The Index Card of Allowable Opinion

[acptulsa]

https://mailchi.mp/tomwoods/two-sentences?e=fc95d80121


If you express a thought that's somewhere off the index card of allowable opinion, expect to be demonized.

If over 30 years of writing you've written three sentences that might seem shocking in isolation, expect them to be repeated by your enemies over and over again until you depart this vale of tears.

Evidently the British philosopher Roger Scruton is being hit with this tactic.

(Scruton, whose 40+ books include two on architecture, has been appointed to an unpaid position as chair of a small commission on the design of public housing, and this is why he's under scrutiny.)

The tactic is used two ways:

(1) Indignantly quote the offending sentence with no attempt to demonstrate how it is wrong, as if it's of course obvious that the idea expressed is incorrect and no right-thinking person could hold it.

(2) Take it so out of context as to make it mean something like the opposite of what it really does.

Scruton, it turns out, got a twofer.

Let's take a look at how they've used the second tactic against him.

Scruton gave a speech in Hungary in which he said that a substantial portion of the intelligentsia in that country are Jewish and "form part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire."

Get him! He's an anti-Semite!

Except the rest of the passage reads:

People in these networks include many who are rightly suspicious of nationalism, regard nationalism as the major cause of the tragedy of central Europe in the 20th century, and do not distinguish nationalism from the kind of national loyalty that I have defended in this talk. Moreover, as the world knows, indigenous anti-Semitism still plays a part in Hungarian society and politics and presents an obstacle to the emergence of a shared national loyalty among ethnic Hungarians and Jews.

Thus his point is that Jews there have legitimate reasons to be wary about nationalism, and that anti-Semitism still plays a part in Hungarian society.

They actually tried to use that passage against him.

Well, not the passage. The first sentence without the rest of the passage.

In another phase of the controversy, we learn that "BuzzFeed News has unearthed footage of a lecture he gave in the US in 2005," in which Scruton made reference to the phenomenon of "date rape."

By "unearthed," they mean they went to YouTube and watched a lecture that had been sitting there for over five years. (Crack investigators, these.)

Scruton has written an entire book called Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation, but he is to be judged by a ludicrously decontextualized sentence or two.

Then, out of millions of sentences written throughout a distinguished career, this sentence is used against him: "If you express outrage at crimes committed by Muslims against women, and hint that Islam might have something to do with it, you will be accused of 'Islamophobia.'"

Whatever the truth of the matter there, we can't even be permitted to discuss it? And someone is to be demonized even for pointing out that people are under intense pressure never to raise it?

This kind of hysteria could hardly have come as a surprise to him. "Once identified as right-wing you are beyond the pale of argument," Scruton wrote. "Your views are irrelevant, your character discredited, your presence in the world a mistake. You are not an opponent to be argued with, but a disease to be shunned. This has been my experience."

As Douglas Murray puts it, "It appears that Scruton’s detractors will continue to mine the columns Scruton has secretly published in all the national papers in order to expose his wrong-think. They will continue to ‘unearth’ his public lectures. And they will continue to pretend that none of the complex things in life – including the complexity of human relations – should ever be opened up or explored by anyone."

If anyone thinks only SJWs use these tactics, they should look around this very forum. All the Partisan Divide and Conquer trolls do these things.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Roger Scruton is a real powerhouse of a thinker. The best, most thorough example of a British conservative, even over Peter Hitchens, I would say.

[dannno]

LOL, ya right.. Supporting Trump is not on the index card of allowable opinions in our society. If you can't see that, you are blind.

[acptulsa]

LOL, ya right.. Supporting Trump is not on the index card of allowable opinions in our society. If you can't see that, you are blind.

There are two index cards of allowable opinion. Without that the illusion of freedom is lost.

Say something that gets both trumpsters and SJWs screeching the same denials at you, and you just might be on to something good.

[dannno]

There are two index cards of allowable opinion. Without that the illusion of freedom is lost.

Say something that gets both trumpsters and SJWs screeching the same denials at you, and you just might be on to something good.

I.e.?

[PierzStyx]

LOL, ya right.. Supporting Trump is not on the index card of allowable opinions in our society. If you can't see that, you are blind.

Which must be why he won the Presidency and got over 60 million votes.

You Progressives are oh-so quick to play the victim card.

[dannno]

Which must be why he won the Presidency and got over 60 million votes.

You Progressives are oh-so quick to play the victim card.

Trump supporters "playing the victim card" is like somebody who was beaten to death with a sledgehammer playing the victim card.

Again, if you can't see it, you are blind or you are being purposefully obtuse.

[Origanalist]

Trump supporters "playing the victim card" is like somebody who was beaten to death with a sledgehammer playing the victim card.

Again, if you can't see it, you are blind or you are being purposefully obtuse.

We're all victims now.

[acptulsa]

Which must be why he won the Presidency and got over 60 million votes.

You Progressives are oh-so quick to play the victim card.

Everybody gets to be a victim. And the fact that everybody's a victim permits everybody to victimize people.

[Ender]

I.e.?

Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

Develop free enterprise, stop the WoD, let people cross the border legally & let businesses hire whomever they wish.

[dannno]

Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

Develop free enterprise, stop the WoD,

All wrong, complete bullshit. That was why I asked, because i knew I was going to get bullshit answers like this.



let people cross the border legally & let businesses hire whomever they wish.

If you put the word "some" between "let" and "people" most would have no issue with that either.. but the question was statements that piss off both sides, and open immigration wouldn't piss off the SJWs so that is wrong too.

[dannno]

We're all victims now.

Trump and his supporters get completely flogged by the MSM, hollywood, anything mainstream, left or NPC like on a daily basis. It's been going on for almost 3 years, I've never seen anything close to this in my entire life.

You can pretend we are hallucinating, but that just makes you look dishonest.

[dannno]

Say something that gets both trumpsters and SJWs screeching the same denials at you, and you just might be on to something good.

Since Ender made a complete fail at trying to name like a half dozen different things, can we narrow it down to one? Just ONE thing that pisses off pretty much all Trump supporters and pretty much all SJWs, what is your best example?

If somebody can think of something creative, I will applaud them.. but pretty sure you are going to come up with jack squat.

[Ender]

All wrong, complete bull$#@!. That was why I asked, because i knew I was going to get bull$#@! answers like this.




If you put the word "some" between "let" and "people" most would have no issue with that either.. but the question was statements that piss off both sides, and open immigration wouldn't piss off the SJWs so that is wrong too.

Bravo!

You just proved the whole point of the OP.

[dannno]

Bravo!

You just proved the whole point of the OP.

No I didn't, all I did was point out that you posted bullshit answers.

