PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Michael S Costello — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:15:20 GMT

Not exactly right on the latter, or at least you seem to imply more than is strictly espoused by the Paleo side of things. Sure, there are white supremacists, and white christian fundamentalists that feel persecuted on that side of things, a distinct and perhaps very vocal minority of a majority might feel that way, I don't know as I haven't met one personally lately.

I think you're magnifying and characterizing the deportation stance of Paleos and perhaps Paul with a bit more animosity than is indeed required to deal with the issue. Border control is a duty of the existing government, lax border controls justify an increased police state presence and invites resentment based on limited resource allocation and perceived cost. Much like other aspects of the overall welfare state.

If you have worker amnesty, you still get a bumped up police state and a bureaucracy for instance, somehow your assertions otherwise ring hollow.

My argument is, stem the flow, and fix the legal immigration process so that it is *not* bureaucratic so that it can allow documented entry and keep a minimal state immigration system present to (again minimally) ensure that infrastructure people pay for is used by the people who pay for it. Not to say that our economy doesn't benefit from illegal immigration, it does, but it sets a bad moral and ethical precedent to have a law you don't enforce. Why not be genuine and honest and work to change the law so that it is fairly applied?

Pro choice, well, hard to say, I definitely don't want my money buying abortions willy-nilly, just as much as I don't want my money buying bombs for interventionist wars or propping up of petty dictators.

I say, make donations to your local planned parenthood to make contraception available to all. Some will still disapprove of this but I wouldn't. Reproductive Choice isn't all about mass tissue removal and the violent destruction of a fetus for the sake of a change of plan or a poorly laid plan for that matter.

On Racism and Nationalism,

I'm white in appearance but not white (entirely) and I have no great love of a nation that slaughtered Indians and enslaved Blacks over it's history, but I do have a great love of certain core principles of Natural Law. Does that make me a racist? I find the concept alien in a way, being of mixed racial background and cultural identity, so I find your Politically Correct moral-ism to be overblown and saccharine. I guess I wouldn't count myself in the Cosmo-Tarian wing, but I wouldn't exactly count myself entirely apart from it either.

I guess the moral of the story is, overall: Don't let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good.

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

jtucker — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:29:20 GMT

I mean to say Libertarians of the Chair. You might think I would know that comments don't accept HTML.

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

jtucker — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 03:24:35 GMT

Right, oh I understand. I also appreciate your points and agree with them. I don't know anyone at the institute who would disagree. I really do think that was is really at issue here is radical antistatism of the LvMI variety vs. a kind of <a href="cepa.newschool.edu/.../historic.htm">Libertarianism of the Chair</a>

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Brainpolice — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:17:47 GMT

Just to clarify for Tucker: I'm not necessarily critisizing the Mises Institute here. Just the claims or implications I've seen made by certain individuals on Lew Rockwell.com, some of whom are associated with the institute. I do think that the Mises Institute is diverse in that its members and associates range from people such as Roderick Long ("left") to Hans Hoppe ("right").

I'm simply not comfortable with some of the more paleoconservative influenced libertarians because I see some potentially negative implications. This isn't to say that some of the more "leftish" ones don't deserve criticisms of their own, but I think libertarians too often turn a blind eye to some of the negative things that sometimes creep through on the "rightish" side of things.

In this little writting, I tried to remain relatively respectful and in some ways even neutral. I do not mean to imply that simply holding culturally conservative views is a deviation from libertarianism in and of itself. But I do mean to imply that ideologically supporting or employing political means in the persuit of such cultural concerns is a deviation.

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

jtucker — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:36:17 GMT

I don't really recognize these sides of the debate. All fantasies aside, the Mises Institute stands for a wide tradition of thought that ranges between classical liberalism of the Bastiat/Jefferson school and radical libertarianism of the Rothbardian variety. The brouhaha of late traces entirely to a beltway variety of pseudo-libertarianism with a gravitational pull toward the state. I really don't think it is any more complicated than that. All the talk about culture and nationalism and etc. etc. is just a distraction.

re: PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

occasionalreader — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:28:14 GMT

I think there's some truth to both sides' assertions. I'm going to have to agree with the paleos that a large number of "cosmo-libertarians" have obvious pro-war and pro-police-state sympathies, even if they don't openly admit it. The reason most of them oppose Ron Paul is because of the things he's good on, not bad on. They also tend to move above and beyond anti-racism, into the realm of PC hysteria.

Likewise, many of the paleos obviously have some sympathies for far-right bigotry, even if they also won't openly say it. They say that they oppose "libertinism." I think nearly everyone opposes "libertinism" in the sense that nobody wants to live in a society based entirely on unbridled hedonism. But for some of the paleos, it seems that simply being a sexual, racial, or religious minority is an act of "libertinism" (it isn't).

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:41:04 GMT

Pingback from Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Ron Paul On The Issues

Ron Paul On The Issues — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:26:28 GMT

Pingback from Ron Paul On The Issues

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:10:13 GMT

Pingback from Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians

Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:05:03 GMT

Pingback from Ron Paul » PaleoConservaNationalistTarians