Ben Stein Drops the A Bomb II

Eric Dondero, a Libertarian Republican blogger, found and commented on my article about Ben Stein calling Dr. Paul an anti-Semite. His comment didn’t reference a single point made in the article, which he probably didn’t bother to read, but it provides an interesting opportunity to review and dissect the mindset of the Tea Party types that I hope we can engage and influence on some level.

It’s a relatively brief comment, but it’s stuffed with content…

It’s not the NeoCons who are anti-Islamo-Fascist and wanting to fight back against the maurauding Muslim onslaught, it’s us Libertarians.

Islamo-Fascism is inherently anti-Libertarian. How can one call oneself a Libertarian yet be supportive of Sharia Law?

Ron Paul may not be an anti-Semite, but he’s certainly anti-Israel, and decided weak on fighting our enemies – the Islamo-Fascists. He may be a libertarian on domestic issues, but on foreign policy he’s gosh-darn awful, cowardly, and a diehard surrenderist.

The first sentence is evidence of the power of controlling discourse. Just look at it. In one sentence alone, Eric asserts that…

  1. Islam is associated somehow with Fascism
  2. Muslims instigated the conflict
  3. Libertarians are united against “marauding Muslims”

Jewish mastery of discourse is so complete that this man who believes himself to be rejecting the “neocons” is doing nothing more than rejecting an obsolete front group for Israeli Likudnik interests while being inextricably brainwashed into perceiving geopolitics through the perspective they constructed. In a tragicomic twist, this White American military veteran has been bamboozled into loudly and proudly sending his comrades and countrymen off to die in the desert for a hostile foreign government.

This phantasm of “Islamo-Fascism” is inherently anti-Libertarian, Eric claims. But his next sentence inverts things: Libertarianism is inherently anti-Muslim. This is “inherently” silly. An elementary understanding of libertarian ideology demonstrates that violating the will of other individuals to join a collective is an imposition on their liberty. It’s very easy to be a libertarian and be “supportive” of Sharia Law. As long as one isn’t personally forced into that Sharia Law collective, there’s no libertarian concern there.

His final paragraph proves that this poor guy has absolutely no idea where he just posted a comment, accusing Ron Paul of being “anti-Israel” for refusing to deliver our servicemen to fight its wars. This would actually be amusing if Eric’s farcical delusions hadn’t directly caused the unnecessary deaths of thousands of America’s finest young men and women. Dr. Paul is as far from a “diehard surrenderist” “coward” as they come, having fought a principled fight against the Israel Lobby in the belly of the beast for decades.

38 Comments

  1. If I had a chance to press a button, and if I pressed it, I would die, but Saddam Hussein would never have been invaded, I would press it. Hail the HEROIC secular liberator.

  2. Eric
    I have to go now. Later I’m going to check out your poor-ass site and see if your as ideologically-pure a hombre as your seat belt stance suggests. Seat belts for those who remember, was the initial sign of armegeddon, the first instance of a government knowingly putting their hands near the average American male’s loins….the person or persons responsible must be found and put up against the wall and shot.
    I for one deducted that only a foreign entity, an entity with unbelievable ‘chutzpah’ would try something like this and get away with it.

  3. Captainchaos that last post of yours was entirely unintelligible. It made zero sense. You obviously don’t know me, or have any clue as to my background or what I currently do, if you think me to be “not serious.”

    I suggest you check out my blog Libertarian Republican. I think you’ll be a bit enlightened.

  4. Aha! Donald, I would argue exactly the opposite. I would argue that those who oppose War with Islamo-Fascism cannot be any in way “Libertarians,” for they defacto align themselves with those who wish to impose Sharia Law, which is entirely and fundamentally in direct opposition to Libertarian beliefs on civil liberties issues, AND! even free market economics.

    Donald, you may be decent on libertarian economics, and libertarian civil liberties agenda, but if you fail on the War on Islamo-Fascism it cancels all the rest out.

