Jeffrey Tucker: The Alt-Right, Richard Spencer, Hoppe, & Rothbard

My take:

1.) Jeffrey Tucker consults his Jewish guru Ludwig von Mises as his oracle on all matters. He returns to his guru at the end of the interview.

2.) According to Tucker, Trump is a “fascist.” The definition of “fascism” is immigration restriction (Immigration Act of 1924), protectionism (Smoot Hawley Tariff), intolerance/authoritarianism (Japanese internment), badgering businesses (National Industrial Recovery Act), press censorship (Sedition Act of 1918). By this standard, Woodrow Wilson or FDR’s America was “fascist.”

3.) Tucker makes it clear that libertarians are for open borders.

4.) Jeffrey Tucker says that right-libertarians are “revealing their true hand.”

5.) Tucklypuff is so “principled” that he was a ghostwriter of the Ron Paul Newsletters.

6.) He is right that lots of people supported Ron Paul who were not ideological libertarians. The Alt-Right generally supported Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012.

7.) Libertarianism is the definition of a negative future. As a disintegrating force, it is defined purely in terms of what it is against. Liberty to do what? To what end?

8.) Libertarianism doesn’t define the good life though. It is purely negative. It creates a void which can be filled by anything. Drugs? Sexual degeneracy? Consumerism? Anything will suffice. In contrast, ethnonationalism is about identifying with your own people. Libertarianism is about love of self. In that sense alone, they do have a positive vision of the future.

9.) The result of anarchy isn’t peace. It is war. See Africa’s failed states.

10.) As I have repeatedly explained, everything Tucklypuff decries as our “tradition” has ample precedent in American history: racialism, nationalism, statism, historicism, protectionism, etc.

11.) We don’t believe in Liberty which isn’t the same thing as liberty. Aristotle was right. Just like any other good, liberty can be taken to extremes and perverted into something undesirable. A society based on Liberty and nothing else isn’t a place where many people want to live.

12.) The Alt-Right doesn’t believe in a society based on Liberty. We want to live in organic communities in which race, ethnicity, culture and religion also have value and provide points of collective solidarity. We believe that kinship and culture should be foundation of the state. Liberty has to have boundaries or else the social order will unravel and we will end up with what we have today.

13.) Ethnonationalists believe kinship should be the basis of the state.

14.) Let’s be clear: a society based on Liberty is one which will lose its racial, ethnic, cultural and religious cohesion over time. It will become a low-trust place where individuals end up alienated from their neighbors who they will have little in common with like contemporary Los Angeles.

15.) Actually, it is points of solidarity like ethnicity and culture that encourage people to get along with each other, not individual freedom. Compare Japan or Iceland to the United States. The latter is hopelessly dysfunctional compared to the former because it has lost a common identity.

16.) We do feel a sense of pride in our race. In fact, we say that Europe would be better off today if it had chosen to remain divided into homogeneous ethnostates. We say that state of affairs is preferable to what we have now which is a result of the open borders favored by libertarians.

17.) We disagree with Tucker on the aesthetic appeal of African-American culture. We would be fine without Jay Z and Beyonce.

18.) The longing for freedom isn’t universal.

19.) Liberty should be downsized to liberty. When liberty is just one good among others and a sense of balance has been restored, it will be fine.

20.) We want to live in homogeneous ethnostates. We don’t want to be overrun by foreigners and have our culture submerged and destroyed. Period.

21.) Jeffrey Tucker identifies as an anarchist/anti-fascist. In other words, he is a left-libertarian.

22.) We don’t believe in liberalism which is a failed ideology.

23.) Murray Rothbard was a leading figure in paleolibertarianism and worked with Pat Buchanan.

24.) If libertarianism is for open borders, it will be defined by that issue.

25.) In the beginning of the interview, Tucker says that right-libertarians have changed. By the end of the interview, he boasts about refocusing libertarianism in its present leftist direction.

26.) Tucker predicts that right-libertarians will return home from the Alt-Right after Trump demonstrates how they will suffer from immigration restriction. Yeah right!

31 Comments

    • I remember some podcast called “The Old Man Show” where he chuckled and wondered why so many Paul fanatics were so surprised that Paul failed to win the retirement state of Florida with his libertarian message of abolishing social security and medicare.

  1. The fact that there are so many Jews in the libertarian pantheon should make anyone suspicious of this ideology to begin with.

  2. Jeffrey “grids” Tucker appears at Catholic music conferences posing as a “catholic” but worships his jew masters Von Mises and Rand, who are, among other things, are two of the most anti-christian people ever seen.

    • He posts articles on a website called New Liturgical Movement which is a great site for traditional Catholics but I certainly question any resemblance between libertarianism and true Catholicism. The Church never approved of religious freedom i.e. whatever you believe is fine nor is the heresy of Americanism approved by the Church either.

      • Unfortunately the Church has been subverted, certainly in the US and apparently in Rome as well. Many Catholics seem to think that liberalism/libertarianism and Catholicism are compatible.

  3. Concurring opinion.

    Individual freedom, liberty, is the product of trust which only seems to happen in a homogeneous area. Move to Detroit or a Little Mexico and see if you can leave your car unlocked. Or locked with anything over $5 in value in view.

    We want to live in organic communities in which race, ethnicity, cultureand religion also have value and provide points of collective
    solidarity.