If you have a good example of something that pisses off pretty much all Trump supporters and pretty much all SJWs, provide one. So far you haven't.

[Ender]

No I didn't, all I did was point out that you posted bull$#@! answers.

If you have a good example of something that pisses off pretty much all Trump supporters and pretty much all SJWs, provide one. So far you haven't.

From the OP:

(1) Indignantly quote the offending sentence with no attempt to demonstrate how it is wrong, as if it's of course obvious that the idea expressed is incorrect and no right-thinking person could hold it.

That, dear sir, is YOU.

[dannno]

From the OP:


That, dear sir, is YOU.

Every Trump supporter on this site agrees with:


Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

So the idea that these statements would be offensive to Trump supporters, is, like I said, complete horse shit.

There, I demonstrated why you are wrong.

Feel free to come up with something that fits tulsa's model, so far you have nothing.

[A Son of Liberty]

Every Trump supporter on this site agrees with:


Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

So the idea that these statements would be offensive to Trump supporters, is, like I said, complete horse $#@!.

There, I demonstrated why you are wrong.

Feel free to come up with something that fits tulsa's model, so far you have nothing.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt as a "Trump supporter" that you oppose those things, it seems rather clear that Trump himself does NOT oppose those things... literally NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

So, either you and the rest of the "Trump supporters" are fucking idiots, or... well... never mind that 'or'. There is no 'or'. You're a fucking idiot.

[timosman]

Giving you the benefit of the doubt as a "Trump supporter" that you oppose those things, it seems rather clear that Trump himself does NOT oppose those things... literally NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

So, either you and the rest of the "Trump supporters" are fucking idiots, or... well... never mind that 'or'. There is no 'or'. You're a fucking idiot.

Projection is a powerful tool in the hands of a demagogue but you are overdoing it. :D

[A Son of Liberty]

Projection is a powerful tool in the hands of a demagogue but you are overdoing it. :D

Gonna go out on a limb here and ask you to actually respond to the merits of the post...

[CCTelander]

Gonna go out on a limb here and ask you to actually respond to the merits of the post...


Don't hold your breath waiting.

[Ender]

All wrong, complete bull$#@!. That was why I asked, because i knew I was going to get bull$#@! answers like this.




If you put the word "some" between "let" and "people" most would have no issue with that either.. but the question was statements that piss off both sides, and open immigration wouldn't piss off the SJWs so that is wrong too.

LOL

I wrote 2 sentences that support my POV. The 1st one was sure to offend any SJW and the second to offend Trumpers.

Thanking you again for proving exactly what the OP said.

[dannno]

Giving you the benefit of the doubt as a "Trump supporter" that you oppose those things, it seems rather clear that Trump himself does NOT oppose those things... literally NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

So, either you and the rest of the "Trump supporters" are fucking idiots, or... well... never mind that 'or'. There is no 'or'. You're a fucking idiot.

Do I have to agree with Trump that ketchup tastes good with steak, or else I can't support him?

Sorry if I have a STRONG PREFERENCE for somebody I disagree with on a host of issues, who wants the best for us, compared to somebody who I disagree with on EVERYTHING, and would sell out the country for a Popsicle.. can't believe I have to apologize for something like that. Does that seem like a reasonable thing to have to apologize for to you?

[dannno]

LOL

I wrote 2 sentences that support my POV. The 1st one was sure to offend any SJW and the second to offend Trumpers.

Thanking you again for proving exactly what the OP said.

Um, ya, that isn't how it works. Tulsa said there are statements that piss off both Trump supporters and SJWs that are outside the index card of allowable opinion. That doesn't mean you get to make two separate statements, one that pisses off each group separately. That is a fail.

So go ahead.. let's see a single statement, on a single issue, that pisses off both Trump supporters on this site (since that is what we have to work with) and SJWs.

Still nothing..

[Swordsmyth]

LOL

I wrote 2 sentences that support my POV. The 1st one was sure to offend any SJW and the second to offend Trumpers.

Thanking you again for proving exactly what the OP said.

:rolleyes:

Not only does that not qualify as what the OP said but if it did it would make the OP meaningless, all you have proven is that there are more than two sides in the game.

The OP wrongly wishes to prove a connection between all other sides than his own so that his side can claim to be that holiest of all beings, the victim.

[Ender]

Um, ya, that isn't how it works. Tulsa said there are statements that piss off both Trump supporters and SJWs that are outside the index card of allowable opinion. That doesn't mean you get to make two separate statements, one that pisses off each group separately. That is a fail.

So go ahead.. let's see a single statement, on a single issue, that pisses off both Trump supporters on this site (since that is what we have to work with) and SJWs.

Still nothing..

That WAS/IS a single issue: Get .gov out of our lives.

I wrote in 2 sentences to show the irony and to help some better understand, but I guess I was reaching for a higher plain than Trumpies can comprehend.

[Ender]

:rolleyes:

Not only does that not qualify as what the OP said but if it did it would make the OP meaningless, all you have proven is that there are more than two sides in the game.

The OP wrongly wishes to prove a connection between all other sides than his own so that his side can claim to be that holiest of all beings, the victim.

Wrong on all points and the OP describes exactly how YOU operate.

[Swordsmyth]

That WAS/IS a single issue: Get .gov out of our lives.

I wrote in 2 sentences to show the irony and to help some better understand, but I guess I was reaching for a higher plain than Trumpies can comprehend.
So your big point is that anyone who isn't an anarchist disagrees with anarchy?

What else is new?

[Swordsmyth]

Wrong on all points and the OP describes exactly how YOU operate.
LOL, I am chock full of non-standard opinions.

[dannno]

That WAS/IS a single issue: Get .gov out of our lives.

I wrote in 2 sentences to show the irony and to help some better understand, but I guess I was reaching for a higher plain than Trumpies can comprehend.

There are A LOT of Trump supporters who want the government out of their life.

Next.

[acptulsa]

Since Ender made a complete fail at trying to name like a half dozen different things, can we narrow it down to one? Just ONE thing that pisses off pretty much all Trump supporters and pretty much all SJWs, what is your best example?

If somebody can think of something creative, I will applaud them.. but pretty sure you are going to come up with jack squat.

Of course, no matter what anyone says, you'll point to a teeny, tiny minority on one side or the other that doesn't hold the opinion, but...

End Medicare.

End the Fed.

Peace.

Create no law that shows any favoritism to any racial group or either gender.

[PierzStyx]

Trump supporters "playing the victim card" is like somebody who was beaten to death with a sledgehammer playing the victim card.

Again, if you can't see it, you are blind or you are being purposefully obtuse.