    I suggest you check into Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders and Dr. Jack Wheeler if you want to learn about 100% principled Libertarians.

  5. Argue all you want – your argument has nothing to do with the traditional libertarian milieu. Libertarians are non-interventionists and have consistently believed that the government has no place in dictating to other nations how to run their affairs. Your particular political views are more in line with the early neocons who detested social welfare, government regulation, but believed in aggressive foreign policy.

    You are trying to apply that label to yourself based on a reaction to establishment conservatives – not actual libertarianism.

    I am not a libertarian – not sure why you make that erroneous claim. Geert Wilders is not a libertarian either; he is a very liberal populist who’s greatest claim to conservatism is his opposition the Muslim invasion.

  6. Steve, that’s a tough one. I really hadn’t thought about that. I do know, New Hampshire, the only state without a seat belt law, does have one for minors under 18. It seems to work out decently. So, I wouldn’t be vehemently opposed to it.

    Then again, seat belts in many instances have been shown to be unsafe and to even kill. So, I’m torn?

  7. I’m all for reaching out to the conservatives and tea partiers. I also believe we need to reach out to the young, and I do stress young libertarians.

    At the same time, I have a hard time taking serious any person in 2010 still using the laughable term “Islamo-Fascism” and using arguments such as “we need to get them over there so they can’t get us over here.” This discussion has been taking place since 2002 and yet we have people still at romper room level on these subjects.

    Enough time has passed where intelligent men should have pondered these things and employed some critical thinking skills. There comes a point to show some sort of intelligence and go past the talking points and jingoism given to us by party hacks. Mr. Dondero here is using these silly arguments and as far as I’m concerned is wasting our time.

  8. Aha Donald. And there you are absolutely 100% and entirely totally wrong. Dead wrong in fact.

    I AM AN ORIGINALIST LIBERTARIAN!!! I hail back to the ORIGINAL LIBERTARIANS from the early to mid-1960s:

    Barry Goldwater
    Milton Friedman
    Ayn Rand… and most especially…

    THE FOUNDER OF THE MODERN LIBERTARIAN MOVEMENT DANA ROHRABACHER.

    See what you don’t seem to understand is that I’m a loooooongtime veteran of the libertarian movement going waaaaay back to the 1980s. I was a personal friend of Karl Hess. I served as a personal aide to Roger MacBride for 5 years. I knew Don Ernsberger well, and Jim Turney. I got all the stories from them about the early days of the libertarian movement and the founding of the Libertarian Party.

    And guess what? Practically all the founders of modern libertarians were hardcore Anti-Communist Crusaders.

    It’s only in 1974/75 when the AntiWar faction started taking over. They started with the LP platform committee (Justin Raimondo, Garris, David Bergland and Rothbard.)

    Eventually the Libertarian Defense Caucus people were pushed out, and a few years later purged from the Libertarian Party altogether. I was the last LDC man remaining standing.

    In 1990, I founded the Republican Liberty Caucus. And ever since the Pro-Defense libertarians have been active in the GOP.

  9. Actually, I think the original libertarians were the founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson, especially, would have scorn for your type.

    I could care less about your neocon buddies.

  10. “You’re calling for nothing short of a race war against the entire Muslim World and carrying on about how dissidents ought to be physically assaulted or worse…”

    Interesting someone with a Hispanic surname calling for such a genocidal endeavor as this.

    Better be careful there, since the Obama/Holder “justice” dept., (now) includes Muslims as an identifiable minority ethnic group that is “worthy” of enhanced protection under the under the hateful “hate crimes” laws that were (deceitfully) passed last fall.

  11. “Captainchaos that last post of yours was entirely unintelligible.”

    That is saying nothing more than that it is not intelligible to you, as you lack the self insight to delve to the bottom of the psychological genesis of your opinions, opinions you pass off as reasoned, empirically validated and systematic analysis. Well, if I can refute the latter, and I can do so easily, the former interpretation of why it is you believe what you believe should press upon you.

