Thursday, December 22, 2011

Freedom Failed: Ron Paul and Tom DiLorenzo Excuse Away The Black Undertow

PK NOTE: The Thomas DiLorenzo article in question throughout this piece is here

It is my belief that Rep. Ron Paul -- who is a religion unto himself at this point, a deity in the eyes of his followers who can do no wrong -- should actually defend the content of his newsletter. Turn the tables and challenge those attacking him by asking, politely, to prove him wrong.

You can't. Dr. Paul continues to state that liberty and freedom are the things that make America great, but as we at SBPDL know, freedom failed. Just take a look at Detroit, an Actual Black Run America (ABRA) city that stands on the verge of the most pitiful bankruptcy in world history.

Sure, sprinkling in some Austrian Economics might save Detroit; but you'd have to sprinkle in some white people in the process and remove, well, 82 percent of that city's population if you hoped to save it. Dr. Thomas Sowell tried to blame liberalism and socialism for Detroit's collapse, but he forgot to mention how similar polices are in play in Norway, a nation that has some of the highest rates of entrepreneurship in the world.

Et tu, Detroit? The only entrepreneurship there involves selling stolen goods from the trunk of a car.

Reason magazine once had a cover-story with The Price is Right host Drew Carey on how to save Cleveland.  Hearing Drew Carey say that free market economics is the best way to save Cleveland was inadvertently the funniest thing the guy has ever said. The article was full of Libertarian non-sense. You know how you save Cleveland and make it the economic powerhouse that it was when A Christmas Story was set? Well, that would revolve around removing the Black Undertow from the city who ruin public transportation for every one else, commit the vast majority (and disproportionate amount of) the crime, and make the schools unsafe for those desiring an actual education.

"If you remove them, people will return." It's as simple as that. The Black Undertow has more devastating long-term affects to a city's health, infrastructure, schools, sense of justice (stretching the criminal system to its limits) by requiring local law enforcement to enact veritable martial law to keep the peace, and business sector -- it dies overnight as Black people can't sustain a local economy -- then a city being besieged by aerial bombardment in time of war.

Hiroshima recovered from the atom bomb; Detroit will never recover from the Black Undertow. Neither will Birmingham, Alabama.

Now, one of the top writers at the left-of-center has decided to try and smear National Review's for having a legacy of racism (ask Peter Brimelow how true that is or John O'Sullivan).

Thomas DiLorenzo has penned one of the most mendacious columns in the history of the Internet that finally proves the once Paleo-libertarians have completely gone the way of the Dinosaur. To think, he lives in Baltimore, a city where the Black Undertow contends with Atlanta, Newark, Detroit, and Memphis for the worst in the country. It's so bad in Baltimore that hospitals are used to train trauma surgeons and military doctors on what to expect in war zones:
CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr reported this weekend on a program used to train military doctors for the fast-paced and bloody environment found in war zone hospitals — namely, America’s inner cities. 
Starr follows a rotation of military doctors who are preparing for their deployment at the University of Maryland Shock Trauma Center in Baltimore. The program director told Starr that the hospital is the closest to a war zone hospital he has seen:
COL. DAVID POWERS: The injuries that I’ve treated here and that I see here at this hospital are the closest thing to the injuries I saw in Iraq that I’ve experienced in the continental United States.
 Black people in Baltimore have turned a formerly great American city into a town filled with neighborhoods that returning war veterans say are worse than anything they saw in war zones:

Earl Johnson's boots crunch broken glass from liquor bottles as he walks down an alley in East Baltimore's Oliver neighborhood. He is just blocks from the site of the firebombing of a family who called the police on area drug dealers and were killed for it and just yards from some of the most memorable scenes of urban decay in "The Wire."

At his side are Rich Blake, 32, a Marine Corps veteran, and Jeremy Johnson, 34
, a Navy veteran, who like Earl — who is no relation — are on a different kind of mission.

They've come to this neighborhood once synonymous with the worst of Baltimore to help it become something better. They call this mission "Operation Oliver."

