Category Archives: libertarianism

UPDATED: A Reader Loathes Levin, Prefers Libertarians Who Create Oscillation

Constitution, libertarianism, Liberty, Media, Neoconservatism, Political Philosophy, Republicans

ML is annoyed with me because of the column titled “Secession, Not Convention, Offers Salvation.” He writes:

Based on my contacts, Mark Levin doesn’t have a big following in Ohio. I’m surrounded by conservatives, but nobody mentions Levin. Ever. And I grew up here. The only time I ever hear his name is when Sean Hannity mentions it and I turn the dial. To the people I deal with in Ohio, Levin is parochial New York.

I don’t pretend to understand the media environment on the East coast, but, from my experience, your information resonates with people in southwest Ohio. I don’t care about anybody’s opinion. I care about information. You supply great information.

That’s why I suggest you never promote Levin. He’s an establishment tool. Any time you write about him, you elevate him. I prefer you counter his oppression with libertarian arguments, than promote him by name.

BTW, I’m a big, recent fan. I’ve read mises.org for years and lewrockwell.com for a year or so, but you bring a point of view that sometimes contrasts with both. Nice job!

“Secession, Not Convention, Offers Salvation” takes on Levin for his odd idea that we look to the states, which are hardly bastions of freedom, to initiate a constitutional amendment or demand a constitutional convention, when this has never occurred before, and when there is no mechanism to compel Congress to hold such a convention.

MORE.

UPDATE: FACEBOOK thread: Levin is not as simple as all that. Item: he rails against establishment Republicans, hates Bush and Rove, and is seldom asked to go on TV with the teletwits. Levin is not as simple as say, Medved or Prager who are pure establishment.

Richard Sherman And The National, Mindless, Racial Merry-Go-Round

Celebrity, Democrats, Intelligence, libertarianism, Media, Race, Republicans, Sport

Written by a scholar of color, whose intellectual and moral authority in the culture stem not from the force of his argument, but from the concentration of melanin in his skin cells—John McWhorter’s article, “Let’s Not Make Thug the New N-Word,” exemplifies the banal, racial back-and-forth that parades as “debate” in the US.

In the wake of the manufactured Richard Sherman brouhaha, Dr. McWhorter waxes fat and fuzzy on TIME over the artificial, politically dictated linguistic laws that govern discourse in this country (and explain why “dumbassery” is the norm). This racial roundabout proceeds, always, from the premise of compliance with preordained linguistic standards or laws.

When they rabbit on about race, America’s chattering classes—blacks, whites, Democrats, Republicans and the silliest of libertarians alike—exhibit an unthinking habit of mind. These are individuals (for they are not individualists) who’ve been trained by their political and intellectual masters to respond in certain, politically pleasing ways.

To tell you the truth, I have no idea what the fuss is over what Sherman said after the Seattle Seahawks’s victory over the San Francisco 49ers. What I know about the game is dangerous, but it appears that the Seahawks cornerback was merely commenting on an aspect of the game:

“I’m the best corner in the game. When you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree, that’s the result you gonna get. Don’t you ever talk about me!”

The man was pumped, as men ought to be in such a testosterone-infused game. But Sherman’s boisterous bit of theatre set in motion some racial, national free-association, which for the life of me, I can’t follow. Truly.

I’ll say this much: Sherman was correct to point out that his “outburst,” following the “defensive play that sealed his team’s trip to the Super Bowl,” was an extension of “his game-time competitiveness.”

The rest is of a piece with the mindless racial merry-go-round manufactured by America’s media types.

Ariel Sharon, Soldier In The Style Of ‘Stonewall’ Jackson

Homeland Security, Israel, Judaism & Jews, libertarianism, Middle East, Military

As a child growing up in Israel, this 1973 image of the late Ariel Sharon was seared in my mind. Had Sharon himself not performed military miracles, who knows if Israelis, myself included, would have survived. How many Americans can point to a leader who had actually saved their lives, rather than send other men to die in foreign countries and then propagandized his countrymen about having fought for their freedoms?

Seen in the image above, former Israeli Prime Minister Sharon led his men into battle and won the 1973 Yom Kippur War in which the Israeli government and the intelligence failed. Here Sharon is seen during that war “on the western bank of the Suez Canal in Egypt. Sharon said his greatest military success came during that war. He surrounded Egypt’s Third Army and, defying orders, led 200 tanks and 5,000 men over the Suez Canal, a turning point.”

Sharon died, Jan 11, after languishing in a vegetative state for 8 years.

During the Bush years, “libertarian who loathe Israel” would often compare Emperor Bush with Sharon, whom they detested too.

Hated though he was abroad, Sharon was a soldier in the style of “Stonewall” Jackson, not Dubya the Deserter. As a Special Forces commander, he personally led his troops into battle, performing daring assaults that saved Israel in the 1967 and 1973 wars.

Agree or disagree with his methods, it is unarguable that Sharon’s overriding concern was with the security of his citizens. He saw himself as bearing a “historic responsibility” for “the fate of the Jewish people.” By contrast, Bush’s Wilsonian, global missionary movement related not even tangentially to the future and safety of the American people.

Unlike George Bush the internationalist, Arik Sharon was a fierce nationalist who cared first and foremost about his country. Under pressure from the U.S. for his treatment of terrorists, he was expected to make concessions to murderers who kill civilians, while Bush and the international community made no such allowances for al-Qaida.

UPDATE III: ‘Duck Dynasty’: A Decoy For Dummies (Robertson’s Fans Not Working With Much)

Celebrity, Christianity, Homosexuality, libertarianism, Morality, Pop-Culture, Religion

“‘Duck Dynasty’: A Decoy For Dummies” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

“… there is nothing wrong with making a good living catering to the base, voyeuristic demand created by many millions of Americans, as do the Ducksters. But are capitalists compelled to like their product because it makes money? No. It is perfectly productive, if far from lucrative, for me to criticize all aspects of the puerile Duck production.

The Ducksters are part of a debased culture—the right-wing answer to Kim Kardashian, whose deformed figure and ass elephantiasis you can ogle online and on late-night Leno (1.21 minutes in).

Then there is the matter of Duck-Dynasty religiosity.

“I think you’re missing an important point, Ilana,” said one perceptive Facebook Friend. “The [Ducksters] were selected for the show because they are how you describe them. Duck Dynasty was meant to be a redneck minstrel show. They were supposed to be objects of ridicule for cosmopolitan America. They are what blue-state America imagines religiosity to be.”

Arguably, this is precisely what being devout looks like in the USA.

Delve more deeply, and you’ll discover that Christianity in our country is a lot like what the Ducksters profess. No longer doctrinaire or demanding, the mishmash of pop-religion practiced in churches across America is an extension of the therapeutic culture: festooned with feelings, mostly misdirected. Untempered by intelligent interpretation of scripture.

As for the Ducksters’ occupation. I’ll leave you with Proverbs 12:10:

Whoever is righteous has regard for the life of his beast, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel. …

The complete column is “‘Duck Dynasty’: A Decoy For Dummies.” Read it on WND.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

• At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”

• On my Facebook page.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

UPDATED I (12/27): It should be mandatory for Myron my man to strike out for sanity and intelligence at WND Comments, when mouth-breathers get out of hand. Here he does it superbly:

Myron Pauli
• 4 hours ago

I have very little use for the 21st Century KulturKreig where every utterance has to be on one ‘side’ or other in some Culture-War conducted by people on both sides who are so insecure in their own beliefs that they apparently need to have everyone think exactly like they do. Additionally, I can’t be too optimistic for a country where Phil Robertson is elevated to our Thomas Aquinas and Sarah Palin is our Edmund Burke. Not surprisingly, those who do the elevation consider Ilana to be a “liberal … communist …” until, of course, the opposite side weighs in when she utters a criticism of Nelson Mandela and then she is magically transformed into a “racist-genocidal … Nazi” since in the dualistic Manichean world of 2013, thinking is an inconvenient freakish diversion from knee-jerk feelings.

Where are all the other brilliant pals and patrons of this site?

UPDATE II (12/27): ROBERTSON’S FANS NOT WORKING WITH MUCH. Wow. Not since I came out, on 9/19/2002, against Bush’s invasion of Iraq have I received so much hate mail. The country is in serious trouble if this is Red-State America. These people are not working with much. Their Hosannas belong not with Robertson—who, understandably, protects them from the gays who’re clearly gunning for them in a big way—but to Jehovah for seeing to it that breathing is involuntary, governed by the autonomic nervous system.

If not for G-d, they’d forget to breathe. Here’s Letter of the Week.

From: Lostboys Son [mailto:moveoutdrawfire@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 8:57 AM
To: imercer@wnd.com
Subject: Hey dumb bitch!!!

Are you mad because you are a half breed with no values or heritage? Are you pissed because you idol kim CRACKHOEAGAIN, got knocked up by your ex boyfriend? I bet your mad because any decent white man wouldn’t even touch you with a 10 foot poll. I wouldn’t even hit you with my car, I wouldn’t have sex with you with someone else’s dick!! You look like a troll. Go back to your lame overcrowded smog invested, std having, gang filled, slum hood, and don’t worry about duck dynasty or its viewers. You are not at all a trustworthy person, thats why you go from man to man your whole life, all while talking about other peoples lives, where in fact you should only worry about yourself!!
DUMB BITCH!!

Write to Lostboys Son (email: moveoutdrawfire@yahoo.com), to let him know you appreciate his contribution to civilization.

Gorgeous. Poetry. As for grammar and syntax: I’m ready to hang up my hat as a writer.

UPDATE III: To look on the bright side, quite a number of letters from high-IQ Christians have been received and were appreciated. Many thanks to those who’ve defended sanity, and chimed in @ Comments on WND.

Writes a lady editor:

The BEST of the Duck Dynasty articles that we read yet! I am really glad now that I haven’t wasted a second of my time watching it.

Another man of letters said:

A great column!

This really needed to be said.

My guess, though, is that columns like this will not be popular at WND!

And here’s another nice note:

I loved your column in regard to ‘Duck Dynasty’ and religiosity. And you are correct in your assessment that it is all for entertainment value and appeal to the “blue-American”. I used to watch A&E for concerts and performances; as it was known as Arts & Entertainment Network. Now, it is just an embarrass- ment. Keep up the good work.