    “He [Saddam] was a diehard Islamist who supported and funded Islamist causes most especially Hamas and Hezbollah.”

    By that logic then those in the United States government that funded and facilitated the Islamists in their insurgency against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan are also Islamists. But you will object, ‘no, the former were obviously not Islamists’. Implicitly asserting that some criteria of just what an Islamist is need be objectively applied to the former in judging whether or not they (the men in the United States government who support the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan against the Soviets) actually meet said criteria. Which is something you are apparently unprepared to do in the case of Saddam. Now why is that?

  12. Islam in and of itself is not a huge problem, but ‘International Islam’ or ‘Pan-Islamism’ is indeed a problem just as International Jewry is. As long as we keep the non-White Muslims out of White-Western nations I have no major problems with Islam.

    As for libertardianism, it is mostly a Jewish-invented ideology through and through, a way to divert Whites away from the biosocial realities of race and distract them with various abstract economic-political theories — notice how Eric Dondero and other libertardians revere Jewish libertardians like Any Rand, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Peter Schiff, Milton Friedman, Ben Stein, Pam Geller, and so on and so forth…and not to even begin to mention all of the Jewish neocons who are very similar to the above-listed Jews.

    Newflash for you Mr Dondero — lying rat-faced Jews (a few of which were listed above) of whatever ideology, whether libertardianism or international capitalism or communism or neoconism or whatever else, can never be trusted.

  13. Barry Goldwater
    Milton Friedman
    Ayn Rand… and most especially…

    What do these three have in common? hahaha I wonder if Libertarian Republican with his high school Dungeons and Dragons talking points knows.

    Libertarians are a joke. Not everyone is fit for liberty, especially low IQ violent minorities, who need to be locked up on a hair-trigger standards. I like the war on drugs because it gives a pretextual reason to lock up violent blacks for 50 years at a time. I said so at Takimag and the sodomite Justin Raimondo got mad at me. Fuck him.

    Libertarians have no reason to support a particular libertarian community, and they ignore how rampant self-interest leads to Benedict Arnold betrayals by people who were never raised to think about anything or anyone other than themselves and their self interest. It’s ignorant, adolescent nonsense.

  14. Eric Dondero
    I AM AN ORIGINALIST LIBERTARIAN!!! I hail back to the ORIGINAL LIBERTARIANS from the early to mid-1960s:

    Barry (JEW) Goldwater
    Milton (JEW) Friedman
    Ayn (JEW) Rand

    You’re not fooling anyone.

    Barry Goldwater was not a libertarian. He supported the Vietnam war.
    Milton Friedman was a monetarist not a libertarian. He also invented the withholding tax. Thanks a lot, uncle Miltie.
    Ayn Rand was the closest thing to a libertarian on your list even though she denied it. Just one problem, she was an isolationist and praised the “anti-semitic” America First movement!

    It’s only in 1974/75 when the AntiWar faction started taking over. They started with the LP platform committee (Justin Raimondo, Garris, David Bergland and Rothbard.)

    Wrong, it was antiwar from day one. The whole point of founding the libertarian party was to oppose the Vietnam War and the draft. That was the issue that drove the Young Americans for Freedom to break with the conservatives.

    In 1990, I founded the Republican Liberty Caucus. And ever since the Pro-Defense libertarians have been active in the GOP.

    Just in time to support the neocon Gulf War that got us stuck in the Iraq tarbaby in the first place.

  15. Grimioire, I agree you are right about the GOP, any pro-White electoral success is going to come through the Republican party. Third parties are a time wasting dead end. The GOP is basically the only chance for anything even remotely pro-White, considering the Democratic party is literally owned and funded by Jews.

    But I’m not running for office nor leading any political movement, so I don’t have to play pretend. Republicans and every single one of their politicians and leaders and supporters are traitors and vile shit.