As the men walk, they pick up empty Seagram's gin and Bacardi rum bottles. They point to progress — refurbished homes, a painted playground — and to vacant houses and trash-filled alleys that still need work.
"The impoverished conditions, the vacant homes, the crime — in some cases, Oliver is in worse shape than some of the neighborhoods we've been deployed to," Blake says. "We're not afraid to dig in and make a difference in a community that's got a bad reputation in the city. The discipline, the go-get-'em, let's-do-this-now, aggressive attitude, it really lends itself to community service in a way traditional organizations haven't been able to do."

The Reality of Baltimore is that Black people make it mighty dangerous and unsafe to live in, Dr. DiLorenzo. Sort of like South Africa, where an Actual Black Run Nation (ABRN) has turned what was once the envy of the world into the future site of a full-scale race war. Yes, when the terrorist Nelson Mandela dies, younger Blacks will be emboldened to launch even more devastating incursions into Boer (and white) areas.

Illana Mercer recently wrote a book about the fall of South Africa that Dr. DiLorenzo blurbed. Here's what he said about Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa:
"If you want to witness the end result of what in America is called `diversity,' you must read `Into the Cannibal's Pot.' `Diversity' is a euphemism for racial retribution administered mostly by guilty white liberals in universities, corporations, and government. It is a thoroughly collectivist notion that condones punishing the current generation of white males for the sins of the past. It's most extreme form is practiced in post-Apartheid South Africa, and its effects are meticulously documented by Ilana Mercer (who also writes marvelously): rampant black-on-white crime, racist labor laws that have created `The world's most extreme affirmative action program'; the confiscation of private property; economic socialism; state-sponsored terrorism; and, most sickeningly, the idolization of the corrupt and murderous Zimbabwean dictator, Robert Mugabe. The Western media ignore all of this because of their ideological love affair with the communistic African National Congress and, frankly, their support for many of these same policies." --THOMAS J. DILORENZO, professor of economics, Loyola College, Maryland, author of the best-selling "The Real Lincoln," "Lincoln Unmasked," and most recently, "Hamilton's Curse"

Hmm, it seems like Dr. DiLorenzo understands that freedom has failed in South Africa, where white people have been deprived of their rights and he believes this is is coming in the United States. Good for him. He's right: Black-Run America (BRA) is bolstered daily by Eric "My People" Holder and his Department of (In) Justice, even though cracks are showing in it across the nation. Strangely in the piece at, Dr. Dilorenzo would attack National Review for defending Apartheid, a system of government that many Black people in South Africa fondly recall as the strange Black power government that replaced it collapses into the inevitably Black failed nation/state (or city) that history is littered with.

Yet, DiLorenzo chastised National Review for once daring to defend white people against the onslaught of what we have deemed BRA:

In an early, August 1957 editorial National Review asked the question of whether "the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally . . . " "The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is entitled because . . . it is the advanced race." It is "almost certain" that this was written by Buckley. To bolster its case for White supremacy in the South (and presumably in the North as well), the editorial cited unnamed "statistics" that supposedly proved "median cultural superiority of White over Negro . . ." 

Universal suffrage (i.e. ending government interferences with the right to vote by blacks) would be harmful to "the claims of civilization," said the editorial. The same editorial also praised the actions of the British government in Kenya for basing its discriminatory policies on its perception of "qualitative differences between its culture and the Negroes," or "between civilization and barbarism . . ." After all, a March 1960 National Review editorial intoned, "in the Deep South the Negroes are retarded" and any attempt to argue this point is mere "demagoguery." Ah, that Buckley had a magical touch with the English language, did he not?

Buckley even had kind words for former Ku Klux Klansman David Duke of Louisiana. "[J]ust as we like to think Gorbachev has truly renounced the evil doctrines he was so recently associated with," Buckley wrote on December 2, 1991, "so has David Duke." He then praises Duke for his view that "white people also have rights." Huh? Whoever said that white people did not have "rights"?! Buckley then says that if he lived in Louisiana he probably wouldn’t vote for Duke (who was running for public office at the time), but then again "I would however force myself to wonder whether I was being vindictive" by not voting for David Duke.
Dr. DiLorenzo, what do you expect is going to happen if Ron Paul got elected and we returned to the U.S. Constitution of old and started to eliminate the entitlement state? The artificial Black middle class was created solely by an ever-enlarging Federal government and with the elimination of various Federal departments and agencies comes MASSIVE Black unemployment that the private sector can't alleviate.

