Category Archives: Critique

Paul Gottfried Ponders Richard Spencer’s Strategy (& My Paleolibertarian Take)

Conservatism, Critique, Left-Liberalism, Logic, Multiculturalism, Old Right, Paleolibertarianism

Well, at least some in the Moron Media have corrected course and are calling Richard Spencer a “white nationalist,” instead of a white supremacist.

Watching Richard’s performance at Auburn University, renowned scholar of the Right Dr. Paul E. Gottfried shared these impressions:

When I criticize him, I am not making moral judgments, except when I note his futile attempt to keep up with leftist Millennials by siding with gay rights and abortion. What I object to in Richard is his, well, strategic stupidity, not the fact that he has committed the “sin” of being a white nationalist. Since “educated” whites are taught to hate their own race, I can’t see how one can appeal to Millennials and leftist college students by calling for white nationalism. Nor does one win their sympathy by mimicking their positions on feminism and homosexuality while trying to convert them to a racialist ideology. What seems to me the only chance left to the Right to be effective is by mobilizing the “Deplorables” and then turning them against the social-cultural Left. I was delighted to see how the pro-Trump people took it to the Antifascists at Berkeley. And I knew these counter-demonstrators were on the side of the angels when David French at National Review began to rail against them.

My impressions? The young, white men in the audience seemed receptive, even enthusiastic, although Richard may be talking above their heads. What Richard was saying conjured an interview I gave, “Self-Segregation Trumps Imposed Multiculturalism.” My views are decidedly LIBERTARIAN, a slant Richard Spencer rejects:

Multiculturalism as practiced in the West amounts to top-down, centrally enforced and managed integration. Show me a historical precedent where forced integration has worked. As it works across the Anglo-American and European spheres, one group (the founding, historical majority) is forced by self-anointed and elected elites—no contradiction there—on pain of public and professional ostracism, to submerge its history, heroes, customs, culture, language, and pander to militant minorities, who’ve been acculturated by the same elites in identity-politics warfare. As a libertarian, I believe that the right to include or exclude; associate with or dissociate from, is inherent in the right of private property. Private property is a civilizing institution. How better to keep the peace than to respect the right of free private-property owners to keep their distance (or not)—to hire, fire, and, generally, associate at will? This foundation of civil society is being dismantled for the sake of militant multiculturalism and policed pluralism.
An interesting new book, reviewed by one Barnaby Rogerson, makes the point that the Levant of the 18th century was peaceful and prosperous (and surprisingly libertine), because it was made up of “a grid of self-governing communities.” Integration between disparate communities was not enforced. And surprise, surprise: communities freely chose to live in complete segregation. This freedom fostered “remarkable tolerance” among diverse communities across the cities of the Levant of that time. “Deals before Ideals, City before State, Trade before Politics,” as the reviewer puts it. This freedom of association was the source of strength. These autonomous ethnic communities were free of the top-down, punitive, forced integration that has become the hallmark of the 19th-century nation-state that usurped their authority.

See: “Self-Segregation Trumps Imposed Multiculturalism.”

UPDATE V (6/7/017): Fox News Fluff

Ann Coulter, Conservatism, Critique, Gender, Intelligence, Media, Neoconservatism, Republicans

UPDATE V: (6/7/017):

03.10.17:
Thank goodness for periodic outbreaks of so-called sexual harassment at Fox News. It thinned the herd a bit. Some fems left. But now, instead of terrible Tamara Holder, former friend to the Sean Hannity TV show, the eardrums and intelligence are assaulted by the likes of Jessica Tarlov. It wouldn’t matter that Tarlov’s voice sounds like it was squeezed from the nether regions of her anatomy, if she had something to say.

Enough of the 23-year-olds who know nothing. Do hard time as journalists in a war zone, say for 10 years—like Iona Craig—then come back to tell us a thing or two.

Being lectured to by silly fresh-faced Millennials ought to insult adults. Don’t call yourself a cultural conservative if you unleash kids to lecture adults. Commies were big on putting kids in control of the adults and thus inverting the natural social order.

Tucker Carlson turns in outstanding journalistic performances nightly, on Fox News. Topping today’s segment was Ann Coulter, who should have her own show. (But won’t, unless she knocks off 20 IQ points to pacify other egos in the anchors’ chairs.)

But if Tucker starts featuring cretins like Austan Goolsbee and Geraldo Rivera, we’ll switch off. These are Sean Hannity’s regulars, and they’re insufferable. [UPDATE 6/7/017: Tucker UNLEASHED Krystal Ball on the unsuspecting public. A Democrat brainless tart.) And it has nothing to do with their liberalism. It didn’t matter that the late intellectual Christopher Hitchens was a liberal. He was brilliant.

Hannity is crossing over into the light—becoming increasingly libertarian and anti-statism. We love him for it. But at the same time, the popular anchor still insists on featuring a dizzying array of dumb bimbos on his show.

UPDATE I (3/15):

FoxNews’ AWOL on the heroic Julian Assange.

UPDATE II (4/5): No compunction about bringing immorality and mindlessness back. Boobs before brains: On con-servative media, it always ends up that way, on Sean Hannity’s show, too. Michelle Fields is back. A primer.