    This scumbag libertarianrepublican is a disgusting whore for Jews who literally, not metaphorically, literally, sucker young White men – often Southerners – into shooting at some goat herding raghead half way around the world for Jews. Then those same Jews steal the parent’s retirement and outsources the kids jobs to Communist China. The Republican activists then take the Jew’s money and comes up with some flag-waving Jew bullshit about “Islamo-Hitlerism”

    The White men who run the Republican party are the most servile shabbos-goy ass kissers that have ever disgraced the White peoples of the world. In some cases, like former Republican Congressional leader Dennis Hastert, they are literal child-molesting fags being blackmailed by Mossad.

    The Jews did 911, yes they did.

  16. Eric Dondero
    Hey Donald, could you do me a favor? Please identify which views of mine below are “NeoCon”?

    If you still support war on the Muslim world, the occupation of Iraq and aid to Israel you’re a neocon. Those are the only litmus tests. There are socialist neocons, plutocrat neocons and libertine neocons. What there can’t be are libertarian neocons. Preemptive war is the definition of violating the non-aggression principle.

  17. Deliberate Deception by Dr. William Pierce

    Unlike many of her fellow Jews at the time, she (Ayn Rand) did not preach communism. She was, however, an apostle not only of selfishness but also of other destructive ideas preached by nearly all of her fellow Jews, such as the idea that race doesn’t matter. In her book The Virtue of Selfishness, after railing vehemently and at length against what she called “collectivism,” she wrote:

    “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism.”

    Furthermore, Ayn Rand’s brand of selfishness was a far cry from the sort of self-reliance and individual responsibility in which I believe. The atomistic sort of selfishness she preached was intended — again I say intended — to sever a person from his racial roots, to kill his feeling for his race, to lead him to put his personal interests above his responsibilities to his race as a whole, and, in fact, to abjure his racial responsibilities altogether. And this was deliberate.

    I don’t like to sound spooky or irrational about this, but I should tell you that many years of experience have led me to believe that a maxim we all ought to be guided by is, “No good thing cometh out of Israel.” When a Jew preaches anything to us — whether collectivism, as in the case of Karl Marx, or extreme individualism, as in the case of Ayn Rand — it is intended to do us harm, to deceive us, to weaken us, to make us more vulnerable. Even when it appears to be anti-communism, it is slyly twisted so as to equate communism with every form of collective feeling, and from there to make any form of racial feeling akin to communism. And as I said, this is done very slyly, very cleverly, so that it fools many people, especially the simpletons of the Right. Many anti-communists today have let themselves be persuaded by Rand and her cohorts that racism is a form of communism. A thousand generations of practice in the marketplace have given Rand and her fellow tribesmen a rare talent for deception, for misdirection.

    http://www.natall.com/free-speech/fs001b.html

  18. I suggest you check into Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders and Dr. Jack Wheeler if you want to learn about 100% principled Libertarians.

    It is no surprise that Geert Wilders, who is slavishly pro-Jewish and pro-Israel, is the only European immigration restrictionist who is politically correct enough for American conservatives (and “pro-defense libertarians”), who consider the British National Party, National Front in France, and Freedom Party of Austria beyond the pale.

    Wilders is not a racialist or ethnonationalist. He would have no problem with the immigration of millions of Bantus into the Netherlands so long as they are not Muslim. He also calls for the destruction of the Dutch people through “assimilation” with immigrants.

    Regarding assimilation, it is exasperating when conservatives say the only problem they have with immigration is that the immigrants are not assimilating. We don’t want them to assimilate. Balkanization is better than Brazilianization. Amalgamation with millions of non-whites means the irreversible destruction of our people, while preservation remains possible with Balkanization.

    Wilders also has attacked the BNP, calling it “disgusting.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/netherlands/5523238/Dutch-divided-over-Geert-Wilders-as-radical-MP-eyes-premiership.html

    In the European Parliament [Wilders’s] four MEPs will not ally with the British National party, he said, claiming he had never met a BNP Member. “I understand they talk a lot about blacks and whites. This is disgusting,” he said.

    Wilders has also the following: “My allies are not Le Pen or Haider. We’ll never join up with the fascists and Mussolinis of Italy. I’m very afraid of being linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups.”