    I’m willing to let the libertards have their areas to experiment with multiculturalism as long as they aren’t within a one tank trip of where I live and accept it would be a “trespassers will be shot” if they try to invade.

    But that is why they don’t get “Why don’t you just move to Somalia where there isn’t a state?”.

    I will do a slight dissent in that ethno is not sufficient. Ethno-cultural-religious-nationalists is clunky but more accurate. I think I can find a bunch of secular socialists and SJWs of anglo descent and they won’t change into proper Southerners – the South has no more “magic dust” than the country as a whole. Civic nationalists want to discard the ethno part, but if you look at the demographics of who has a culture, religion, etc. to form a free society, they tend to be all white. It isn’t white makes right, but whites happen to be disproportionately right, and it is like trying to find pine trees in a desert or rainforest to ignore race.

    We do feel a sense of pride in our race. This is not vainglory, but because we produced philosophy, science, high art and music. We are not proud because we are white, we are proud because we’ve achieved far more – the pinnacle is Western Civilization. And it is “opensource”. Zimbabwe is free to adopt the US Constitution and English law, Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart (Japan has to some extent), Socrates and Aristotle, and the various Christian churches. As is Venezuela and Cuba and North Korea.

    Murray Rothbard was a leading figure in paleolibertarianism and worked with Pat Buchanan. Rothbard is idolized instead of providing an example. I think Rothbard would have had a very good discussion with Richard Spencer. Instead the left-loosertarians have gone to virtue signalling.

    To a more general comment, I like watching Tom Woods in his cognitive dissonance. He seems to realize the alt-right is right, but can’t quite bring himself to admit it, though he has called for secession. But he also hasn’t abandoned the trite, stupid, strawmen talking points (two recent guests: 1. All statists are Keynesians; 2. A moral code everyone is bound by – but there is no consented-to social contract). Philosophy under the libertarians had corroded and has become self-parody. To the extent that the NAP requires tens of thousands of pages of “scholarly works” to explain the rules – worse than the IRS tax code – yet it is called “liberty”.

    One analogy I use is communists posit a sci-fi planet Marx where all problems of economic calculation and corruption just don’t happen, but isn’t explained. But libertarians posit a planet Rothbard where everyone just obeys the NAP (maybe some mind-control or implant?) and roads get done without eminent domain since it is flat, doesn’t have peninsulas (you can’t ‘build a bridge between the two in Michigan anywhere else) so alternate routes are always possible or just doesn’t come up.

    Stefan Molyneux has gone alt-right. I have. Anarchy might be a possible, if Utopian ideal, but we have to deal with the decadence and invasion and other practical problems and SOLVE them. Only the alt-right is doing so. The left is the enemy, but the cuckservatives and losertarians are perhaps worse as they are saying “peace in our time” when there is no peace.

  4. (Please link to your fora so I can copy my text there so it will persist after the disqusting deplatforming).

    HHHoppe and Walter Block support chattel slavery, as long as it is voluntary. There are opportunities in Africa with phones with an “I Agree” EULA like on an iPhone.

    Walter Block:
    Free association is a very important aspect of liberty. It is crucial.
    Indeed, its lack was the major problem with slavery. The slaves could
    not quit. They were forced to “associate” with their masters when they
    would have vastly preferred not to do so. Otherwise, slavery wasn’t so
    bad. You could pick cotton, sing songs, be fed nice gruel, etc.
    The only
    real problem was that this relationship was compulsory. It violated the
    law of free association, and that of the slaves’ private property
    rights in their own persons. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, then, to a
    much smaller degree of course, made partial slaves of the owners of
    establishments like Woolworths.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/02/walter-e-block/chris-selley-is-a-pussy-libertarian-imnot/

    Also in “defending the indefensible” he lauds prostitutes and drug pushers.

    And they bother about David Duke and Richard Spencer.

  5. 17.) We disagree with Tucker on the aesthetic appeal of African-American culture. We would be fine without Jay Z and Beyonce.

    I didn’t watch the video. Can’t stand looking at that fag Tucker.

    Aesthetic appeal of African-American culture?

    Only appealing to fags, cucks and assorted degenerates.

    • Correction: We would be FAR BETTER OFF without Jay Z and Beyonce.

      Blues and Jazz are one thing. Musical pornography and disgusting behavior are something else. There’s black Gospel, but it won’t win any Grammy, only potty-mouth SJW songs.

    • If you haven’t grown out of African American culture by the time you hit adulthood and stop rebelling against your parents, then there is a fairly good chance that you are trash.

    • The only reason that many Whites find that degenerate African-American culture appealing is that they seek validation for their own desire to discard any moral constraints without shame or guilt since blacks are regarded as primitive and therefore more “authentic” or natural. Blacks themselves see moral constraints as an imposition by Whites and therefore acting like thugs as being true to themselves. This relationship is doing neither race good and we need to go our separate ways. We also need to rid ourselves of the Jews who are encouraging and exploiting it.

  6. Many of FDR’s policies were pretty similar to those of Benito Mussolini, who is often considered to be the father of fascism. So Mr. Tucker has a point there.

  7. Mr Tucker comes from the extreme left-wing element of the libertarian party. For him to deny or put off the right-wing contingent is deceptive at best. I mean, Thom Woods, Thomas Delorenzo and Murray Rothbard himself were all three League of the South members at one time or another.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. LIBERTAS: LIBERTAD IDENTITARIA – Reactio Populusque Disidentem

Comments are closed.