What about Black people who are disproportionately represented on TANF/Welfare, EBT/Food Stamps, and free lunches at school? We already know that The Day the EBT Card runs out is the next Hurricane Katrina moment in America.

Will President Paul be on hand in Atlanta trying to tell people how the invisible hand of the Free Market can help Black people pay their rent instead of relying on Section 8 Housing? Black people rioted back in 2010 over signing up for Section 8 vouchers that wouldn't be good for five-to-seven years, mind you.

What about Affirmative Action? This is one of the only reasons that many of the prestigious public universities have a Black enrollment, because they condone the discrimination of more qualified applicants in favor of enrolling Black students.

That doesn't seem fair or anywhere near the type of equal treatment one should get under the law!

And Dr. Paul is against police state measures, but high levels of Black criminality necessitate curfews in Black Undertow cities like Philadelphia, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Baltimore and Chicago. Hell, New Orleans is a war zone right now thanks to the citizens of the Black Undertow.

I know, I know: "Collectivism is racism." How dare anyone think such draconian thoughts that are anathema in Black-Run America! Dr. Paul repudiates all connections to evil bigots, because he wants to get the Black vote and once in office, remove every hand-out that keeps afloat the Black Undertow.

Look, the reason Dr. Paul is so popular is for a few reasons:
1. He's a genuine guy. People can tell that the other candidates are all sociopaths. That's refreshing!
2. He wants to end pointless wars and bring the troops home. That's great news! 
3. He wants to dismantle the police state and restore personal liberties and freedom. That's great news too!

That's about it. His policies (and Libertarian policies in general) would be disastrous to the Black community. Why would they vote for their own dispossession? White people in South Africa and America do it, by why should we hold Black people to the same standards? Collectively, they understand that Organized Blackness is their only ticket for success in America.

We already know that civilization broke down in one day during Hurricane Katrina because Black people lacked the ability to govern or take care of themselves without adult supervision (amounting to a mini-police state).

White people in nearby suburbs of New Orleans banded together collectively to protect their   united interests in a time of great distress as the Black Undertow swarmed around them like the walkers in The Walking Dead.

So, in closing, Dr. LiLorenzo is a useful idiot of the strange Ron Paul Cult. He wrote a glowing review of a book that argued the dismantling of South Africa's Apartheid system had horrible consequences for white people there, and he stated that that will soon happen in America for white people too. 

Yet he chastises National Review for daring to have once defended white rights.

You know, one of these days people are going to start asking when an actual group will come along that dares does defend white rights in Black-Run America (BRA). It will happen spontaneously, and it will happen without any contributions from those bemoaning collectivism as some form of racism.

I'm sure that Murray Rothbard will be smiling from high above when that day comes. Dr. DiLorenzo, your praise for Mercer's book shows us that you will be too.

PK NOTE: Okay, I'm going back to # posts for a few days after this one. Maybe a few college football posts too!


Anonymous said...

Apartheid South Africa was a place of refuge for people who Mugabe disliked because they were members of the wrong tribe.

An uncomfortable fact which is why you will never hear it when refugees are being discussed.

JJ said...

Your points about the naivete of libertarians and Ron Paul fanatics w/r/t race are correct.

However, the US faces problems outside of the racial issues. One such problem - in my opinion a massive problem - is foreign policy/war.

I will vote for Ron Paul because of his views on foreign policy.

If Paul tried to defend the newsletters he'd be done in a heartbeat. I am glad he instead has decided to distance himself from them.

Anonymous said...

I've heard on quite a few sites recently (including in this very article) that once Mandela goes to the big KFC buffet in the sky that the savages will go wild in SA and start a bona fide race war. Can anyone explain to me why that is? What power does this sick, 80(?) year-old guy have over the blacks there? What will his death change?

Ben N Indiana said...

My beefs with libertarians:

1. They fail to acknowledge that Austrian economics is uniquely Western that presumes an average intellect and higher among a populace.

It cannot work in Africa and efforts to apply free economies in South America have only been moderately successful.