  19. MGLS,

    Thank you for the research. That’s my bad for mistaking a Jewish racial activist for a confused White American. I take back all the things I said about Eric sending his people to die in the desert for a foreign country. He’s sending my people. We’re the foreign country.

  20. You have reached the blind alley of the treason you committed when you agreed that you had no right to exist. Once, you believed it was “only a compromise”: you conceded it was evil to live for yourself, but moral to live for the sake of your children. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your children, but moral to live for your community. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your community, but moral to live for your country. Now, you are letting this greatest of countries be devoured by any scum from any corner of the earth, while you concede that it is selfish to live for your country and that your moral duty is to live for the globe.

    Malice Rosenbomb

  21. Earlier, I was in a hurry and just scanned the post and these comments and my first comment to W.T. Mann was “Lets waterboard this mutha”.

    After I wrote that I reconsidered and thought if a republican libertarian was making an effort to exchange views with us we should also make an effort to exchange views with the fucker and get him on our side. Also we should infiltrate the Republican party, as it’s self evident most of them would come to us if they knew we will have soon the chance of changing the ballgame. And so I wrote the post putting forward my view we should dialogue with the mongrel.

    Now that I’ve had the time to read this guys posts, i did not see the list of things he calls his views or what he stands for earlier. And i’ve been able to check his page…What amazes me is that none of you stood for this shit. Almost everyone could see right through this asshole. I almost felt this strange and eerie pride to be a contributor, (in my small way) to this blog

    Ayn Rand? What a tosser.

  22. http://shadowdemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/ron-paul-has-shown-himself-to-be-an-anti-semite-and-a-racist/#comment-800

    “Eric Dondero Rittberg is Jewish and Italian.

    “The Johnson-Reed Act should have been passed several decades sooner.”

    ====

    Eric Dondero, on November 15th, 2007 at 6:14 pm Said:
    “My full name is Eric Dondero Rittberg. I am technically half-Jewish. My Mother is Jewish and my Father Italian.

    “I am proud of both my Italian and Jewish backgrounds.

    “And I have been Bar-Mitzvahed, and can read and speak some Hebrew.”

    _____

    MGLS,

    Thanks SO MUCH for showing up this little fraud of a dissembler, ‘Eric’!

    Yeah, the tough-guy, (ship-bound) ‘war hero’ obviously does what he does best — lobs missiles from afar, just like the ships he was on did to innocent Arabs and Muslims for the ‘wars’ on behalf of ‘Eretz Yisroel’.

    “…Two tours in the Gulf – USS Kittyhawk and guided missile destroyer USS Luce.

    “I’d thank you for thanking me for my service.

    “Somthing tells me you um, “opted out,” of the military, or as we Veterans would say “cowarded out.””

    Uh, what an arrogant creep.

    Next war for Israel, if he really wants to prove his ‘macho’ creds, Eric should switch over to the Army or Marines (or better yet, join the Israeli Offense Forces), and serve in the front lines with an infantry unit, where he can get a nice whiff of *depleted uranium* from the spent tank and artillery shells, or suffer traumatic brain injury from IED’s (where if he is ‘lucky’ enough not to get directly hit) can spend the rest of his life on fifteen-to-twenty different medications treating ‘mysterious’ symptoms.

    Then, maybe, he can be ‘thanked’ for his ‘service’.

    As a WOP, and former soldier myself, I am ashamed he is part-Italian, with an ‘Italian’ name (although likely is a Spanish name).

    Happy New Year & Buon Anno.

  23. Wilders is not a racialist or ethnonationalist. He would have no problem with the immigration of millions of Bantus into the Netherlands so long as they are not Muslim.

    Are you sure? I thought he was an immigration restrictionist. I could have sworn he came out against Romanian and Bulgarian EU accession, and on the grounds that they’d send immigrants too, and after accession he was against worker movement . Or I might have him confused with someone else. Still, this is such a basic fucking position it’s almost beyond belief a mainstream party isn’t running on it. If you can’t get ‘culturalist’ or even just ‘reduce conflict-ist’ immigration restriction passed, where the fuck is support for repatriation going to come from?

