Category Archives: libertarianism

UPDATED: RIP GOP & Party of Liberty

Democracy, Democrats, Elections, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Republicans

Smug, self-satisfied left-libertarians like to dream that their constituency is differently derived, but the demographic facts are straightforward. As the GOP goes, so goes the libertarian movement. We know this, but reminders are necessary: The upshot of continued, unfettered, mass immigration—as it is currently practiced and preached by American central planners—is the triumph of tribalism, pillage politics, and left-liberalism.

Over to Patrick J. Buchanan, in “Suicide of a Superpower”:

“White Americans, who provide nine out of ten Republican votes every presidential year, have fallen to less than two-thirds of the U.S. population and three-fourths of the electorate. Meanwhile, the number of people of color is growing, both as a share of the population and as a share of the electorate. An in presidential elections, people of color vote Democratic—in landslides. Asians vote 60 percent Democratic, Hispanic 60-70 percent, and African American 90-95 percent.” (Page 338.)

POIGNANTLY PUT, “Either the Republican Party puts an end to mass immigration, or mass immigration will put an end to the Republican Party.” (Page 423.)

[SNIP]

Ditto the future of a philosophy (libertarianism) which offers far fewer distributive spoils than does the Republican Party, yet demands from voters more by way of reason, for they must understand that less loot is better for them and their posterity.

The future dispensation of America, once the host population has been swamped and consigned to minority status, will be that of a third-world dominated, dominant-party state.

UPDATE: Texas is most certainly not “stubbornly Republican,” it is barely Republican; it is hanging on to a Republican slim majority by the proverbial hairs of its chinny chin chin:

“For the first time in the state’s history, Texas is now a majority-minority state, and the new round of redistricting will likely create at least one, and probably two majority-minority districts in Texas.” (via Race 4 2012)

Texas won’t be Republican for long.

Michel Cloutier: Canada has a different immigration complexion. It also has a different immigration process. Canada has something of a merit system, although, like the US, the overwhelming numbers of incomers result from the family unification aberration. However, in Canada legal immigration is driven by a point system. You get points for education, language (only English or French: OMG, how chauvinistic) and age. Your profession should also be in-line with the country’s needs. The US is a work-visa system, with one, not-always worthy sponsor acting as a ticket for a tribe.

As Michel points out, Canada has large Chinese and Indian immigration populations, which are somewhat less welfare dependent, more educated and socially conservative, and have less of a representation among the ranks of law-breakers. Are they less inclined to vote liberal?

UPDATED: Ron Paul Rising (Stand Up for Middle America!)

Democrats, Ilana On Radio & TV, libertarianism, Liberty, Media, Political Correctness, Political Philosophy, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Republicans, Ron Paul, Russia

As of this writing, Rep. Ron Paul—the ultimate outsider and quintessential anti-establishment presidential candidate—is the favorite to win the Iowa caucuses, scheduled to take place on January 3, 2012.

Polls such as Insider Advantage and Public Policy Polling place Paul in the lead, at 23 and 24 percent respectively, to Mitt Romney’s 20 percent and Newt Gingrich’s 14 percent. From ignoring Congressman Paul, the Republican Party establishment and mainstream media have moved to strategizing on how to discount his lead, and likely win, in Iowa.

Especially exercised is the Republican Party of Iowa. Its functionaries seem willing to delegitimize Iowa poll results—and the importance of the Iowa caucuses as harbingers of things to come in the national convention—if these don’t fall in line with the Party line. Apparently, caucus-goers who dare to “reward” candidates “who are unrepresentative of the broader party” deserve to be discredited.

What Grand Old Party apparatchiks cannot accept is that voters are coming around to reality dictated truths. And when “[t]hings fall apart; the center cannot hold.”

Against this backdrop, I was interviewed, on December 15, by the Russia Today (RT) television network, a broadcaster that does not abide herd behavior. Topics covered: The rise of Ron Paul, his rivals, and the Representative’s chances of parlaying his accomplishments in Iowa (to be repeated, we hope, in the Granite State and South Carolina) into a national win.