Trump Supporters: "WAAAAAA! The Scary Mexicans are only 50% Caucasian on average! WAAAAAAAA! Mexicans are willing to work for more realistic wages WAAAAAAAAAAA! Mexicans aren't the right kind of Christians! WAAAAAAAA! The very existence of Mexicans threatens Muh White Culture! WAAAAAAA! If the government doesn't beat, cage, or kill these people they might actually succeed in living slightly differently than I do! WAAAAAAA! The Evil Liberal Media does nothing but lie and say mean things about Muh President Trump! WAAAAAAAAA!"

I could go on. You Trump supporters are nothing but crybaby, whiners playing the Victim in order to justify using the police state to beat, cage, and kill innocent people. Like all Progressives, your whining and basic lack of manhood is pathetic and ridiculous. And you're accurately aware of this, which is why so many of you call others cucks. You're hoping if you accuse others of being weak and pathetic no one will recognize just how weak and pathetic your are. You want to be victims without admitting it so you don't have to face how pathetic you really are.

[PierzStyx]

Trump and his supporters get completely flogged by the MSM, hollywood, anything mainstream, left or NPC like on a daily basis. It's been going on for almost 3 years, I've never seen anything close to this in my entire life.

You can pretend we are hallucinating, but that just makes you look dishonest.

Oooooh how terrible. Someone on the TV said something mean about Cheeto Mussolini!

Look at you, playing the victim and talking about how mean society is to you.

The irony is delicious. And sad.

[PierzStyx]

Since Ender made a complete fail at trying to name like a half dozen different things, can we narrow it down to one? Just ONE thing that pisses off pretty much all Trump supporters and pretty much all SJWs, what is your best example?

If somebody can think of something creative, I will applaud them.. but pretty sure you are going to come up with jack squat.

Trump Supporters are SJW. You want to create "social justice" for "muh nation," or "muh, people," or "muh culture." Just another branch of cultural Marxism- in this case White Cultural Marxism. Pathetic identity politics.

[PierzStyx]

Everybody gets to be a victim. And the fact that everybody's a victim permits everybody to victimize people.

http://i.imgur.com/lwydpF9.png

[Anti Federalist]

Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

Develop free enterprise, stop the WoD, let people cross the border legally & let businesses hire whomever they wish.

Which, in today's environment, is racist, sexist, cis-normative, white male meritocracy, Nazi bullshit.

Always keep in mind, Trump learned his racism from Ron Paul.

Where did Donald Trump get his racialized rhetoric? From libertarians.
The intersection of white nationalism, the alt-right and Ron Paul (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/02/where-did-donald-trump-get-his-racialized-rhetoric-from-libertarians/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.48422d17fef8)

So, with that in mind, I'm utterly open to suggestions on how to "sell" everything you mentioned, and more, to an idiot mob of AmeriKunts who think you are a racist for even trying.

[Swordsmyth]

Trump Supporters: "WAAAAAA! The Scary Mexicans are only 50% Caucasian on average! WAAAAAAAA! Mexicans are willing to work for more realistic wages WAAAAAAAAAAA! Mexicans aren't the right kind of Christians! WAAAAAAAA! The very existence of Mexicans threatens Muh White Culture! WAAAAAAA! If the government doesn't beat, cage, or kill these people they might actually succeed in living slightly differently than I do! WAAAAAAA! The Evil Liberal Media does nothing but lie and say mean things about Muh President Trump! WAAAAAAAAA!"

I could go on. You Trump supporters are nothing but crybaby, whiners playing the Victim in order to justify using the police state to beat, cage, and kill innocent people. Like all Progressives, your whining and basic lack of manhood is pathetic and ridiculous. And you're accurately aware of this, which is why so many of you call others cucks. You're hoping if you accuse others of being weak and pathetic no one will recognize just how weak and pathetic your are. You want to be victims without admitting it so you don't have to face how pathetic you really are.


Oooooh how terrible. Someone on the TV said something mean about Cheeto Mussolini!

Look at you, playing the victim and talking about how mean society is to you.

The irony is delicious. And sad.


Trump Supporters are SJW. You want to create "social justice" for "muh nation," or "muh, people," or "muh culture." Just another branch of cultural Marxism- in this case White Cultural Marxism. Pathetic identity politics.


http://i.imgur.com/lwydpF9.png

LOL is the only response your pathetic lies and propaganda deserve.

[A Son of Liberty]

Do I have to agree with Trump that ketchup tastes good with steak, or else I can't support him?

Sorry if I have a STRONG PREFERENCE for somebody I disagree with on a host of issues, who wants the best for us, compared to somebody who I disagree with on EVERYTHING, and would sell out the country for a Popsicle.. can't believe I have to apologize for something like that. Does that seem like a reasonable thing to have to apologize for to you?

For "disagreeing with someone on a host of issues", you sure do go to bat for him a lot... not to mention coming up with creative ways to re-interpret clearly shitty positions as some kind of "strategy".

For me, I have marginal alignment on 2 issues: he cut taxes and he hasn't invaded a new country [yet]. Of course, in the case of the latter, the previous several presidents didn't leave him with a lot to work with, so...

Beyond that, I got nothing, and I wouldn't expect too many folks around here to have much more. Yet we have folks here at RPF treating this like a Paul presidency.

Oh by the way, we all noticed no reaction to the fact that your boy doesn't oppose any of the following fairly important issues to so-called liberty-minded folks:


Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

How about that?

[acptulsa]

If somebody can think of something creative, I will applaud them...

Of course you will. Dannno and the Trump Brigade are well known for being real good sports.

[A Son of Liberty]

Stop entitlements, get gov out of the welfare system, education, medicine, business, and the WoT.

Develop free enterprise, stop the WoD, let people cross the border legally & let businesses hire whomever they wish.

Which, in today's environment, is racist, sexist, cis-normative, white male meritocracy, Nazi bull$#@!.

Always keep in mind, Trump learned his racism from Ron Paul.

Where did Donald Trump get his racialized rhetoric? From libertarians.
The intersection of white nationalism, the alt-right and Ron Paul (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/02/where-did-donald-trump-get-his-racialized-rhetoric-from-libertarians/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.48422d17fef8)

How can you credibly argue that the rational liberty-oriented response to this admitted reality is to embrace the guy who legitimately stands on the wrong side of each of those issues?

There's no question that the pop-culture - and therefore perceived popular opinion - aligns with what you've laid out above, and that is INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATING as a libertarian. But that is also a reality that Ron dealt with most of his political career; yet he managed to stick to his PRINCIPLES.

It seems like there's more than a small faction here who are willing to chuck those same principles onto the bonfire out of that frustration and align themselves on a lot of core issues with someone who clearly does not get it... and what's more, that faction is going to do real, tangible damage to the liberty movement by doing so.


