any given group of loosely related white people (“nations,” they used to be called) will adopt an economic system that is simultaneously nationalist and mixed socio-capitalist.
Definitely, it’s not for the new “Diverse” population in places where mass immigration was used to wipe out the historical generational white american public “hegemony”. National libertarianism with northwest europeans would probably work fine again, like when you have an ethnic base of people who can think, feel empathically, and act responsibly. It helped that americans once shared genes, extended family networks, history, religion, culture, etc, (so that it wasn’t just a “Diverse” immigrant free-for-all which is what it becomes.)
Maybe there’s really no such thing as “libertarianism” in Diverse populations—- you can’t compare the IFFA (Immigrant Free-for-All) with what classic liberalism or ‘libertarianism’ meant.
To make it work, you have to have the sort of population that lives decently on its own (without having to be ruled over and slapped around every five minutes, the way the “new” populations seem to need)
Really, Jack’s comment proved mine—- the Europeans could have a “libertarian” life, as long as they were on their own.
Diversity makes freedom impossible, is what is really being said.
—So why throw the baby out with the bathwater, is my question. Wouldn’t it be better to have ethnic nationalism (for instance, northwest euro protestants could have a whole country) and then they could also have freedoms, (since it would not degenerate into a psycho free-for-all of the sort it has become with endless mob violence, trash tv for “entertainment” (what would have to BE, internally, to think that trash is “entertaining,” lol), and so on?
But it’s like the “anti-libertarian” crowd wants to USE INCAPABLE populations to MAKE THEIR CASE that it’s the white people who need to be ruled over in some robot fascist way.
Why not insist on NATIONAL libertarianism (among people who can handle being left to their own devices? And exclude those who can’t?)
Liberty works in an all white society.
Folks like Rand and Ron Paul aren’t simple libertarians, they are also universalists who don’t believe in nations and borders. Ron Paul took his inspiration from the Jewish novel Dr Zhivago.
I would say unabashedly that libertarianism + racial separation is my goal.
Agree with afterthought and a host others here. Libertarianism works in an ethnic context. The views espoused are highly alien to traditional americans whose experience includes abuse of power resulting in abuse of the citizenry, such as gagging citizens, forced quartering of troops, assassination of citizens, confiscatory and indiscriminate taxation, forced conscription (murder of the citizenry), outright pillage and theft by the state, etc. ad nauseum. I’m not sure where Ryan intends to build is tyrant Utopia but I and legions of other freedom loving ethnic Americans will fight it to the death. You should preach your Hockey and Tyranny to Russians where these things seem to be appreciated. Hockey isn’t even possible in the South without artificial facilities.
Anon wrote: ‘Unlimited immigration from WHITE countries is fine’
NOT good. A policy of inter-ethnic INTRA-racial mixing leads directly to full INTER-racialism.
‘But it’s like the “anti-libertarian” crowd wants to USE INCAPABLE populations to MAKE THEIR CASE that it’s the white people who need to be ruled over in some robot fascist way’
Exactly! But these anti-libertarian ‘hobby horse riders’ NEED a strong police state to protect and maintain the delicate balance of their comfortable but very precarious urban environment.
Furthermore, RamZPaul doesn’t ride the same hobby horse (isn’t really anti-RonPaul): http://www.ramzpaul.com/search?q=ron+paul
Nice sign: http://blondegynocide.wordpress.com/2014/01/14/be-proud-to-be-white-vikings/
Perhaps I’m showing my age, but for me libertarianism does not equal anarchism. It also doesn’t mean libertine-ism like NAMBLA. It’s simply what was called in the 19th century economic liberalism. It was considered a step forward from mercantilism where one had to petition the king or government for a patent or grant of monopoly power over a certain type of trade or business.
Y’all don’t remember the horrors of government agencies like the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) which literally had thousands upon thousands of pages of regulations setting the price of hauling goods of a particular type from every city in the country to every other city in the country. It was a bureaucratic nightmare and de-regulation (economic libertarianism) was the answer. It let the market decide freight rates.
I believe in free trade, low taxes, and a less intrusive government in general, and one in which the delegation of power falls to the smallest possible practicable unit be that state, county, city, family, or individual. This would naturally include the right to sell one’s goods (including one’s own house) or NOT to anybody one pleases to.
This what was called libertarianism in the 1950’s and was a reaction to the New Deal. The formalized Randian cult and nutzoid anarchists like Murray Rothbard expanded this to include any action whatsoever.
The excesses of the 1960’s ruined everything including it seems, precise definitions.
I give up Jack. I’m no longer going to object to your anti-libertarian rants. It’s obvious that we do not share the same definition of the term. Just don’t throw out the free trade baby (and what should the right of anyone who is free, White, and 21) with the bathwater.
I’m not sure what tenet of libertarianism prevents people from refusing to support parasites who despise them. I’m not sure what ideology permits people to use whatever means necessary to free themselves from whoever would require them to do so. Isn’t there some thread of common sense that should prevail upon any philosophy to the extent that to capitulate to the demands of hostile vermin is just fucking stupid?