WATCH THE RT CLIP ON WND.COM.

My book, “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” is available from Amazon. (Don’t forget those reviews; they help this cause.)

A Kindle copy is also on sale.

Still better, shipping is free and prompt if you purchase Into the Cannibal’s Pot from The Publisher. Inquire about Xmas and New Year specials.

UPDATE ((Dec. 23): STAND UP FOR MIDDLE AMERICA. In reply to Jeff’s comment, here: You are right about Pat Buchanan’s mind. The man is brilliant. However, as for your recommendation to Ron Paul; it is mainstream and wrong. Utterly wrong. Paul should do the exact opposite of what you advocate. He should stand up for middle America. White America is not racist. That is pure propaganda. If anything, America is dangerously stupid about the reality of demographic differences on the ground.

You need to read my book, especially the section about the “Pathos of the Puritan.” (Look Inside the book.) Your argument is of the Left but has been adopted by the so-called Right. This waffle about low expectations is also the in-vogue leftist argument, conjured by the “Right” so as to both come across as politically palatable, and make excuses for 1) the militant anti-white sentiments blacks have adopted voluntarily, albeit with the encouragement of race huckster Democratic leaders. 2) Give credence to the leftist explanation for underachievement in this racial cohort: racism. All you have to do is expect more, and racial differences on the achievement variable will disappear. Hardly. Enough of this dangerous utopian day-dreaming.

Should Paul quit the obsequious apologetics and stand up for Americans—he would succeed mightily in galvanizing mainstream Republicans, heartland America. They are still a majority, if a waning one. The idiot Republicans will never win over the Left in this country with which most minorities identify. The GOP’s libertarian faction needs to veer Right and stand up for its base.

Granted, it is fashionable among the feminist Republican media bimbos and their beaus to castigate the GOP for being the party of Anglo-American males. Where’s the shame in that? That’s an acquired Mark of Cain; acquired through PC brainwashing. Who founded this country? The ancestors of this much-maligned majority. Were they so bad? Be a man. Stand up for America.

If Ron Paul proves unable to reject the racism accusations and stand up for an America that is defended as good and non-racist—he will be political toast.

UPDATED: Liberty’s Civilizational Dimension

Foreign Policy, History, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Liberty, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Old Right, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Republicans, Ron Paul

LIBERTY & CIVILIZATION. In the post “STRASSEL’s Non Sequitur,” it was pointed out that whether Ron Paul’s statements about Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum were true or not, “Paul has taken a classic Chris-Matthews kind of ad hominem swipe against Bachmann: she hates Muslims. Santorum hates gays and Muslims. Siding with the Left by adopting its arguments may be situationally advantageous, but it will backfire on a Republican candidate in the long run. This tactic, even if it was tantamount to a not-so-funny joke, damages Ron Paul’s effectiveness from the vantage point of conservative libertarians who think that liberty cannot be reduced to the non-aggression axiom and has a cultural and civilizational dimension.”

In their demands for an explanations, my libertarian readers seemed to forget that “conservative libertarians” are the majority who matter.

This writer is a paleo-libertarian; a libertarian of the Right. If libertarianism is ever to appeal to middle America, it is this libertarianism, as it is rooted in the founding ideas, which is also why I prefer classical liberalism as a philosophical label.

As I pointed out in “Libertarianism Lite,” “A certain establishment-endorsed libertarianism is currently being touted on the Fox News and Business channels as the only legitimate brand of libertarianism. This life-style libertarianism, or libertarianism-lite, as I call it, tends to conflate libertinism with liberty, and appeals to hippies of all ages, provided they remain juveniles forever.”

These sinecured TV types appeal to middle America not at all. “Ordinary, gun-toting, homeschooling, bible-thumping Middle Americans remain unmoved by people who draw their paycheques from foundations, think tanks, and academia, and wax orgiastic about MTV and Dennis Rodman. This stuff might appear sophisticated, but it is reductive and shallow—a post-graduate cleverness that lacks philosophical depth.”

More crucially: If you are driving a libertarianism that hates the whites BHO described derisively as clinging to their bibles, bigotries and guns—you are a marginal and insignificant force in American politics, and so you will remain.

True, salt-of-the-earth America (the founding stock of this great nation) is diminishing fast thanks to immigration central planning: mass immigration from the third world.

In “The Sequel to ‘Suicide of A Superpower’” I wrote: “…almost all the immigrants replacing the host population in the U.S. come from ‘Asia, Africa, and Latin America.’ Given America’s preference for welfare-dependent, third-world immigrants, pillage politics will proliferate. Thirty years on, when the Rubicon is crossed, most Americans will be poorer, less educated, and more welfare-dependent. One party will represent this majority. This party will serve as an instrument of perpetual oppression of the minority by a politically powerful majority. … America is destined to degenerate into a dominant-party state.”

The party of choice for this socially engineered America will never ever be Republican or libertarian leaning (capital or lower case “l”). Never ever.

A candidate who dismisses the national questions, namely immigration, affirmative action, the centrality to America of Christianity and the English language, etc.—fails to appreciate the civilizational dimension of ordered liberty.

Like it or not, the libertarian non-aggression axiom has a cultural and civilizational dimension, stripped of which it has no hope of being restored. I’m not saying that in her fumbling iterations on Islam Ms. Bachmann evinces such an understanding; far from it. But Bachmann is instinctively using Islam and Jihad as proxies for arguments that have become politically too dangerous to make.

For a conservative candidate to mock individuals who do so is a grave error.

UPDATE: “Two new polls show that Ron Paul is now the undisputed leader in Iowa, while Newt Gingrich has deflated and Rick Perry may be on the verge of making a small comeback.”

Insider Advantage (12/18)

Ron Paul 24%
Mitt Romney 18%
Rick Perry 16%
Newt Gingrich 13%
Michele Bachmann 10%
Rick Santorum 3%
Jon Huntsman 4%

UPDATE II: Talked Ron Paul On RT (Russia Today) & MyRon Pauli Distills GOP Debate

Constitution, Foreign Policy, Ilana On Radio & TV, libertarianism, Media, Politics, Republicans, Ron Paul, Russia, The State

I was on Russia Today (RT), my favorite broadcaster, to discuss the Ron Paul surge. I am sorry I was unable to give you notice of the segment, but I’ve been tied up. I am sure it will pop up later. Send the embed if you find it; I’m no good at locating such things.

UPDATE I: To MyRon’s comment: If I watched myself do these things I’d never do them. I’m a writer, first and foremost. A shy one, at that. I thought RT’s Liz said “anti-war,” which is a variant on the “isolationism” libel against libertarian foreign policy,” but I could be wrong.

UPDATE II: MyRon Pauli Distills Tonight’s GOP Debate, in Sioux City, Iowa:

“I subjected myself to something almost as bad as waterboarding – watching the FOX NEWS DEBATE!

Rick and Michelle are out there trying to out do each other on protecting us from Partial Birth Abortions.

Perry was a bit better and almost funny as the Aw Shucks Redneck invoking Tim Tebow.

Huntsman, while no ideologue, actually tries to act like an adult instead of an idiotic panderer.

Mitt, the businessman, can lecture the Bloated Socialistic Newtonian on capitalism – but the voters looking for red meat cheap shots probably can’t understand a lick of economics.

Newt – that right wing socialistic egomaniac – oi vey – the true inheritor of and poster boy for Hoover Progressivism, Nixonian Price Controlling, and Dubya’s Compassionate Conservatism.

And then there is Ron Paul getting clobbered over how to deal with America’s number 1 threat – the IRANIAN NAVY (heck – what happened to the Nepalese Air Force, the Liectenstein Army, and the Maldive Islands Special Forces)? Strange because of my job that some of this hits home as well.

Well, I dozed off a few times waiting for Ahmadinejad’s Battleship to come sailing up the Potomac!”

**

This is MyRon Pauli signing off for BAB.

MyRon’s previous campaign dispatch for BAB was filed from his couch too. Read it.