UPDATE III (4/7/017): Martha Maccallum’s Fox News show is a do-over of Megyn Kelly’s:

UPDATE IV (4/28):

UPDATED: Coequal in Tyranny: The Ninth Circuit’s Rules for Radicals

Constitution, Critique, Donald Trump, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Iran, Justice, Law, Neoconservatism

“Coequal in Tyranny: The Ninth Circuit’s Rules for Radicals” is the current column, now on Townhall.com. An excerpt:

Read the judicial rules for radicals issued by the United States Court Of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in affirmation of the ban on The Ban. It follows the Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump, with the imprimatur of 62 million voters, to protect the nation from foreign terrorists entering into the United States. Two states objected to the president’s undeniably badly written Order, which, while upholding negative rights—and neither denying natural rights nor minting positive ones—was nevertheless replete with administrative errors.

Acting as coequal partners in the administrative tyranny the president is trying to break, the two states issued a temporary restraining order against “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” (I can already hear the election midterm ads.)

In the corner for the Deplorables was a government lawyer. August Flentje Esq. had “argued” (if you can call it that) for an emergency stay of the Washington State district court’s temporary restraining order against the president. The three Ninth Circuit jurists who heard the case said no.

CAREER GOVERNMENT LAWYERS. If you’re good at what you do, you look to make it in the private sector (as our president did, before he did us a favor). If not, you seek sheltered employment (as President Trump’s predecessor did). Clearly, clerking for the Supreme Court, as August Flentje had done, doesn’t mean a whole lot.

In presenting the oral arguments for the president and the people, Flentje evinced a level of incompetence that spurred the Bench to the heights of usurpation. For example, when The Court caviled about an alleged lack of evidence for the necessity of the “travel ban,” not only did Flentje fail to provide it, but he failed to question the need for this evidence based on the scope of the president’s constitutional, executive power in matters of nation security.

Mr. President: You promised to hire the best. Alan Dershowitz is champing at the bit. Kris Kobach would kill it in any court. (Jonathan Turley is soft. Don’t touch Fox News’ tele-judges.)

Helped by the poor job stumblebum Flentje did in arguing the president’s prerogative and position, the Ninth Circuit judges usurped President Trump’s constitutional authority, substituting their own judgment for his. The three refused to lift the ban on the ban and reinstate an Executive Order that was never meant to be subjected to judicial review, in the first place.

GEORGE W. BUSH’S LAWYER. Those on the Right who opposed George Bush during his presidency (check) were vindicated yet again. In the nooks-and-crannies of our command-and-control judiciary, Bush had squirreled away a jurist as bad as John G. Roberts Jr.

Recall, Roberts, chief of the country’s legal politburo of proctologists, rewrote Obama’s Affordable Care Act. He then proceeded to provide the fifth vote to uphold the individual mandate undergirding the law, thereby undeniably and obscenely extending Congress’s taxing power. (Lazy government worker Paul Ryan still hasn’t come up with an alternative to ObamaCare, one that’ll prevent the Left from torching the country. Patience. It’s only been eight years.)

The unelected Bush appointee under discussion is from my State of Washington. District Judge James L. Robart, like Bush, would wrestle a crocodile for an illegal immigrant. Or, for potential immigrants, preferably from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan.

Having been granted standing by the Ninth Circuit to appeal President Trump’s Executive Order, Robart, as explained by a Daily Caller contributor, “hinged his entire ruling on a concept called parens patriae, …

… READ THE REST.  “Coequal in Tyranny: The Ninth Circuit’s Rules for Radicals” is the current column, now on Townhall.com.

Best tweet:

Best retort to #9thCircuit nutters: US can bomb the 7 Muslim countries. That's constitutional. It can't peacefully disassociate from them. https://t.co/c1JG0qdhgl

Posted by Ilana Mercer, Author on Thursday, February 9, 2017

FACEBOOK:

Noah Purcell, you don’t represent Washington State. You, the tech execs and social justice clientele are having a ‘moment.’ Enjoy! It won’t last! You didn’t even have standing to bring the case. You’re asserting the rights of people who are not even Americans. You’re a joke. The 9th circuit is a joke.

President Trump Vs. The Democrat Dunce-Cap Lobby

Critique, Democrats, Donald Trump, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism

“President Trump Vs. The Democrat Dunce-Cap Lobby” is the current column, now on The Daily Caller. And excerpt:

Donald Trump is the gift that keeps giving. The week is still in its infancy, but the president has already made Chucky Schumer cry, fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates within hours of her acting up, and caused the Forgotten Man to go even harder for their president. This Trump accomplished by inadvertently exposing the Democrats as firmly in the camp of Hollywood harridans, tech execs, the immigration lawyers lobby, the global refugee industry; and in the grip of the international human rights octopus.

The Democratic constituency can no longer hide. It’s as though all these ghastly people are wearing the pussy dunce-caps adorned by the Madonna and Ashley Judd protesters. …

… Read the rest. The complete column, “President Trump Vs. The Democrat Dunce-Cap Lobby,” is now on The Daily Caller.

Related: “About The Republican ‘Facile Argument’ That Obama Halted Immigration. Just Like Trump”