2. Libertarians (CATO, Stossel, Kerry) advocate open borders.

Last time I attended a Libertarian Party convention, they did not have 'open border' attendance. Rather, I was required to register, obtain 'papers' and forced to dangle my name tag around my neck. If one cannot enter a Libertarian convention hall without documentation of membership, one should not be allowed to enter a nation without documentation of citizenship.

3. Libertarians are type-2 homophobes.

By that I mean Libertarians fear being ostracized and criticized by militant gay activists. The Libertarian Party has become the gay-advocacy party. This embrace group rights and defies the libertarian principle of individual rights.

4. Libertarians advocate gay marriage.

Libertarians are opposed to gov't licensing. The one exception is they advocate licensing of gay marriage.

btw . . .

I've attended many Libertarian Party functions. All have been 99.99% White. No Hispanics, very rarely any blacks and I've never seen an Asian at an LP function.

Ben N Indiana said...

Ron Paul is the only candidate whose policies would:

• Dismantle Affirmative Action

• Close the black-run Dept of Education

• Prefer states rights, individual rights and property rights above so-called 'civil rights.'

• End the punitive tax system that redistributes wealth from Whites to blacks.

• Pull the plug on welfare, et al.

I find it disturbing when Constitutionalists like Ron Paul are considered "kooks."

Paul's refusal to own up to his newsletters is bothersome, to say the least. As much as I'm disappointed in is coy approach, he remains the most reality-friendly candidate in the running.

Dr. Paul may not get an 'x' in every square on the check list, but he scores far higher than his competition.

make it rain TRUTH said...

"Ben N Indiana said...

I've attended many Libertarian Party functions. All have been 99.99% White. No Hispanics, very rarely any blacks and I've never seen an Asian at an LP function."

Well, to be honest the idea of liberty is an acutely white one. From the Magna Carta, through the American Founders. America was practically the first nation built upon the idea of freedom, and God granted rights (to be protected from government intrusion).

It's a foreign idea to nearly every other culture and race. So I am not surprised that not many non-whites have much interest in a party based around liberty.

Silent Running said...

This is disappointing, but not totally surprising. Dr. DiLorenzo has done a masterful job of destroying the many myths of Abraham Lincoln, but it cannot be denied that he considers Lincoln's "racism" to be one of his greatest failings. Mercer's not that bright either. It seems to be a mark of libertarianism to boldly discard some propaganda while zealously embracing other propaganda.

Well, to be honest the idea of liberty is an acutely white one.

And if you tell that to a libertarian, he'll go just as apoplectic as a die-hard liberal. He'll tell you that all people desire liberty and that all problems with minorities are the fault of a meddlesome state. For all their talk of going to war against the government and sitting on large stockpiles of guns and food, I actually expect the doctrinaire libertarians to succumb fairly quickly.

Btw, "collectivist" is the libertarian's favorite buzzword, often used the same way liberals use "racist." When you see "collectivist" on the page, there's an excellent chance you're dealing with someone who believes Austrian economics can cure all ills.

Laz said...

"Why would they vote for their own dispossession?"

Ha! Good one Paul. With half (approximate) of all blacks in this country not being able to vote because of their own criminal behavior I think there's very little black vote to be had. It's more than likely aimed at the DWL vote.

Ivan .M said...

Aside from the realities of race undermining libertarianism's universalist foundations, I don't even agree with libertarians on the substance of many ideas they promote. The most acute deficiency I could never overcome was their monetary theory; I had to side with Lincoln on that one.

My philosophical shifts have traveled secular Leftism, libertarianism, market anarchism, economic nationalism, and ethno-cultural traditionalism (in that order). Where I stand now is a combination of the last two.

The SWPL White people I encounter usually don't know what to do in response to a non-White who takes the side of Real America. It's hilarious to watch them panic when I say, "Are you going to attempt intimidation or try to shame me with words like 'racist' or 'bigot?' You do realize I'm not some White eunuch you can silence."

Hardcore DWLs, however, get violently angry at me and use racial slurs. Insofar as my family's immigration to the United States was part of the willfully planned Brown Tsunami, these DWL cretins appear to harbor a special dislike for pawns that refuse to be moved.

Olivier said...

Ben N Indiana is exactly right.

