Paleolibertarianism?!?!

[Havet]

What the hell?!?!

Paleolibertarianism is a school of thought within American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) libertarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism) formerly associated with Lew Rockwell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell), the late economist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economist) Murray Rothbard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard), and the Ludwig von Mises Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises_Institute). It is based on a combination of radical libertarianism in politics and cultural conservatism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_conservatism) in social thought. Austrian economics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School), anti-federalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-federalism), Misesian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises) libertarianism, and anarcho-capitalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism) heavily influenced the movement's attitudes toward ideas on trade, commerce and statecraft.

Assailing alleged “hatred of western culture,” he asserted that “pornographic photography, ‘free’-thinking, chaotic painting, atonal music, deconstructionist literature, Bauhaus architecture, and modernist films have nothing in common with the libertarian political agenda - no matter how much individual libertarians may revel in them” and stated “we obey, and we ought to obey, traditions of manners and taste.” After explaining why cultural conservatives could make a better argument for liberty to the middle classes, Rockwell predicted “in the new movement, libertarians who personify the present corruption will sink to their natural level, as will the Libertarian Party, which has been their diabolic pulpit.”[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism#cite_note-0)

Paleolibertarianism is commonly distinguished by appreciation for American limited government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_government) constitutionalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionalism) and even anti-federalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-federalism), sometimes criticizing Abraham Lincoln (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln) for leading America toward a centralized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralized), managerial state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism#cite_note-3) While practically all paleolibertarians subscribe to a philosophy of anarcho-capitalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism), they differ over what a society which has a state should do about issues like immigration.

Weirdest dumbest ideology i ever heard, right after this one (http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Anarcho-monarchism)

What are your thoughts on this one? Had you ever heard of this term before?

[Dejavu]

I don't think about it much. :P

This reminds me mostly of those Jesus praising, homophobic , racist loons living in some of the armpits of society.

Conservatives by another flavor in other words.

[Misanthrope]

This has been here for ever, now they just put a name on it.

[Demogorgon]

It is way out of sync with your outlook, but it is actually pretty typical of libertarians as they are most commonly found. Indeed along with the tamer pro-state Friedmanite variety found at the likes of CATO they might even be the most common.

As I have said many times before capitalism is attractive to social conservatives due to the fact that it allows for hierarchical social systems and to their minds rewards the "strong" and punishes the "weak". An extreme version of it with no social welfare and the absence of restrictions of the ability of the powerful to trample on the powerless is very appealing to people with an authoritarian outlook, hence they will frequently consider themselves Libertarian.

Lew Rockwell, the man associated with this the most is very close to Ron Paul and Paul's Presidential run was very much about airing these ideas and it is striking just how enthusiastically open fascists jumped on the Paul bandwagon. He was very enthusiastically endorsed on Stormfront for instance and many of the leading lights of the white power movement either formally endorsed him or spoke enthusiastically of him. This wasn't because Paul is part of that movement (his level of connection is uncertain but is likely pretty loose), but because the ideas were exactly what appealed to them.

Perhaps more interesting is the connection to the older Rothbard. The younger Rothbard, for all else he might have been, was no social conservative. He claimed indeed his economic views were naturally linked to his socially tolerant outlook. Yet by the time he grew older he was about as right wing socially speaking as you could get-without having changed his economic views. I believe in fact that his views on economics eventually led him down the path of authoritarianism meaning that it is not just that those economic views appeal to social conservatives (as seen with Rockwell) but also naturally lead to that kind of authoritarianism.

[Demogorgon]

Incidentally, if you want a laugh, here is another, slightly different example, of social conservatism linking with libertarianism. I have accused Libertarians of so many things over the years that I lose count, but I have never accused them of being theocrats, yet here we are:

http://www.kevincraig.us/

He was an official Libertarian party candidate for Congress. Even given that party's tendency to prostitute themselves to anyone who will support them, I am surprised they didn't dismiss him as their candidate. Candidates are apparently asked to sign statements saying they will not bring the party into disrepute and this guy sure as hell does that.

[Havet]

Incidentally, if you want a laugh, here is another, slightly different example, of social conservatism linking with libertarianism. I have accused Libertarians of so many things over the years that I lose count, but I have never accused them of being theocrats, yet here we are:

http://www.kevincraig.us/

He was an official Libertarian party candidate for Congress. Even given that party's tendency to prostitute themselves to anyone who will support them, I am surprised they didn't dismiss him as their candidate. Candidates are apparently asked to sign statements saying they will not bring the party into disrepute and this guy sure as hell does that.

Yes, many of these right-libertarians are just conservatives that don't actually like the term because they feel it has grown old (wow), and figure calling themselves something else will give new meaning to their century-old flawed politics.

[GPDP]

It seems every ideology has its loonies, even one as fundamentally loony as libertarianism.

[Demogorgon]

Yes, many of these right-libertarians are just conservatives that don't actually like the term because they feel it has grown old (wow), and figure calling themselves something else will give new meaning to their century-old flawed politics.
It's actually more basic than that with this particular guy. He had no chance of the republican nomination, partly because there is a senior incumbent in his district and partly because he is too right wing even for them (after all he calls the very Conservative incumbent a socialist), so he goes Libertarian instead.

Of course it is a side issue. He is more an amusing flaw with the Libertarian Party's candidate selection procedure than anything else. What you bring up in your original post is a more serious issue however and that is the fact that Libertarian economic philosophy is naturally linked to social conservatism and authoritarianism.

[Dimentio]

I am sorry Hayen. Not even your loons could match up to the nazi loons. Check in Julius Evola or Savitri Devi. They will make the paleolibertarians seem like social liberals.

[Havet]

I am sorry Hayen. Not even your loons could match up to the nazi loons. Check in Julius Evola or Savitri Devi. They will make the paleolibertarians seem like social liberals.