So, with that in mind, I'm utterly open to suggestions on how to "sell" everything you mentioned, and more, to an idiot mob of AmeriKunts who think you are a racist for even trying.

Couldn't necessarily say just right now, but I can tell you that one way to for sure NOT sell it is to tie it to someone who literally stands on the wrong side of every one of those issues.

[timosman]

Couldn't necessarily say just right now, but I can tell you that one way to for sure NOT sell it is to tie it to someone who literally stands on the wrong side of every one of those issues.

This is really insightful. Now, why don't you GTFO? :cool:

[A Son of Liberty]

This is really insightful. Now, why don't you GTFO? :cool:

23,933 posts and not a single meaningful contribution... Congrats. That's it's own kind of talent. I'll ask management to put together a participation trophy for you, sweetheart.

[kahless]

LOL at the OP trying to cover his tracks by starting this thread.

[A Son of Liberty]

How can you credibly argue that the rational liberty-oriented response to this admitted reality is to embrace the guy who legitimately stands on the wrong side of each of those issues?

There's no question that the pop-culture - and therefore perceived popular opinion - aligns with what you've laid out above, and that is INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATING as a libertarian. But that is also a reality that Ron dealt with most of his political career; yet he managed to stick to his PRINCIPLES.

It seems like there's more than a small faction here who are willing to chuck those same principles onto the bonfire out of that frustration and align themselves on a lot of core issues with someone who clearly does not get it... and what's more, that faction is going to do real, tangible damage to the liberty movement by doing so.



Couldn't necessarily say just right now, but I can tell you that one way to for sure NOT sell it is to tie it to someone who literally stands on the wrong side of every one of those issues.

Just going to repost this to block Tim from his objective of preventing these relevant questions from being addressed...

The Trump-trolls here are REALLY something, aren't they...

[acptulsa]

LOL at the OP trying to cover his tracks by starting this thread.

And here's the same tactic used by the other side. Just replace "right" with "left" and "identified" with "misidentified" and there you have it.


This kind of hysteria could hardly have come as a surprise to him. "Once identified as right-wing you are beyond the pale of argument," Scruton wrote. "Your views are irrelevant, your character discredited, your presence in the world a mistake. You are not an opponent to be argued with, but a disease to be shunned. This has been my experience."

Those who have brains and principles to debate with do so. Everyone else...

[CCTelander]

This is really insightful. Now, why don't you GTFO? :cool:


Timmy, don't you have a well somewhere to go fall down so that Lassie can lead rescuers to you and save the day? You know, put your time to some productive use? Just askin is all.

[Danke]

Which, in today's environment, is racist, sexist, cis-normative, white male meritocracy, Nazi bullshit.

Always keep in mind, Trump learned his racism from Ron Paul.

Where did Donald Trump get his racialized rhetoric? From libertarians.
The intersection of white nationalism, the alt-right and Ron Paul (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/02/where-did-donald-trump-get-his-racialized-rhetoric-from-libertarians/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.48422d17fef8)



By Zippy Juan & Matthew Sheffield
September 2, 2016

Hillary Clinton and her campaign have been going out of their way to make a surprising argument about Donald Trump: He’s not really a Republican.
At the Democratic convention, several speakers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-democratic-conventions-surprising-message-trump-is-not-a-real-republican/2016/08/01/b981d3ca-5822-11e6-831d-0324760ca856_story.html?utm_term=.fbc9148ec27e)sai d Trump represented a complete break from the conservative traditions of the GOP. Last month, Clinton delivered a similar message (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/25/hillary-clintons-alt-right-speech-annotated/)in a speech linking Trump to the white-nationalist political movement known as the “alt-right.” “This is not conservatism as we have known it,” she asserted.

According to Clinton — and many (http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/284908-george-will-leaves-gop-this-is-not-my-party)conservative intellectuals (http://bold.global/carrie-sheffield/2016/08/29/bill-kristol-looks-past-general-election/)who oppose (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/frank-rich-trump-didnt-hijack-gop.html)Trump — the conspiratorial, winking-at-racists campaign he has been running represents a novel departure from Republican politics.


Here's what you need to know about the alt-right movement.(Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)


That’s not quite true, though. Trump’s style and positions — endorsing and consorting with 9/11 truthers (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/donald-trump-tells-alex-jones-your-reputation-amazing), promoting online racists (http://fortune.com/donald-trump-white-supremacist-genocide/), using fake statistics (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/11/22/trump-retweeted-a-very-wrong-set-of-numbers-on-race-and-murder/)— draw on a now-obscure political strategy called “paleolibertarianism,” which was once quite popular among some Republicans, especially former presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Formally, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) may be his father’s political heir. But there’s no question that the paranoid and semi-racialist mien frequently favored by Trump originates in the fevered swamps that the elder Paul dwelled in for decades. Most people who back Trump don’t do so for racist reasons, but it’s incredible how many of the same white nationalists and conspiracy theorists to whom Ron Paul once catered are now ardent Trump supporters. It’s because Trump and Paul speak the same language.

Mainstream libertarians have been agonizing over this legacy among themselves for some time, hoping (http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/how-did-we-get-here-or-why-do-20-year-old-newsletters-matter-so-damn-much/)that either the elder or younger Paul would definitively denounce the movement’s racialist past, but no such speech has ever come. Instead, the paleolibertarian strategy concocted decades ago as a way to push for minimal government threatens to replace right-wing libertarianism with white nationalism.
* * *
The figure whose ideas unify Pauline libertarians and today’s Trumpists is the late Murray Rothbard, an economist who co-founded the Cato Institute and is widely regarded as the creator of libertarianism.

Nowadays, many libertarians like to portray their ideology as one that somehow transcends the left-right divide, but to Rothbard, this was nonsense. Libertarianism, he argued, was nothing more than a restatement of the beliefs of the “Old Right,” which resolutely opposed the New Deal and any sort of foreign intervention in the early 20th century. Many of its adherents, such as essayist H.L. Mencken (http://articles.latimes.com/1989-12-05/news/mn-198_1_h-l-mencken), espoused racist viewpoints, as well.
As moderate Republicans such as Dwight Eisenhower and “New Right” Christian conservatives such as William F. Buckley became more influential within the Republican Party in the 1950s and ’60s, the future creators of libertarianism gravitated instead toward the work of secular anti-communist thinkers such as economist Ludwig von Mises and novelist Ayn Rand.