Dr. Ron Paul's policies would dismantle BRA, despite what he says about helping negros.

Libertarians as a group are 99% white. And despite what they say, their ideas or meritocracy would lead to the end of BRA.

These people either don't accept the racial consequences of their policies, or do but don't openly talk about. Regardless, the policy of true freedom (NOT Government-imposed Black Run America) does work.

Olivier said...

Re: Why doesn't Ron Paul defend his Newsletters?

I have two names for you:
James D. Watson and William Shockley.

James D. Watson, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA and winner of the Nobel prize, raised a storm recently when a British newspaper quoted him saying that black Africans are not as intelligent as whites.

William Bradford Shockley, who shared a Nobel Prize in physics for his role in the creation of the transistor and earned the enmity of many for his views on the genetic differences between the races. [This man created "Silicon Valley"]

They will be remembered not for discovering DNA and creating Silicon Valley, but their public comments correctly identifying negros as inferior. They were/are ostracized by academia, media, and public.

Ron Paul has a role to play, and it is not as flag bearer for race realists. For now we must be content with the vanguard of Race Realism: Paul Kersey, Unamused, OneStdv, Cesar Tort (Chechar), Altright, Vdare, AmRen, etc.

Anonymous said...

Shortly after Ramseur’s release from the hospital, he filed a phony report that men hired by Mr Goetz tried to kidnap him. He was not charged in the incident.

A year later, in 1986, Ramseur was convicted of holding a gun while a cohort raped a pregnant woman in the Bronx.

Read more: Guy whose word that he did not attack Bernhard Goetz and whose word was taken by the media found dead

Libertarians are quite naieve. If you repeal the drug laws criminals will just disappear.

Anonymous said...

Christmas brings out blacks being black...


WarriorClass III said...

"Look, the reason Dr. Paul is so popular is for a few reasons:

1. He's a genuine guy. People can tell that the other candidates are all sociopaths. That's refreshing!
2. He wants to end pointless wars and bring the troops home. That's great news!
3. He wants to dismantle the police state and restore personal liberties and freedom. That's great news too!

That's about it. His policies (and Libertarian policies in general) would be disastrous to the Black community."

Well, once Ron Paul is elected we will have good use for all those FEMA camps we paid for.

Tribal_Superman said...

Hmm Although I do agree with SBDL I also Know that ron paul is leaps and bounds above these other creatures whom is hes centered around. And I am a fanatic ;) Ron Paul 2012 you get my x bro and I still love you SBDL...just gotta go with paul there is no other choice.

W74 said...

I agree that freedom failed for blacks. However if our country truly embraced social and economic freedoms (as opposed to the social elevation of non-producers and the redistribution of wealth systems we currently have in place) then blacks would limit their freedoms on their own accord.

The notion of freedom for most, even all would still hold true. We are all born with equal opportunity and rights. What you do with it depends on you from there.

I liken it to going through a class in school or college. Everyone starts out at 100% and whatever you do from there you choose how many points get taken off throughout your time there.

Prof. Woland said...

Detroit going bankrupt will be a good lesson about what ultimately happens to the black welfare state. My only regret is that the MSM will miss the real story and not use the opportunity to drive the point home. The icing on the cake is that this will occur during Obama’s reelection campaign and with any luck this will stick to him like a tar baby.

EYE OF HORUS said...

If Ron Paul is too big a Chicken to defend his own newsletter, then how will he govern against committed leftists who refuse to cut one penny of entitlement spending?
Answer, he won't! The first time a Liberal plays the Race Card, ole Ron will run and hide and NOTHING will actually change!
Such a COWARD will not be able to deal with the traitors in Congress or the Useful Idiots in the Media!
Ron Paul would be a Disaster as President! He doesn't have the backbone to stand up to PC or the Communists that are promoting it! Ron Paul would accomplish NOTHING as POTUS and the March towards Communism would continue unabated! Worse, his Anti-War rhetoric would embolden our enemies and make the US weak and ineffectual as a Superpower!
Ron Paul is just a Sad, Old Man with an Ayn Rand fixation! He's no Leader for America! He can't even face down the Media Whores at CNN!