This statement:
Anon wrote: ‘Unlimited immigration from WHITE countries is fine’
NOT good. A policy of inter-ethnic INTRA-racial mixing leads directly to full INTER-racialism
Theoretically? Practically?
What would be the problem, for example, if we welcomed all WHITE South Africans into the country with open arms?
Re Anon Guy “Unlimited immigration from WHITE countries”:
You would be shocked to find 100+ millions of “WHITE” Russia’s citizens being in the US one day.
@Anon: Boers are very close to us, very Northwestern European. But a policy of admitting even the ‘whitest’ Hispanics who are mostly Mediterranean and ‘Sephardic’ Converso would be the ‘inter-ethnic intra-racial mixing’.
Libertarianism has failed because it leaves the host country open to Cultural Marxist style subversion.
Marxists waging psychological warfare on their host population, has nothing to do with free speech. Its quite the opposite in fact.
Anon Guy says:
January 15, 2014 at 6:56 am
“What would be the problem, for example, if we welcomed all WHITE South Africans into the country with open arms?”
Being White isn’t good enough for me. For one, I wouldn’t welcome White anti-Whites like Charlize Theron into any Pro White country. They should be forced to accept the consequences of their own actions.
And if we did have the political power to welcome White South Africans into America, would we not also have the power to take South Africa back for Whites?
Rudel writes:
“I give up Jack. I’m no longer going to object to your anti-libertarian rants. It’s obvious that we do not share the same definition of the term. Just don’t throw out the free trade baby (and what should the right of anyone who is free, White, and 21) with the bathwater.”
JR responds:
I don’t see my presentation of RamZPaul’s very true comments about the brutal realities of the Black underclass and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe as “ranting”. A more Libertarian viewpoint can work OK as long as the over riding goal is to fight for the legitimate rights of our people/our civilization to survive, revive. Please view this RamZPaul video many times and see that terrible Black parasite underclass family, training that Black terrorist in diapers. Then re-read the Amren year end article documenting Rand Paul’s treason.
When Libertarians go full anti White renegade, traitors like Rand Paul, they ain’t on our side. When they put their office on MLK Jr. Blvd, open Jack Kemp style outreach centers in Detroit, Howard University – make messianic immigration speeches demanding that the United States throw open it’s borders and welcome every single human on planet earth that wants to work in America then…
This form of Libertarianism is not for us.
It’s tar and feather time and yeah…
The day of the rope.
If you or anyone you love/like are in this anti corruption form of libertarianism cult – get help, get out.
Anon Guy writes:
“What would be the problem, for example, if we welcomed all WHITE South Africans into the country with open arms?”
Jr responds:
I suggest you start doing this on an individual basis. The Jewish community got virtually every every single Jewish person out of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe South Africa. One of these ex Rhodesians is set to be # 2 on the Federal Reserve Bank board. He was also up to head the Israeli central bank.
Jews are internationalists, look out for their tribe all over the world. No reason we can’t do the same.
But this takes work, which is quite different than living in lib-libertarian fantasy worlds.
We have to WORK to secure the existence of our people and a future for our children.
14 words
Don’t fall into the trap that libertardians set for us that our only two choices are pure doctrinaire libertarianism or out and outright tyranny. Come to think of it, wannabe tyrants peddle the same false choice to stoke people’s fears of the consequences of pure libertarianism.
The reality is that we have many many many more options, and that most paradigms in the history of the world have been neither libertarian nor tyrannical.
In 2014, an open-borders libertarian is a de facto Sinophile. If you like your country ruled by Chinese, speaking Chinese and looking Chinese, libertarianism is the ideology for you!
@Jack Ryan: “The day of the rope.” Large numbers of White people won’t endorse the David-Lane-type message until things are far gone and the body count is very high. Angelo John Gage is on the right track: “This whole system is screwed. … in twenty years this country won’t even be functional anymore. … multiculturalism isn’t working … People say the race war is coming. It’s here … since the civil rights movement. That’s when it started. … We segregated the races for a reason. … Race determines the culture, and it’s the genetics. … all the other races combined still haven’t come close to anything we’ve done. … Read a book like “March of the Titans” … Detroit doesn’t work. … Newark … it used to be a great city … totally ruined. … We are putting other races above our own. … We tried multiculturalism – it failed. … They use our heart against us. … Have the heart to accept the truth. … It is a war, ladies and gentlemen. … We are trying to get to the normal white guy who realizes that something is off. … If anything is taboo, you should look into it.”
http://thewhitevoice.com/thewhitevoicenetwork/2014/1/15/world-war-truth-18-a-heart-to-heart-w-reality
Dixiegirl,
1. Thanks to the glorious melting pot, White Americans are ethnically mixed to such an extent that differentiating between “Northwest” Europeans and everyone else from Europe isn’t a worthy exercise. Whether its the massive influx of Germans (Central Europe), Poles (Eastern Europe) or Italians (Southern Europe), America hasn’t been a country with a dominant Northeast European population in over 100 years.
2. That said, there are more White Americans of German and Irish extraction than any other European ethnicity, and there are more of the former than the later. Granted, few of those types are 100% German or 100% Irish anymore, but even so, America’s largest White ethnic group has supported collectivization and a strong central government since at least 1871. In other words, the largest White ethnic group in this country rejects libertarianism.