    Eric you’re a lying piece of shit. It’s quite the testament to the uselessness of American WN fantasism that a piece of shit like Eric can walk around without fear of his head being smashed in (even just on war-is-bankrupting-us-grounds; ie how dare this miserable cunt insist on war being the burning issue of the day when millions of Americans are losing their jobs). I mean, geez, the least you could do is make these lying scumbags work for their lies, rather than getting to peddle them pain-free.

  24. WNists would be better spending their time at that milieu helping them to see who their enemies are. After all they probably outnumber WNists by at least 1000 to 1.

    Why would you do that when you could better spend your time learning Chinese and weaponizing your brain?

  25. Are you sure? I thought he was an immigration restrictionist. I could have sworn he came out against Romanian and Bulgarian EU accession, and on the grounds that they’d send immigrants too, and after accession he was against worker movement .

    Yes, Wilders has called for the EU accession of Romania and Bulgaria to be reversed. His reasons were that they are corrupt and that the EU is large enough.

    I may have been somewhat hyperbolic, as Wilders has called for immigration (Muslim immigration in particular) to be restricted or even halted temporarily.

    However, Wilders has indicated that in principle he has no problem with the racial transformation of the Netherlands and Europe. His concern is defending “Western values.”

    In a speech Wilders said mass immigration would be no problem if the immigrants would “assimilate.”

    http://www.pvv.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1310&Itemid=1

    A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

    Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate.

    In the same speech Wilders also said:

    The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

    The demographic transition in the United States is much further along than in any European country, and if things continue as they are the United States will not be “the last man standing” and the “last bastion” of European civilization. However, Wilders does not recognize this because the immigrants to the United States are mostly Hispanics rather than Muslims.

  26. Thanks for your comments MGLS on the PVV (and outing little Eric of course!). Despite voting for the PVV, I have never followed the party that close because of my perception that they are not really ethnonationalist or racialists, but rather ‘culturists’. But recently I’ve been pondering becoming more actively involved. If you want to exchange views you can give me a call at vanspeijk [@] gmail.

  27. WNists would be better spending their time at that milieu helping them to see who their enemies are. After all they probably outnumber WNists by at least 1000 to 1.

    Why would you do that when you could better spend your time learning Chinese and weaponizing your brain?

    Compared to spending time arguing with malcontents like you and Linder it would be a better use of time.

  28. I would argue that those who oppose War with Islamo-Fascism cannot be any in way “Libertarians,” for they defacto align themselves with those who wish to impose Sharia Law, which is entirely and fundamentally in direct opposition to Libertarian beliefs on civil liberties issues, AND! even free market economics. (Eric Dondero)

    This remark seems to imply a principle (beyond the absurd paranoia and anti-libertarianism of with-us-or-against-us) whereby any “libertarian” polity must crusade, militarily, against all putatively non-libertarian polities.

    Derivatively, then, we must imagine that all sovereign governments, in a world containing at least one so-regarded “libertarian” (or “democratic”) regime, must reckon with Mr. Dondero’s typically aggressive moral universalist’s impulse and accommodate that metastasizing regime by attempting to adhere to necessarily imprecise specifications for qualification as a “libertarian” (or “democratic”) regime (illustratively, see the squabbles on this point amongst ideologues of this element) – lest they suffer otherwise unprovoked (or be provoked to) military aggression (“War”) in reaction to their pursuit of arguably antithetical domestic policies (“Law”/”liberties”/”economics”), as above. [Sound familiar?]

    Libertarianism promotes what implicitly is supposed to be a legal framework intended to facilitate (which it does not) and (arguably) collectively protect (with violence if necessary) the non-violent realization of rightly-understood individual interests and objectives. Mr. Dondero ironically and suspiciously offers a (Kosher-con) version of libertarianism that promises the globe a world of perpetual collective violence, evidently by justifying preemptive and violent imposition of this ill-defined and defective framework. [Sound familiar?]