AnalogMan said...

when the terrorist Nelson Mandela dies, younger Blacks will be emboldened to launch even more devastating incursions into Boer (and white) areas.

So, shoot (or hang) the bastard and bring it on!

anon 12:07 -

I think this just started out as a rumour, and certain stirrers, like Julius Malema (former ANC Youth League leader) got on the bandwagon and like to scare White people with threats of genocide.

Probably the idea was that Mandela, being a genuine saint and "the most loved statesman in the world", who got the Nobel Peace prize for bringing about reconciliation between Whites and Babuntus, is holding the whole thing together by his moral authority. Didn't you watch "Invictus"?

I don't believe there is an actual conspiracy; blacks are too stupid for that. No telling what they might spontaneously do if somebody starts it, though.

Anonymous said...

Friday Decebmer 23, 2011 - the "Air Jordan Riots"!

Even if all the rioters aren't niggers (although the vast majority are niggs), they have been niggerfuxated and culturally degraded to such an extent that they now participate in typical nigger behavior.


Louisville, Kentucky

Louisville, Kentucky (WDRB) -- Louisville Metro Police had to break up a big fight early today at Jefferson Mall over the release of a new style of sneakers.

Officers were called to a food court in the mall where 75 to 100 people were reportedly in a fight over pairs of the new Air Jordan Eleven Retro Concords

A security guard was reportedly trampled by the crowd waiting for several shoe stores to open early.


Apelanta, Georgia:

Race for New Air Jordan Sneakers Turns Ugly


LITHONIA, Ga. - The quest for some limited edition sneakers took an ugly turn early Friday morning outside the Mall at Stonecrest in Lithonia.

DeKalb police say several people have been arrested , including one woman who left two young children in her car, after the new Nike Air Jordan 11 Concords went on sale.

Hundreds of people began lining up in the early hours at the Mall at Stonecrest to get their hands on a pair of Nike's new Michael Jordan sneakers. Several stores inside the mall were offering the sneakers.

Apparently, some people could not wait until the mall opened its doors at 8 a.m. Police were called to the scene.

DeKalb police responded with as many as 20 squad cars after a large crowd apparently made an illegal entry into the mall, breaking down the door. Police escorted most of the people back outside. At least four people were arrested in that incident.

Police say more arrests could come as a result of the break in.

According to police, one woman left two young children in her car in the mall parking lot. Officers with DeKalb police had to break her car window to get the children out. They say the woman's car had been in the parking lot for quite a while.

Anonymous said...

Tukwila, Washington:

Crowd waiting for new Air Jordans clashes with police,0,3200543.story?track=rss


Police officers used pepper spray to break up fights within a group waiting snag a pair of the latest Air Jordan sneakers early Friday morning.

A crowd, numbering in the hundreds, was camped outside the Southcenter Shopping Mall ahead of the release of the retro Air Jordan XI Concords when the frenzy began.
Sign up for Q13 FOX News Daily

A Q13 FOX News photographer on the scene said people were shoving each other and shouting at police before the store selling the shoes, Foot Locker, opened about 3:30 a.m.

Tukwila Police Department spokesperson Mike Murphy said pepper spray was used against people fighting with officers in order to avert a full-scale riot.


Annapolis, MD

Air Jordans attract crowds, police at Annapolis Mall
By David Marino-Nachison

An early morning crowd hoping to buy new Air Jordan shoes was dispersed by police Friday morning, Anne Arundel County authorities said.


Indianapolis Indiana:|mostcom

Police called to malls as crowds vie for new sneakers

Police were called this morning to two Indianapolis malls to control crowds of shoppers flocking to purchase the newest-generation Air Jordan basketball shoe.

Certain stores at Lafayette Square Mall on the Northwestside were forced to close their doors shortly after opening at 7 a.m. because of mayhem created by hundreds of shoppers vying to get to the shoes, according to communication on police radio this morning.

Impatient shoppers tore a door off its hinges at Lafayette Square,
confirmed Kendale Adams, a spokesman for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department.


Thursday night, hundreds lined up outside Castleton Square Mall in anticipation of midnight sales of the shoes. Police were called to control shoppers, who were shoving one another and throwing objects. No arrests were made, police said.

