019): Will Dave Rubin Let Richard Spencer Do Business On His New, ‘Free,’ Crowd-Funder?

Celebrity, Free Markets, Free Speech, Political Correctness, The Establishment

YouTuber David Rubin is leaving the crowdfunding site Patreon, after Patreon unveiled its bizarre new ‘hate speech’ policy.” Rubin spoke to Tucker Carlson about his plans to launch his own version of the online donation site.

This is all well and good—but will Rubin allow true freedom on his business, or is the Rubin venture to be reserved only for an acceptable range of expression? Will Rubin allow Richard Spencer, for example, to transact on his site? That would be a real measure of freedom.

Let’s see.

But any time the truly great Tucker has the likes of Dave Rubin on; it’s time to stop listening. Rubin is interchangeable with other, standard issue, left-leaning Republicans or right-leaning Democrats.

If this is his usual white noise, it might just turn out to be a safer version of Patreon, reserved for establishment Republicans and slightly off-beat, but acceptably, others.

HERE.

UPDATED (5/27/019):

The Emptiness of #DaveRubin | 1791: "The question of why social media corporations would target his show never seems to occur to Rubin, [when] most disagreements on his show are about mundane political trivialities: tax policy, regulation." https://t.co/KdQfaLTjqm

— Ilana Mercer (@IlanaMercer) May 23, 2019

Mainstream Republicans Catching Up: My Jan. 2016 Picks For A ‘Winning Trump Cabinet’

Donald Trump, Elections, Foreign Policy, Government, Republicans

Good to see mainstream Republicans catch up. “The Winning Trump Ticket & Cabinet,” written January 22, 2016, suggested “the talented James Webb for the Trump ticket.”

Webb,” I wrote, “is a decorated Marine who served as Ronald Reagan’s secretary of the navy. In particular, Webb is the recipient of the ‘Navy Cross for heroism in Vietnam,’ the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts”:

Indisputably the last salt-of-the-earth Democrat of his generation, Webb had considered a bid for president as a Democrat, last year. However, he appeared out of place at the first dominatrix-dominated debate in October of 2015, where he confessed to killing a man or two in battle. He soon dropped out.

Citing paleoconservative thinker Pat Buchanan, Mr. Webb had argued forcefully against affirmative action and for poor whites, well before reports about the early demise of white working-class America percolated to the public.

Webb the Southern Democrat can galvanize Reagan Democrats as well as fans of the military on the Left.

It’s three years late. Maybe even too late. But perhaps the president—who has squandered 2 years appointing Kushner neoconservatives—will heed mainstream Republicans, who’ve finally, and somehow, stumbled on a sane candidate for secretary of defense.

2016 column: “The Winning Trump Ticket & Cabinet.”

2016 book: “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June 29, 2016).

NEW COLUMN: Wage Walls, Not Wars

Abortion, Addiction, Ilana Mercer, IMMIGRATION, Law, libertarianism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, The West, War, War on Drugs

NEW COLUMN IS “Wage Walls, Not Wars.” This “Big League Politics” Interview about paleolibertarianism is now on WND and the Unz Review.

Excerpt:

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. libertarianism is 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. It means that 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 libertarian 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, so some will disagree. It’s how I’ve applied certain principles week-in, week-out, for almost two decades. In my definition, a paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the just-mentioned libertarian non-aggression principle, by which all decent people should live, will crumble. It won’t endure.

Ironically, paleoconservatives have no issue grasping the cultural and civilizational dimensions of ordered liberty—namely that the libertarian non-aggression principle is peculiar to the West and won’t survive once western civilization is no more. Which is why, for paleoconservatives, immigration restrictionism is a no-brainer.

By the way, the statement is not meant to be culturally chauvinistic. There are indigenous tribal people (say, in Brazil) who’re peaceful and pastoral. I mourn their culture’s near-extinction, as well. Where such extinction has been brought about by the West’s chauvinism—it must be condemned.

In any event, paleoconservatives would typically grasp that libertarian principles would not endure in certain cultures. Libertarians, on the other hand, have had a hard time linking civilizational issues with the libertarian axiom of non-aggression. What do I mean? Libertarians will chant, “Free markets, free minds, the free movement of people.” Let’s have ‘em all.

They don’t always explain how these principles are to endure once Western societies are overrun by individuals from cultures which don’t uphold these principles. (From the fact that our own societies are turning out liberty hating individuals—it doesn’t follow we should import more.)

On the other hand, paleoconservatives are far less focused on the state as an evil actor and often appear more concerned with culture wars: gay marriage, cannabis, pornography, abortion. The paleolibertarian rejects any attempts by the state to legislate around the issues of:

Abortion: Completely defund it is our position.

Gay marriage: Solemnize your marriage in private churches, please.

Drugs: Legalize them and stop the hemispheric Drug War.

Wage walls, not wars.

As a creedal paleolibertarian, I see the road to freedom, primarily, in beating back The State, so that individuals can regain freedom of association, dominion over property, the absolute right of self-defense; the right to hire, fire, and, generally, associate at will.

Foreign policy—specifically, no meddling in the affairs of other countries!—is the be all and end all of both paleoconservatism and paleolibertarianism. Don’t let any of the radio or TV personalities fool you. If he or she liked, justified or rationalized Bush’s Middle-Eastern wars or Trump’s dabbling in Niger—he or she is no paleolibertarian. (Tucker Carlson is a fabulous paleoconservative.)

Both variants are for small government and big society. Again, more so than the paleoconservative, the paleolibertarian is radical in his anti-state position, sometimes even advocating a stateless society.

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: In what ways does your political thought differ from CATO institute libertarianism? …

… READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN IS “Wage Walls, Not Wars.” The interview is now on WND and the Unz Review. It was conducted by correspondent Seth Segal for Big League Politics. A version was published on Nov. 23, 2018.