[Here’s what demagogues like Trump do to their countries when they take power (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/29/heres-what-demagogues-like-trump-do-to-their-countries-when-they-take-power/?utm_term=.73f4fc42c729)]
There had always been some sympathy for racism and anti-Semitism among libertarians — the movement’s house magazine, Reason, dedicated an entire issue in 1976 (https://pando.com/2014/07/24/as-reasons-editor-defends-its-racist-history-heres-a-copy-of-its-holocaust-denial-special-issue/)to “historical revisionism,” including Holocaust revisionism. It also repeatedly ran articles in defense (https://pando.com/2014/07/18/homophobia-racism-and-the-kochs-san-franciscos-tech-libertarian-reboot-conference-is-a-cesspool/)of South Africa’s then-segregationist government (though by 2016, the magazine was running articles like “Donald Trump Enables Racism (http://reason.com/archives/2016/03/16/donald-trump-enables-racism)”). But it was Rothbard’s founding of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in 1982 that enabled the fledgling political movement to establish affinity with the neo-Confederate Lost Cause movement.

Almost immediately after its creation, the Mises Institute (headquartered in Auburn, Ala.) began publishing criticism (https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/05/laurence-m-vance/segregation-always-wrong/)of “compulsory integration (https://mises.org/files/new-liberty-libertarian-manifestopdf-0/download?token=NBX0CiK4),” attacks on Abraham Lincoln (https://www.amazon.com/Lincoln-Unmasked-Youre-Supposed-Dishonest/dp/0307338428)and apologia for Confederate leaders (https://www.jstor.org/stable/30031836). Institute scholars have also spoken to racist groups such as the League of the South (https://archive.is/sX0pr). Rothbard even published a chapter in his book “The Ethics of Liberty (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0814775594?ie=UTF8&tag=thewaspos09-20&camp=1789&linkCode=xm2&creativeASIN=0814775594)” in which he said that “the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children,” although he didn’t specify the races of the children who might be sold.

These and many other controversial views advocated by Mises writers make sense from a fanatical libertarian viewpoint. But they also originate in a political calculation Rothbard revealed in a 1992 essay (http://www.unz.org/Pub/RothbardRockwellReport-1992jan-00005)lamenting the defeat of Republican white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke in the 1991 Louisiana governor’s race by a bipartisan coalition.

Expanding on themes raised two years earlier (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1eTC9ka3dzzQ0p5MzNMazNBOFk/view)by his longtime partner and friend Llewellyn “Lew” Rockwell, an editor and fundraiser for libertarian causes, Rothbard argued that Duke’s candidacy was vitally important because it made clear that the “old America” had been overthrown by “an updated, twentieth-century coalition of Throne and Altar” and its “State Church” of government officials, journalists and social scientists.

Besides commending Duke as an exemplar of the kind of candidate he was looking to support, Rothbard also invoked the “exciting” former senator Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin — not because of his economic views but because he was a brash populist prone to doing erratic things. Rothbard’s description of McCarthy seems eerily similar to the campaign that Trump has been running:

“The fascinating, the exciting, thing about Joe McCarthy was precisely his ‘means’ — his right-wing populism: his willingness and ability to reach out, to short-circuit the power elite: liberals, centrists, the media, the intellectuals, the Pentagon, Rockefeller Republicans, and reach out and whip up the masses directly. . . . With Joe McCarthy there was a sense of dynamism, of fearlessness, and of open-endedness, as if, whom would he subpoena next?”

To solve the problem that few Americans are interested in small government (https://praxis.ink/2016/01/donald-trump-and-the-anti-libertarian-moment/), Rothbard argued that libertarians needed to align themselves with people they might not like much in order to expand their numbers. “Outreach to the Rednecks” was needed to make common cause with far-right Christian conservatives who hated the federal government, disliked drugs and wanted to crack down on crime.

All of these paleolibertarian positions were offered in Duke’s 1990 Senate campaign and 1991 gubernatorial campaign. But they were also offered by another politician Rothbard admired: Ron Paul, the Libertarian Party’s presidential candidate in 1988.

Rothbard and Paul had known and worked with each other in the 1970s, when they came to know Rockwell. Rockwell would work closely with both men, serving as Paul’s congressional chief of staff until he left to found the Mises Institute with Rothbard.

Rockwell also was the editor of a series of printed newsletters for both men in the ensuing decades. Paul’s publications became famous during his Republican presidential campaigns. Their controversial nature is no surprise, given that Paul had coyly endorsed the paleolibertarian strategyshortly after it was devised (http://reason.com/blog/2011/12/29/ron-pauls-march-1990-reaction-to-the-pal).

Sold under various titles, the highly lucrative newsletters frequently stoked racial fears (https://newrepublic.com/article/98883/ron-paul-incendiary-newsletters-exclusive), similar to what Trump has been doing this year, though they went further — one even gave advice on using an unregistered gun to shoot “urban youth.” Another issue mocked black Americans by proposing alternative names for New York City such as “Zooville” and “Rapetown,” while urging black political demonstrators to hold their protests “at a food stamp bureau or a crack house.”

[Trump sees black America as a dystopian hellhole. So do most white people. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/26/trump-sees-black-america-as-a-dystopian-hellhole-so-do-most-white-people/?utm_term=.8bc214a1cd4a)]
The publications also repeatedly promoted the work of Jared Taylor (http://web.archive.org/web/20080118105110/http:/www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=54586159-12be-442c-810d-020982d8becb), a white nationalist writer and editor who is today one of Trump’s most prominent alt-right backers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/racial-realists-are-cheered-by-trumps-latest-strategy/2016/08/20/cd71e858-6636-11e6-96c0-37533479f3f5_story.html). Articles also featured anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and frequent rants against gay men.

Paul later said he didn’t write the newsletters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/ron-paul-and-the-racist-newsletters-fact-checker-biography/2011/12/21/gIQAKNiwBP_blog.html). But regardless of their authorship, the image they created made him attractive to white nationalists. Those supporters weren’t numerous enough to get Paul the GOP presidential nomination, however, and paleolibertarianism began fizzling out.

In the past few years, however, it’s been reborn as the alt-right, as a new generation of libertarians discovered their hidden heritage and began embracing racism and conspiracy theories. Many alt-right writers (https://archive.is/8xhXQ)trace their roots to Rothbard. As one of them, Gregory Hood, put it, paleolibertarian theories about race and democracy “helped lead to the emergence [of the] Alternative Right (https://archive.is/xtuxw).” Rothbard’s call for “sovereign nations based on race and ethnicity (https://archive.is/VIhdj)” is very similar to beliefs Trump’s alt-right supporters express today.

