Category Archives: libertarianism

How is Shedding One Tier of Tyrants—The EU—Bad For Britons?

Barack Obama, Britain, EU, Europe, libertarianism, Nationhood, The State

Liberty is associated with a dispersion of political power, never its concentration and centralization. Adding an overarching tier of tyrants—the EU—to the British government benefits Britons as a second hangman enhances the health of a condemned man. (From “Adieu to the Evil EU.”)

I fail to understand the convoluted logic of the libertarian article, “Why this anarchist will be voting Remain on Thursday.”

Meanwhile, idiot Hillary Clinton is haranguing Donald Trump because he extolled the virtues of shedding the aforementioned tier of tyrants. That’s dangerous she hollered just today. (These days, Hillary is like a woman possessed.) But not when Barack Obama issued threats to Britain to stay in the EU while visiting with David Cameron—that was fine.

Said Obama (Apr. 22, 2016):

President Obama’s warning to those championing Britain’s exit from the EU was stark: Leave, he said, and the “U.K. is going to be in the back of the queue” on trade deals with the U.S.

Someone Should Tell Bill Kristol Dwarf Tossing Is Cruel

Conservatism, Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Republicans, UN

“Someone Should Tell Bill Kristol Dwarf Tossing Is Cruel” is the current column, now on The Unz Review. An excerpt:

Prominent neoconservative Bill Kristol shared his election-year hallucinations with the nation. From the ashes of the Republican primaries would rise a man to stand for president against victor Donald J. Trump, a Sisyphean task that has been attempted and failed by 17 other worthies.

This individual is David French, an attorney, a decorated Iraq War veteran, and writer for the decidedly “Against Trump” National Review. Curiously, Kristol’s independent candidate is a “devout social conservative,” an evangelical who questions the merits of “de-stigmatizing” homosexuality, rejects the progressive premise upon which the transgender, potty wars are being waged, and would keep women out of combat.

Why, then, would a “relatively secular faction within the Republican Party,” the neoconservatives, make common cause with the Party’s fundamentalist wing? Jeet Heer, senior editor at the New Republic, asks this question—a riddle familiar to students and scholars of American conservatism.

The alliance, or, rather, the master-servant relationship between neoconservatives and the Religious Right is an old one. Political evangelists have long since been brought to heel by the Washington-based neoconservatives. “Most on the Religious Right have hardly resisted such cooptation, having perhaps nowhere to go financially, politically or professionally,” wrote Dr. Paul Gottfried in The Conservative Movement, his 1993 prophetic, forensic examination of the roots of the conservative crack-up.

French is vested in an aggressive, expansionist foreign policy. His impressive military credentials, in his role as a tool of democratic internationalism, are meant to provide a stark contrast to Trump’s nativism. At least as Kristol sees it.

French is no American Firster in the way Donald Trump is. For a man can don the uniform and fight Caesar’s wars, but that doesn’t necessarily make him someone who puts his country first—unless one conflates the interests and well-being of ordinary Americans with wars of choice plotted by the New York-Washington axis of power. This error is not one Mr. Trump commits. While the presumptive Republican Party’s nominee clearly has great affection for America’s veterans, he doesn’t love all the wars they’ve been ordered to fight. …

… Read the rest. “Someone Should Tell Bill Kristol Dwarf Tossing Is Cruel” is now on The Unz Review.

Tweet Round Up (Mid-May-June): ‘1237,’ Illiberal Schools, Islam, Debt & Donald, Immigration, MegaloMegyn

Britain, Debt, Donald Trump, Education, Foreign Policy, History, IMMIGRATION, Individual Rights, libertarianism, Media, Neoconservatism, Private Property, Race, Republicans

TRUMP in Sacramento:


1237:


John Brown & neocons:


Hijabs in military academy:


Kunta Kerwick on Roots:


Cupcakes:


Brexit:


Libertarians for Hiroshima:


TRUMP rally reality:


Not Bon Jovi but Roger Daltrey:


Megyn’s getting scarier:


Slow media still guessing:


Media & street Thugs blame Trump:


Pinko Republicans go for Trump:


Refugees:


Pocahontas:


Libertarian Party:


They women burn Bernie


DEBT


Geert Wilders:


Invade Then Invite (as Steve Sailer put it)


Forced Integration:

The Statist Mindset Of ‘Libertarians’ Garry Johnson & William Weld

Donald Trump, Law, libertarianism, Nationhood, Rights, The State, War

Gary Johnson and his sidekick William Weld, Libertarian Party goofballs, are running for president and VP, respectively. The two fulminated to CNN’s Victor Blackwell against Donald Trump. From the libertarian perspective, though, their mindset was much more statist and deferential to state structures than Trump’s.

Weld, in particular, went over the various policies Trump was proposing, voicing objections to each that were thoroughly statist.

WELD: Some of the stuff that he’s running on I think is absolutely chaotic. I’m going to do this to Mexico. OK, that’s a violation of the North American Free Trade agreement, which is the supreme law of the land. It is a treaty. We signed it. I’ll do this to China. No questions asked. OK, that’s a violation of the World Trade Organization rules [which good libertarians despise], exposing us, the United States, to sanctions. And we would be the rogue nation. I don’t think we want to be the rogue nation. You know? Let’s let North Korea be the rogue nation, not us.

Trump can’t do what he proposes because he’ll be in violation of this or the other agreement between states, national and international, which Weld treats as holy writ.

Not to real libertarians. The idea of radical freedom is to dissolve the chains with which others have bound us. Smashing or refashioning these agreements and reclaiming national, state and individual sovereignty, as Trump proposes, is more libertarian than the queasiness these two evince at such actions.

Johnson and Weld objected to Trump’s proposals on the statist grounds that renegotiating agreements or optimizing them for Americans would violate agreements that by their nature sideline the American people.

You don’t get more un-libertarian than that. Then there’s the viva Hiroshima attitude: