Monthly Archives: November 2018

INTERVIEW: ‘Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’

Culture, Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, The West

INTERVIEW: Big League Politics interviewed me on my paleolibertarianism under the headline: “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism.’” I didn’t think I took CATO on, but was just pointing out sharp distinctions, in reply to correspondent Seth Segal’s sharp questions. But OK. <g>

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: Being a preeminent paleolibertarian thinker today, how would you define paleolibertarianism and how does it differ from standard paleoconservatism?

ILANA MERCER: First, let’s define libertarianism. It’s concerned with the ethics of the use of force. Nothing more. This, and this alone, is the ambit of libertarian law.

All libertarians must respect the non-aggression axiom. Libertarians don’t initiate aggression against non-aggressors, not even if it’s “for their own good,” as neoconservatives like to cast America’s recreational wars of choice. If someone claims to be a libertarianism and also supports the proxy bombing of Yemen, or supported the war in Iraq; he is not a libertarian, plain and simple.

As to paleolibertarianism, in particular. And this is my take. It’s how I’ve applied certain principles week-in, week-out, for almost two decades. So, some will disagree. In my definition, a paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the just-mentioned libertarian non-aggression axiom, by which all decent people should live, will crumble. …

… Read the rest. “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’” is on Big League Politics.

Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Federalism, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Neoconservatism, Secession, States' Rights

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act: It’s the excuse parroted by almost everybody, Republicans included, for lack of vigorous military action against invaders on the border.

It took Ann Coulter to point out the obvious: “You can’t shoot … AMERICANS. You can shoot invaders.”

What on earth is The US Army for?

In effect, what you’re being told is, there is no law that’ll defend American borders.’

Or, America doesn’t have borders. Therefore, there is no law that can defend a de facto and de jure borderless country. And certainly some laws even prohibit a defense of America’s borders.

In truth, and according to the Congressional Research Service, as relayed by the Military Times, the Act means that “the U.S. military is not used to control or defeat American citizens on U.S. soil.”

The hordes amassed on the border with Mexico, rushing the port of entry in San Ysidro, Calif., are not Americans. They are not even very nice.

Posse Comitatus sets “limitation against active-duty U.S. forces conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil,” but watch how quickly military force will be used “to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority.”

Feeling free?

Iranians Show Sense of Humor, But Get The US Blame Game Wrong

Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Russia

President Trump is right about the fate of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, killed in the Saudi Arabian consulate in Turkey: It’s not America’s bag.

But things get murky when the president tells the Nation that America First means we side with Saudi Arabia in its regional wars, among them the vanquishing of Yemen. (There, people are dying from disease and starvation in the tens of thousands, thanks to the House of Saud, also the perps implicated in 9/11.)

The Iranians, on the other hand, are berated for sloganeering against America and Israel, and for “propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria,” which, as I explained, is VERY GOOD FOR CHRISTIANS IN THAT COUNTRY. (Read “Lies About Putin, Syria And The Alawite Alliance.”)

Iran, which has “killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks in the U.S. between 1975-2015,” is said to be “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.” Who said so? The same intelligence apparatus that wishes to unseat President Trump. DeepState.gov?

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Tuesday:

“Mr. Trump bizarrely devotes the FIRST paragraph of his shameful statement on Saudi atrocities to accuse IRAN of every sort of malfeasance he can think of. Perhaps we’re also responsible for the California fires, because we didn’t help rake the forests — just like the Finns do?”

While the Iranians get pointers for impolitic humor, they are still confused about one thing.

The Russians are responsible for the heartbreaking California fires, not the Iranians.

Breitbart’s Allum Bokhari Steps Into The Anti-State Void Opened Up On The Organized* Right

Conservatism, Criminal Injustice, Donald Trump, Free Speech, Intelligence, The State, The West

With his piece, “The Rise Of The Western Dissidents,” Breitbart’s Allum Bokhari steps into the anti-state void opened up on the right, and openly and honestly fingers western governments—the Trump Administration, included—in creating their own imperiled dissidents.

It’s a disgrace. (See my “Assange Is Us”)

those who rightly believe the west is superior to authoritarian regimes must now contend with a troubling trend — the rise of the western dissident.

Chief among them is Julian Assange, who for a half-decade has been forced to live in the tiny Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he has claimed political asylum since 2011. Assange claimed that he would be extradited to the U.S. to face charges over his work at WikiLeaks if he left the embassy, and was routinely mocked as paranoid for doing so.

This week, we learned that Assange was right and his critics were wrong. …

Thanks to a clerical error by the U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria, Virginia, reporters were able to confirm the existence of sealed criminal charges against the WikiLeaks founder. …

WikiLeaks behaved precisely as any responsible publisher handling sensitive material should, redacting information that could cause harm. The redactions only stopped when they became pointless. Assange is unlikely to have won more than a dozen journalism awards if he were completely reckless in his publications. …

…the only reason Assange is being targeted is that he tangled with the highest levels of the western establishment. In that, he is far from alone.

In the late 2000s to early 2010s, western governments targeted all manner of individuals associated with Assange and the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, including Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald’s partner David Miranda, and The Guardian newspaper.

These days, however, a new class of western dissident has emerged — the populist dissident. …

Who would have thought that the highest court in Europe, home of the enlightenment, would uphold a case in which a woman was prosecuted for blasphemy against Islam?

Who would have thought that Britain, the birthplace of liberalism and the free press, would ban an independent journalist from its shores for satirizing the same religion?

Who would have thought that Germany, whose living memory of the totalitarian Stasi is just three decades old, would put its largest opposition party under surveillance …

… The REST: Bokhari: “Rise of the Western Dissidents”

* This writer is anti-state, but is also unaffiliated and independent.