In 2016, many, if not most, of the extremists who formerly supported Paul have rallied to Trump’s side. In 2007, Paul won an endorsement and a $500 campaign contribution from Don Black (http://ronpaulsupporters.com/white-power-groups/), the owner of Stormfront, a self-described “white pride” Web forum. Despite a torrent of criticism, Paul refused to return the money (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/22331091/ns/politics-decision_08/t/paul-keeps-donation-white-supremacist/#.TvsxyyNWoqQ). This March, Black encouraged his radio listeners to vote for Trump (https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/stormfront-founder-urged-listeners-to-vote-for-trump), even if he wasn’t perfect.

Memphis-based white nationalist radio host James Edwards supported Paul and likewise backs Trump. His reputation didn’t dissuade either candidate from associating with him. In July, Edwards attended the Republican National Convention on a press pass (https://archive.is/ktxqy)even after the Trump operation was subjected to embarrasing media coverage (http://gawker.com/donald-trump-jr-says-he-didnt-know-white-supremacist-r-1762515723)for allowing Edwards to interview Donald Trump Jr. For his part, Paul agreed to appear (http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/ron-paul-and-the-political-cesspool-radio-program/)on Edwards’s program in 2006 but canceled at the last minute.
[The alt-right just took over the GOP (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/18/the-breitbart-alt-right-just-took-over-the-gop/?utm_term=.7a07e5cdcf87)]

Duke, who is again running for Senate, has also repeatedly expressed his admiration (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0830/Trump-denounces-robocalls-from-David-Duke-s-campaign-Why-now)of both men. While Trump has mostly disavowed Duke, Paul said in one of his newsletters that Duke’s political views were “just plain good sense, (https://web.archive.org/web/20090205102727/http:/www.tnr.com/downloads/November1990.pdf)” despite the “baggage” of his former Klan involvement.
After Rand Paul came to the Senate in 2011, and as he eventually began planning his own presidential campaign, there was some speculation that conservatives might be entering a “libertarian moment.” Things didn’t turn out that way. Instead, the American right seems to have entered a paleolibertarian moment.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly described Reason’s 1976 special issue on revisionism and its coverage of apartheid South Africa. The February 1976 (https://www.scribd.com/doc/234990104/Reason-February-1976)issue included an article that discussed Holocaust revisionism, but it was not entirely dedicated to the subject. Also, while the magazine did run several articles defending apartheid, it did not editorialize in favor of the system.

[Danke]

Trump Supporters: "WAAAAAA! The Scary Mexicans are only 50% Caucasian on average! WAAAAAAAA! Mexicans are willing to work for more realistic wages WAAAAAAAAAAA! Mexicans aren't the right kind of Christians! WAAAAAAAA! The very existence of Mexicans threatens Muh White Culture! WAAAAAAA! If the government doesn't beat, cage, or kill these people they might actually succeed in living slightly differently than I do! WAAAAAAA! The Evil Liberal Media does nothing but lie and say mean things about Muh President Trump! WAAAAAAAAA!"

I could go on. You Trump supporters are nothing but crybaby, whiners playing the Victim in order to justify using the police state to beat, cage, and kill innocent people. Like all Progressives, your whining and basic lack of manhood is pathetic and ridiculous. And you're accurately aware of this, which is why so many of you call others cucks. You're hoping if you accuse others of being weak and pathetic no one will recognize just how weak and pathetic your are. You want to be victims without admitting it so you don't have to face how pathetic you really are.


Wow. There is medication for this. Or are you off that?

[timosman]

Timmy, don't you have a well somewhere to go fall down so that Lassie can lead rescuers to you and save the day? You know, put your time to some productive use? Just askin is all.

Please send my apologies to the team. I didn't mean to trigger anybody. :cool:

[Anti Federalist]

Couldn't necessarily say just right now, but I can tell you that one way to for sure NOT sell it is to tie it to someone who literally stands on the wrong side of every one of those issues.

Right, so, with that in mind, I have little choice but to make lemonade here.

Trump has rolled back regulations that have had a direct impact on increasing my bottom line and hasn't made a move to confiscate my guns in spite of bluster to the contrary.

So, gold stars for him.

The leaders of the New Bolsheviks in Congress are pushing a plan that will bankrupt me in ten years, and are actively seeking repeal of the Second Amendment.

Look, you can call it whatever you want, selling out or what have you...I don't have any more answers, and neither do you.

All I know is I am NOT going to align myself with the New Bolsheviks and Latter Day Jacobins that want to erase me and my posterity from the future of this nation.

Nor am I going to look the other and pretend what's happening is not happening.

If that makes me an idiot partisan or what have you, well, so be it I suppose...no atheists in foxholes and all that.

[CCTelander]

23,933 posts and not a single meaningful contribution... Congrats. That's it's own kind of talent. I'll ask management to put together a participation trophy for you, sweetheart.


I think Timmy prides himself on this kind of thing. It takes work to make sure every post is basically valueless.

[Anti Federalist]

Yet we have folks here at RPF treating this like a Paul presidency

Make no mistake, that is not what I am trying to pull off here.

All I am doing is acknowledging that Trump has done some positive things, and that he is demonstrably better than what the opposition would have had us dealing with.

But he is no Ron Paul and I never made the case that he was anything close to that, in demeanor, personal habits, statecraft, or in grasp of history, economics and politics, Ron stands head and shoulders above him.

[A Son of Liberty]

First of all, the rest of my post says 'hello'...

Second...


Right, so, with that in mind, I have little choice but to make lemonade here.

Trump has rolled back regulations that have had a direct impact on increasing my bottom line and hasn't made a move to confiscate my guns in spite of bluster to the contrary.

So, gold stars for him.

Yeah, great. I'm glad for those things, too. As I said earlier (ITT or another, who can keep up? I mean besides lil' Timmy and his Big Brother Swordsmyth, who seem to have countless hours to spend here pimping the 2nd coming of Cool Cal erm Donald "late term abortions/single payer" Trump... but I digress...) I'm pleased with the tax cuts and the so-far lack of new foreign military adventures.

That doesn't mean I'm here at RPF's to peddle an AT BEST nationalist-socialist (to be differentiated from a National Socialist, for sure) merely because I'm pleased with a couple of the crumbs that fell from his table.


The leaders of the New Bolsheviks in Congress are pushing a plan that will bankrupt me in ten years, and are actively seeking repeal of the Second Amendment.

Look, you can call it whatever you want, selling out or what have you...I don't have any more answers, and neither do you.

No, I do... I said that I couldn't necessarily say just right now... doesn't mean I couldn't say... We can continue to work from the example that Ron gave us... that he continues to give us. Yeah, I generally agree with you that Freedom ISN'T popular, but it's fucking chicken-shit to abandon it altogether and throw in with the like of a Trump.

Fuck man, there were some pro-liberty positions each of the presidents in our lifetime have taken, yet we weren't taken in like some around here have been by the current pimp.