The same scene is being played out today in other malls across the United States, an online search confirms, in cities such as Charlotte, Houston and San Antonio.


Air Jordan fans destroy property, trample shoppers in search of new shoes


Austin, TX

Overnight, unruly crowds forced two malls in Austin to shut down.

Hunter Wallace said...

The Black Undertow has never had more "freedom" in this country. The government even works to their advantage over other races.

Detroit and Birmingham are the product of "free society." Somalia is another example where black people enjoy freedom.

Oddly enough, libertarian anarchists see Somalia as an example worth imitating.

Anonymous said...

Tom DiLorenzo has done good work with his Lincolnian revisionism. As an employee of Loyola University I suspect that he would be toast if he subscribed to race realism, but as far as I know he does not, so I cannot accuse him of a lack of temerity, or a hidden agenda.

The quick answer to all of this is that liberalism, whether left liberalism, right neoconservatism, or libertarianism starts from the premise that everyone is essentially equal, and that rights flow from the individual to the state. Marxism is sometimes confused as a non-liberal philosophy, but it actually derives from the idea of the “general will” which is an abstraction from individualism, and is simply a logical consequence of equality.

In American politics any hint of race realism, or anti-equalitarianism in general, is the kiss of death. Paul is acting very odd about it, though, especially when he could bring up Obama's long time association with his spiritual mentor, the right reverend Wright, as a foil. One has the impression that he hasn't really thought through his strategy. This is unfamiliar territory for Paul, and it shows.

Paul is somewhat of a goofball, but he is no more dangerous than his neocon adversaries—only different. In some respects he is even better than they, such as is the case with his economics. The idea that he is “pro-white” does not seem to be very evident, unless one supposes that fiscal responsibility is a white idea. On the other hand, it is the case that at the macro level the so-called “white nations” have not been fiscally responsible at all. But this leads to another Paul “problem,” his quest to abolish or modify the Federal Reserve. That, along with his foreign policy idea, has earned him the moniker of being an anti-Semite (just ask Joe Scarborough or Ben Stein about it).

If Paul should win in Iowa, things will become very ugly for him anent the mainstream media, and even the conservative blogs. Mostly, the neocon press will become shrill to an extent not ever seen. As a traditionalist I am not happy with libertarianism, however I'd like to see him win a few primaries if only for the spectacle of watching the other worthless Republicans (and they are worthless) become apoplectic. And even if he should become President, which is not likely at all, how could things be much worse than they already are? We live in a dark age, and whatever happens tomorrow will become worse the next day. Much worse.

Ben N Indiana said...

make it rain TRUTH said...

Well, to be honest the idea of liberty is an acutely white one.

• You are dead-on accurate.

• It seems to me that nearly all non-Whites are one-issue (race) demographic groups.

Seldom do you see non-Whites rallying on either side of other issues such as abortion, taxes, education, immigration, etc.

• Asians are capable of embracing free market concepts and democracy. But it seems somewhat limited. The S Koreans are dominated by one party (GNP) as WERE the Japanese (LDP). China, of course, is a one-party state.

Once Whites become a minority in the USA (2041), the socialists (Democrats) will dominate, the remaining embers of liberty will flicker to black, then grow cold.

Ben N Indiana said...

Note to Paul:

As a die-hard libertarian I appreciate your analysis.

Keep in mind that Ron Paul's views on immigration run contrary to those of Stossel, Carey, CATO and many other libertarians. Like abortion, it's a split decision.

Ben N Indiana said...

Are you a libertarian?

Here's a 10-question online quiz.

Ben N Indiana said...

If Ron Paul were elected president, he would contend with a hostile congress.

While few if any of his libertarian views would be enacted, I still think he would be preferred to a president who embraces BRA (or ABRA).

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul is not being attacked because of anything he may or may not have written about blacks. That is just a cover. The real reason he is being attacked is because he is not supportive enough of a certain middle eastern country.

BRA is a nice term, and we get it that it doesn't mean blacks run this nation. But the real folks who DO run this nation have a certain attachment to that middle eastern nation, and they are the ones who are leading the charge against Paul.

Ben N Indiana said...