I'm sorry Dimentio, but they are not "my" loons. Even when i was sympathetic towards "right"-libertarianism i still thought they were idiots. Now i can see their idiocy even clearer.

[Dimentio]

I'm sorry Dimentio, but they are not "my" loons. Even when i was sympathetic towards "right"-libertarianism i still thought they were idiots. Now i can see their idiocy even clearer.

Okay, that is quite fair I guess. But Savitri Devi and Julius Evola are still bigger idiots.

Savitri Devi is basically the nazi version of Ayn Rand.

Her philosophy makes Rand appear as a social democrat.

[Demogorgon]

Evola is probably more interesting than any of them though simply because he was so off the deep end crazy that it is hard not to find it very funny.

A lot of the Libertarian loons are only funny insofar as their poe-faced nature makes them easy targets of ridicule. Their political philosophies are just pretty brutal sociopathy. The likes of Evola at least had style :lol:

[Havet]

Okay, that is quite fair I guess. But Savitri Devi and Julius Evola are still bigger idiots.

Savitri Devi is basically the nazi version of Ayn Rand.

Her philosophy makes Rand appear as a social democrat.

Cool, you should detail more about them in my other thread: "Why all the Rand bashing", so as to show there are more worthy people of bashing (not that i think rand shouldn't be bashed as well..hehe).

[Kwisatz Haderach]

You don't understand paleolibertarianism? But it's very simple: They are people who seek to attain conservative goals (a hierarchical, tradition-bound society) by libertarian means.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

The Libertarian Party is run by paleoconservatives.

[Havet]

You don't understand paleolibertarianism? But it's very simple: They are people who seek to attain conservative goals (a hierarchical, tradition-bound society) by libertarian means.

yeah you are right. I just baffled at the term. It kind of suits them though, as in "paleo" means old.

[Havet]

The Libertarian Party is run by paleoconservatives.

Most libertarian organizations are run by paleoconservatives/paleolibertarians: libertarian party, bureaucrash, mises, lewrockwell, etc

[trivas7]

You don't understand paleolibertarianism? But it's very simple: They are people who seek to attain conservative goals (a hierarchical, tradition-bound society) by libertarian means.
All societies are in some sense hierarchical, tradition-bound societies. Time-binding is a human trait.

[trivas7]

Repeat post. Please delete.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

All societies are in some sense hierarchical, tradition-bound societies. Time-binding is a human trait.
Depending on how far you want to stretch the notions of hierarchy and tradition, you may be correct. However, I was referring to the specific kind of hierarchy that conservatives support (a strict social hierarchy with very low mobility and with people adhering to conservative moral values at the top), and the specific kind of traditions that conservatives support (patriarchy, xenophobia, homophobia, obedience towards one's elders, etc).

Paleolibertarians are people who support a libertarian capitalist society under the assumption that such a society will look like Victorian England. And, by the way, this assumption is correct.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Most libertarian organizations are run by paleoconservatives/paleolibertarians: libertarian party, bureaucrash, mises, lewrockwell, etc

Most American-based organizations are, certainly. It's a sad reflection on the state of "libertarianism" today when someone like Ron Paul - who actually voted against something basic like allowing gays the "right" to adopt - are treated as heroes worth worshiping. Not everyone has to be completely principled, but that is just absurd.

We'll not even get into Rockwell's quasi-fascist obsession. He seems to command the same fetish for feudalism as Hoppe.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

It's a sad reflection on the state of "libertarianism" today...
Today? When was it ever different?

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Today? When was it ever different?

When libertarian meant anarchists in general? and not pseudo inheritors of liberalism who just want to dismantle the state to maximize the power of the ruling class.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

When libertarian meant anarchists in general? and not pseudo inheritors of liberalism who just want to dismantle the state to maximize the power of the ruling class.
Yes, but that was a change in the meaning of a political term, not a change in the behavior or beliefs of any group of people. The original libertarians - the anarchists - are still the same as they've always been. And the present day right-wing "libertarians" are still the same sociopathic ultra-liberal nutters they've always been.

[trivas7]

When libertarian meant anarchists in general? and not pseudo inheritors of liberalism who just want to dismantle the state to maximize the power of the ruling class.
How odd. Most of your fellow collectivists argue explicitly against the notion that the ruling class can function w/out the state. Indeed, that the entire raison d'etre of the state is to ensure said rule.

[trivas7]

[...]The original libertarians - the anarchists - are still the same as they've always been. [...]
If by this you mean that the original lbertarians -- the anarchists -- hated communists and communism, I couldn't agree w/ you more. :)

[What Would Durruti Do?]

The Libertarian Party is run by paleoconservatives.

Run maybe, but the majority of its member base is younger progressive types i believe

[Kwisatz Haderach]

If by this you mean that the original lbertarians -- the anarchists -- hated communists and communism, I couldn't agree w/ you more. :)
Only in the same way that Maoists hate Trotskyists, for example. It's a sectarian dispute between political groups that have many more similarities than differences.

[trivas7]

Only in the same way that Maoists hate Trotskyists, for example. It's a sectarian dispute between political groups that have many more similarities than differences.
OTC, insofar as communists are statists, their political goals are diametrically opposed.

[GPDP]

OTC, insofar as communists are statists, their political goals are diametrically opposed.

Care to substantiate this? Or are you going to leave it as the meaningless tripe you usually pull out of your ass and run from the thread like you usually do?

[trivas7]

Care to substantiate this?
No, I leave it as an exercise for your seriously ill-informed political education.

[GPDP]

No, I leave it as an exercise for your seriously ill-informed political education.


trivias7


your seriously ill-informed political education

http://i419.photobucket.com/albums/pp273/OcelotStampede/LupinLol.gif