All I know is I am NOT going to align myself with the New Bolsheviks and Latter Day Jacobins that want to erase me and my posterity from the future of this nation.

There are more than 2 options. If there are only 2 options, there are actually no options.


Nor am I going to look the other and pretend what's happening is not happening.

Nor should you, but that doesn't necessitate throwing in with the new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss.

Honestly, the ONLY meaningful difference is that the guy is a d-bag on Twitter and disregards the so-called dignity of the office. That's one of the few things I actually like about him by the way, but it's nowhere near enough to cause me to meaningfully support him (i.e., vote for him or advocate for him publicly).


If that makes me an idiot partisan or what have you, well, so be it I suppose...no atheists in foxholes and all that.

Interestingly, that phrase refers to the practice of finding true faith in higher power (for these purposes, let's refer to it as a Principle) when all other hope seems to be lost. So I'll kick that right back at you.

[Danke]

The intro to Tom Woods show, "Prepare to Set Fire to the Index Card of Allowable Opinions."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpFf3M8Yols

[Swordsmyth]

First of all, the rest of my post says 'hello'...

Second...



Yeah, great. I'm glad for those things, too. As I said earlier (ITT or another, who can keep up? I mean besides lil' Timmy and his Big Brother Swordsmyth, who seem to have countless hours to spend here pimping the 2nd coming of Cool Cal erm Donald "late term abortions/single payer" Trump... but I digress...) I'm pleased with the tax cuts and the so-far lack of new foreign military adventures.

That doesn't mean I'm here at RPF's to peddle an AT BEST nationalist-socialist (to be differentiated from a National Socialist, for sure) merely because I'm pleased with a couple of the crumbs that fell from his table.



No, I do... I said that I couldn't necessarily say just right now... doesn't mean I couldn't say... We can continue to work from the example that Ron gave us... that he continues to give us. Yeah, I generally agree with you that Freedom ISN'T popular, but it's $#@!ing chicken-$#@! to abandon it altogether and throw in with the like of a Trump.

$#@! man, there were some pro-liberty positions each of the presidents in our lifetime have taken, yet we weren't taken in like some around here have been by the current pimp.



There are more than 2 options. If there are only 2 options, there are actually no options.



Nor should you, but that doesn't necessitate throwing in with the new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss.

Honestly, the ONLY meaningful difference is that the guy is a d-bag on Twitter and disregards the so-called dignity of the office. That's one of the few things I actually like about him by the way, but it's nowhere near enough to cause me to meaningfully support him (i.e., vote for him or advocate for him publicly).



Interestingly, that phrase refers to the practice of finding true faith in higher power (for these purposes, let's refer to it as a Principle) when all other hope seems to be lost. So I'll kick that right back at you.
I stand with Rand, he finds Trump to be useful and worth defending against his far worse enemies and so do I.

[Origanalist]

I stand with Rand, he finds Trump to be useful and worth defending against his far worse enemies and so do I.

Lol, total weaksauce and you aren't even a politician.

[Origanalist]

That doesn't mean I'm here at RPF's to peddle an AT BEST nationalist-socialist (to be differentiated from a National Socialist, for sure) merely because I'm pleased with a couple of the crumbs that fell from his table.


There are more than 2 options. If there are only 2 options, there are actually no options.






Interestingly, that phrase refers to the practice of finding true faith in higher power (for these purposes, let's refer to it as a Principle) when all other hope seems to be lost. So I'll kick that right back at you.

Out of rep..

[Swordsmyth]

Lol, total weaksauce and you aren't even a politician.
LOL back at you.

[Origanalist]

LOL back at you.

Oh shit! He lol'ed back at me! This is serious!

[CCTelander]

Lol, total weaksauce and you aren't even a politician.


Are you sure?

[Origanalist]

Are you sure?

Ya, paid staff maybe, but I doubt any politician would spend the time he does pounding the keys online. They have staff for that sort of thing.

[Swordsmyth]

Oh $#@!! He lol'ed back at me! This is serious!
Nothing that has anything to do with you is serious.

[Origanalist]

Nothing that has anything to do with you is serious.

Whatever kid.

[CCTelander]

Oh shit! He lol'ed back at me! This is serious!


His rhetorical skills are astounding. A legend in his own mind.

[Swordsmyth]

Whatever kid.
Se ya round Old Man.

[Origanalist]

His rhetorical skills are astounding. A legend in his own mind.

He should be writing for a think tank.

[Dr.3D]

Oh shit! He lol'ed back at me! This is serious!
Lol yea

[timosman]

I think Timmy prides himself on this kind of thing. It takes work to make sure every post is basically valueless.

I didn't know there were people going through my post history.I hope you are well paid. I would be devastated if this was handled by some low level peon. :cool:

[Origanalist]

I didn't know there were people going through my post history.I hope you are well paid. I would be devastated if this was handled by some low level peon. :cool:

Nobody who frequents the forum really needs to go through your post history.

[CCTelander]

Nobody who frequents the forum really needs to go through your post history.


As if anyone would bother going through his post history. As far as I can remember from what I've read of his posts, there's nothing there worth going through.

[UWDude]

Member when everyone was saying Trump was an agent of Hillary Clinton? Remember that?

[r3volution 3.0]

Piss on Tom Woods, Trump shill; he thought he understood something, and he almost did: almost.

But now he's just a street whore for the administration.; do some more interviews with Buchanan.

[UWDude]

If Hillary had won, those idiots would be infesting these boards with a bunch of "told you so's"
We now know they would have been wrong, but nothing would convince them of such, because Hillary won, therefore Trump agent of Hillary.

Unacceptable opinion.
Because it was not an opinion, nor was it ever an opinion. It was a straight LIE. And only Trumpo's winning would prove that to all the delusionals, that still haunt this place with "it's all WWE man, they are all in it together secretly, man".

Bull.

[Origanalist]

Lol yea

You obviously aren't taking this seriously.

[Origanalist]

Member when everyone was saying Trump was an agent of Hillary Clinton? Remember that?

No.

[Origanalist]

If Hillary had won, those idiots would be infesting these boards with a bunch of "told you so's"
We now know they would have been wrong, but nothing would convince them of such, because Hillary won, therefore Trump agent of Hillary.

Unacceptable opinion.
Because it was not an opinion, nor was it ever an opinion. It was a straight LIE. And only Trumpo's winning would prove that to all the delusionals, that still haunt this place with "it's all WWE man, they are all in it together secretly, man".

Bull.

http://droidhorizon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Keanu-Reeves-Whoa-04.jpg

[nobody's_hero]

Right, so, with that in mind, I have little choice but to make lemonade here.