    But I believe him not to be a hypocrite and mere apologist, however, as much as I believe him to be uninstructed in the examination of his own beliefs for their coherence and correspondence to reality, as is the case with every well-occupied position on the political spectrum.

    But I could be wrong. Let us see if he takes this lesson to heart and head, first purifying his incoherent Judeo-fascist quasi-libertarianism, and then thinking his way out of libertarianism altogether.

    Too much to ask of the blood – you will say?

  29. The exchange with this liberetardian shows just how worthless and hypocritical that ideology is. According to most libertarians, the ties that bind humanity are a desire for the free flow of goods, services, cheap trinkets, and even people across national borders. No great nation of civilization was every built on these principles and outside of the Western world you could probably count the number of adherents to libertarianism with both hands.

    Libertarianism is anti-nation state and anti-race. Libtards often scoff at social Darwinism yet embrace it as it applies to the cutthroat marketplace. Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard are its two Jewish godfathers and if I had to guess libertarianism was probably devised as just another ideology which to distract and divide non-Jews.

    Most of the hatred and terrorism directed at Americans would would disappear if we adopted a policy of strict neutrality towards Israel and all other Middle East nations. Without a doubt there is and always has been a fundamentalist and radical element within Islam that see itself in a perpetual state of conflict with non-Muslims. But this element was largely confined to the fringes until our wars of aggression and reckless foreign policy won it numerous new recruits and sympathizers.

    The libertards and neo-cons who accuse of us appeasing radical Islam are the same people who bend over backwards to understand and appease any radical non-white group advocating hatred and dispossession of white people.

  30. The exchange with this liberetardian shows just how worthless and hypocritical that ideology is. According to most libertarians, the ties that bind humanity are a desire for the free flow of goods, services, cheap trinkets, and even people across national borders. No great nation of civilization was every built on these principles and outside of the Western world you could probably count the number of adherents to libertarianism with both hands.

    Libertarianism is anti-nation state and anti-race. Libtards often scoff at social Darwinism yet embrace it as it applies to the cutthroat marketplace. Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard are its two Jewish godfathers and if I had to guess libertarianism was probably devised as just another ideology which to distract and divide non-Jews.

    I second the balance of your remarks, speaking to the issue of the origins of “terrorism”. But I believe that a mistaken imputation of motive is involved in the origins of Libertarianism/Objectivism/Austrian School Economics, as you would have it. These philosophical orientations rather appeal to those who feel themselves both cosmopolitan (Jew and North American Gentile alike) and inclined to the rational, science-inspired analysis of societal ethics and policy.

    The classic gentile experience on this continent has been that of the perpetual elastic frontier in land and in evolving technology that have made laissez-faire/free-enterprise politico-economic policy a historically distinctive success in this singular demographic/geographic context. We North American gentiles remain, in part, the cultural heirs of that colonial success, abstractly formulated now as philosophical libertarianism – a worldview that idealistically encapsulates one’s personal absorption of the ethics and responsibilities of middle-class life, however removed from the unadvertised realities of the non-libertarian Realpolitik of the world above that class.

    Deracinated from birth as we are, and taught, implicitly, the superior social status and employability of a culturally neutral persona, we naturally join the Jew in a cosmopolitan perspective, where we are not natively visceral racists (bigots) and have to reason ourselves out our youthful idealism and into a realistic confrontation with racial and class realities. There is thus no “hypocrisy” (though there are fundamental intellectual faults) in the majority experience of, and passage through, the various schools of individualist philosophy. So I caution against the misapprehension of the motives of opponents and potential converts.

  31. Last sentence of the first paragraph of post 84 hould read as follows:

    “No great nation or civilization was ever built on these principles and outside of the Western world you could probably count the number of adherents to libertarianism with both hands.”

    Note: replaced “of” with “or” and “every” with “ever”

Comments are closed.