3. There are just as many Irish and English people in the Northeast as in Dixie. If we assume that Whites of British extraction form the core of the Generational Americans you speak of, then that means there’s an entire legion of Generational Americans that hate libertarianism.
4. Certainly the Scandinavians love them some collectivism. Norway and Sweden have the lowest Gini Coeffiency ratings in the world; the higher your rating, the higher your economic inequality, which usually means the less government intervention you have. Scandinavians are obviously from Northwest Europe.
5. Classical liberalism is all about the supremacy of individual rights. It recognizes no distinction between ethnic groups and races. Free-for-all immigration is very much a logical consequence of classical liberalism, as the CATO Institute fully understands and embraces.
6. There are very few Whites who can handle being left to their own devices, and there are very few tribes of Whites that ever lived “decently on their own.” Even the Antebellum South had an aristocratic Plantation class. I’m pretty sure an aristocracy – if not yet an official one – is antithetical to libertarian ideals. Moreover, the natural impulse even for the White race is to become selfish and degenerate. It’s happened time and time again throughout history. Leadership, hierarchy, and collective centralized government is needed to both protect us and keep us on the proper upward path. Even the British understood this, and they’ve always been more inclined to individualism and limited government than anyone else.
7. There’s a damn good reason why the power of the Presidency increased whereas Congress is a shadow of the days where the Speaker of the House ruled the roost in Washington: Because White Americans like strong executive leadership and like being ruled over as long as their leaders actually, you know, support them. It’s like Matt Parrott once said: I’m not anti-government, I’m anti-this government.
8. In re: “ruled over in some robot fascist way,” you’re focusing on the what and not the who. I honestly wouldn’t mind this guy manning the streets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmtQXUXez8
But these guys?
http://mylifeofcrime.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/kelly-thomas-murder-75201-fullerton-ca-2-officers-manuel-ramos-and-jay-cicinelli-charged-in-the-beating-death-of-kelly-thomas/
Not so much.
TJ,
“The views espoused are highly alien to traditional americans”
Seeing as you’re referring to RamzPaul’s views here, you’d be quite wrong about that. Most White people like central government and collectivism, including the overwhelming majority of White Christians. Oh sure, they’ll carry Conservatism Incs. water on all things economic, but everyone knows how robust they want the government to be from a non-economic standpoint. Just look at how happily they supported the Patriot Act.
There might be differences among Whites in terms of what the government should do – conservatives want heavy law enforcement but little economic involvement, and liberals want just the opposite – but very few White Americans are opposed to government just because it’s the government.
“whose experience includes abuse of power resulting in abuse of the citizenry, such as gagging citizens, forced quartering of troops, assassination of citizens, confiscatory and indiscriminate taxation, forced conscription (murder of the citizenry), outright pillage and theft by the state, etc. ad nauseum.”
1. You’re speaking mostly of the 1770s here. That was 240 years ago. No one remembers that.
2. To be brutally honest, a lot of whites who are rich deserve exactly what you described. Upper class whites in general hate their own race. Vikingbitch has explained this time and time again on her excellent blog.
Anon Guy,
Mosin meant that practically. And if he didn’t, then I sure as hell do: Ethnic mongrelization leads directly to racial mongrelization. The mainstream Amurrikan embrace of interracial marriage logically follows from embracing inter-ethnic marriage. That’s why the likes of Emma Lazarus and Israel Zangwill were so enthusiastic about mass European immigration to the USA.
“What would be the problem, for example, if we welcomed all WHITE South Africans into the country with open arms?”
*sigh* It would seem the global trend among White people towards Tower of Babel II is irresistible. Here’s the deal: White nations worldwide have proved incapable of drawing any lines in the sand on who gets in and who doesn’t. When one group gets in, everyone gets in. Even Richard Spencer, who once wrote a series of outstanding articles on the cult of inclusiveness back when Alt Right got started in March 2010, all of the sudden becomes super-duper inclusive when it comes to White people. When has that ever worked? Has anyone learned any lessons about the Civil War, WW1 and WW2? Or even a conflict as local as the Hatfields and McCoys? What historical evidence existence that “inclusion” is a good thing anyway? Where does this impulse towards inclusion even come from??
Dan, you’re right. I did mean that practically and seriously. I’ve become convinced that separation is required not only on the racial level, but on all levels, national, regional, local and ‘tribal’ — and religious!
“Let us dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.” – RFK
So that is the etymology of ‘Tamer of Savages’? The writing style of ‘No.More.Hobby.Horse.Riders’ (the unknown anti-hobby-horse-rider hobby horse rider) did bring to mind ‘No-Man’ and ‘Tamer of Savages’ of New Jersey, but ‘they’ (he) hadn’t appeared on any comment thread for so long…. Welcome back. You will enjoy the long waiting times to pass censorship. Make copies of your best substantial contributions because some will be deleted. Now what is your opinion of Jack Ryan’s interpetation of RamZPaul’s view of lower case ‘l’ libertarianism, and of Jack’s view of liberty in general?