Trump has rolled back regulations that have had a direct impact on increasing my bottom line and hasn't made a move to confiscate my guns in spite of bluster to the contrary.

So, gold stars for him.

The leaders of the New Bolsheviks in Congress are pushing a plan that will bankrupt me in ten years, and are actively seeking repeal of the Second Amendment.

Look, you can call it whatever you want, selling out or what have you...I don't have any more answers, and neither do you.

All I know is I am NOT going to align myself with the New Bolsheviks and Latter Day Jacobins that want to erase me and my posterity from the future of this nation.

Nor am I going to look the other and pretend what's happening is not happening.

If that makes me an idiot partisan or what have you, well, so be it I suppose...no atheists in foxholes and all that.

I've been trying to hand out +rep all day so that I could be allowed to +rep this post but someone's gonna have to cover me. I haven't spread enough around, so someone say something worth +repping so I can get on with this.

[Dr.3D]

I've been trying to hand out +rep all day so that I could be allowed to +rep this post but someone's gonna have to cover me. I haven't spread enough around, so someone say something worth +repping so I can get on with this.
I'll volunteer to let ya dump some rep on me so as you can spread it around.

This is serious business.

[r3volution 3.0]

https://i.giphy.com/media/G2grq1dKGa7U4/200.gif

[Anti Federalist]

Piss on Tom Woods, Trump shill; he thought he understood something, and he almost did: almost.

But now he's just a street whore for the administration.; do some more interviews with Buchanan.

See, this is exactly what I am talking about.

Tom woods did not go from "brilliant educator and liberty advocate" to "dirty rotten whore for the establishment" simply by accepting that Trump may be doing some good.

[Danke]

See, this is exactly what I am talking about.

Tom woods did not go from "brilliant educator and liberty advocate" to "dirty rotten whore for the establishment" simply by accepting that Trump may be doing some good.

I occasionally listen to Tom, he is quite critical of Trump, but also as u say, sees some of the good he has done.

[r3volution 3.0]

See, this is exactly what I am talking about.

Tom woods did not go from "brilliant educator and liberty advocate" to "dirty rotten whore for the establishment" simply by accepting that Trump may be doing some good.

That's right, he was never very clever; some of us held our breath.

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, great. I'm glad for those things, too. As I said earlier (ITT or another, who can keep up? I mean besides lil' Timmy and his Big Brother Swordsmyth, who seem to have countless hours to spend here pimping the 2nd coming of Cool Cal erm Donald "late term abortions/single payer" Trump... but I digress...) I'm pleased with the tax cuts and the so-far lack of new foreign military adventures.

That doesn't mean I'm here at RPF's to peddle an AT BEST nationalist-socialist (to be differentiated from a National Socialist, for sure) merely because I'm pleased with a couple of the crumbs that fell from his table.

I can't answer for what those members think, I'm not peddling anybody, I'm simply making the point that there is a difference and it's somewhat delusional to think that there is not.

This new mob are not Tip O'Neill democrats nor Bill Clinton democrats. A great many are committed and open communists.


No, I do... I said that I couldn't necessarily say just right now... doesn't mean I couldn't say... We can continue to work from the example that Ron gave us... that he continues to give us. Yeah, I generally agree with you that Freedom ISN'T popular, but it's fucking chicken-shit to abandon it altogether and throw in with the like of a Trump.

Fuck man, there were some pro-liberty positions each of the presidents in our lifetime have taken, yet we weren't taken in like some around here have been by the current pimp.

I'm not abandoning that at all. I'm simply focusing on more immediate concerns.


Nor should you, but that doesn't necessitate throwing in with the new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss.

Honestly, the ONLY meaningful difference is that the guy is a d-bag on Twitter and disregards the so-called dignity of the office. That's one of the few things I actually like about him by the way, but it's nowhere near enough to cause me to meaningfully support him (i.e., vote for him or advocate for him publicly).

Again, I'm not convinced that what I am doing is "throwing in" with Trump.


Interestingly, that phrase refers to the practice of finding true faith in higher power (for these purposes, let's refer to it as a Principle) when all other hope seems to be lost. So I'll kick that right back at you.

Fair enough.

[Anti Federalist]

That's right, he was never very clever; some of us held our breath.

Well, imagine my relief, to find out that you are overseeing the quality of libertarian punditry.

Perhaps you could submit your curriculum vitae so that we may judge the accuracy of your opinion of Wood's cleverness.

Start with listing your best selling works on history and economics.

[r3volution 3.0]

Well, imagine my relief, to find out that you are overseeing the quality of libertarian punditry.

Perhaps you could submit your curriculum vitae so that we may judge the accuracy of your opinion of Wood's cleverness.

Start with listing your best selling works on history and economics.

Perhaps when we'll have something to discus, you'll join me.

...nothing personal.

[A Son of Liberty]

See, this is exactly what I am talking about.

Tom woods did not go from "brilliant educator and liberty advocate" to "dirty rotten whore for the establishment" simply by accepting that Trump may be doing some good.

I agree.

For the record, my point isn't that Trump isn't doing some good. We can agree that he is... my problem is with the outright advocacy that is coming from a not small segment of this forum's membership.

Again, I'm confident that we can dig through the last several presidencies and find instances of "some good". Yet, no one legitimately tries to argue that Obama or Bush or Clinton were overall good for the liberty movement. And NO ONE was on this forum legitimately trying to defend everything Obama or Bush did from a liberty-first perspective.

Yet here we are with SEVERAL high-profile members (I'm not lumping you into this group, btw) going to bat, day after day, posting thread after thread doing just that on behalf of Trump...


I can't answer for what those members think, I'm not peddling anybody, I'm simply making the point that there is a difference and it's somewhat delusional to think that there is not.

This new mob are not Tip O'Neill democrats nor Bill Clinton democrats. A great many are committed and open communists.

I do not disagree in the slightest...

Let me put it this way... you seem to be saying that "the enemy of my enemy [Dems-cum-socialist/communists] is my friend [DJT]. I get that, as long as we understand DJT in his proper context.

Me? I don't go in for that... for me, the enemy of my enemy is my friend if he treats me like a friend. If he treats me decent for an hour everyday, but spends the rest of the day robbing me, sending my kids off to war, restricting what I may say, etc. (you get what I'm saying), then that mother fcker is my enemy too.

And I feel like there was a time around here before 2016 when that was just understood around here. We may each have disagreed on this-or-that, but in general we were pulling in the same direction...


I'm not abandoning that at all. I'm simply focusing on more immediate concerns.


Again, I'm not convinced that what I am doing is "throwing in" with Trump.

As you said, fair enough. Trump should be understood - particularly here at RPF - as he is in reality... not as he is cast by certain members.