" . . . libertarianism starts from the premise that everyone is essentially equal, and that rights flow from the individual to the state"

I've been an active libertarian for decades and know of no libertarians who believe that every is essentially equal.

Personally, I believe in individual liberty; not equal people.

Note the leftists often prefer the phrase equal opportunityrather than equal rights. That phrase often adjoins 'housing,' 'education,' etc. In their distorted view it justifies 'Affirmative Action,' quotas, redistribution of wealth, etc.

Libertarians believe in individual liberties.

IMHO, a store owner should have the liberty (not 'the right') to eject most anyone for any reason.

Anonymous said...

I've been an active libertarian for decades and know of no libertarians who believe that every is essentially equal.

Hi Ben,

You are superficially correct in that most people, even liberals, when pressed would indicate that there are differences among people. However the basic liberal (and libertarian) principle is that right is equal. This is a metaphysical concept, and has little to do with actual physical differences.

As long as everyone has the same pre-civil (or natural) right, the logical consequence is that the resultant unequal right as it actually manifests in society is therefore an evil secondary to contingent inequality within the civil order, and morally it must be therefore be corrected. This then leads to state action, etc.

One can find this expressed in Hobbes' "right of nature." Here everyone has to be essentially equal in order to enter into the civil union. For how else can unequals ever be said to be able to consent equally?

Anonymous said...

Before all of you jump too hard onto libertarians, you should probably know that there is no one type of libertarian.

Just like there are paleoconservatives, whom most people on this blog would be sympathetic to like Pat Buchanan, and neoconservatives whom most would distrust like John McCain, libertarians are also divided among paleolibertarians and neolibertarians. There are probably other classifications but the paleo/neo seems to be the most common.

Ron Paul is probably a paleolibertarian. Paleolibertarians are also probably the closest in thought to our Classical Liberal Founders. So think twice before slamming these guys, after all, they are probably closer to the ideology of the Founders than the most so-called conservatives of today.

My guess is if people on this blog have problems with libertarians, it is probably the neolibertarians that come to mind.

Anonymous said...

Ben wrote: Asians are capable of embracing free market concepts and democracy. But it seems somewhat limited. The S Koreans are dominated by one party (GNP) as WERE the Japanese (LDP). China, of course, is a one-party state.

Ben, I enjoy your comments and insights. Thanks. For a few reasons I'll not go into, I'm somewhat familiar with one aspect of the "Asian" situation. [Actually, “Asian” is not a good term since it is continental. I am glad you broke it down.]

The Chinese, at least the generation preceding the Cultural Revolution, and even those who grew up with Deng Xiaoping's work on “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics,” were traditional in outlook. Chinese are, in general, rule followers. And because of it the generic idea of a one party state does not in and of itself rule out an implementation of “democracy” [a rather useless word if not pre-defined]. Hence, a "one party state” is, at least from the standpoint of a more or less homgenous Chinese people, not an essential contradiction. Of course, whether the one party actually represents the people is a question that can be asked.

Also, be careful of accepting the idea that “Asians” are able to embrace the “free market.” In the classical Western sense the free market entails individual right, and this is wholly missing from the Chinese experience. The Chinese market is hardly "free" (unless one shops the streets for knock offs and other goods). Then there is much freedom to price shop based upon supply/demand. The national Chinese market is not unlike Western markets in that both embrace a kind of mercantilism.

Getting back to the topic at hand, Paul Kersey, the blog owner, is I believe correct to call the libertarians on the carpet. If the welfare state was abandoned, Negroes would be at a loss to survive very well. In truth, libertarian economics are racist. But that is reality.

Anonymous said...

Ret'd LAPD here. Very interesting story about James Ramseur, one of Bernhard Goetz' attackers. In all my years on the job I can recount only a handful of black people committing suicide. Now murder suicide is something completely different and was very common. Blacks will cap themselves but they must take people with them.

countenance said...


Believe it or not, Lew Rockwell was once right wing enough on race, and his writings racially tinged enough, that the Council of Conservative Citizens' newspaper printed his columns. Rockwell's sea change happened in about 1997.

Anonymous said...

Lew Rockwell wrote the articles in question but is too afraid to admit it. He should just be up-front about it to save his guy.

That being said, is hard-left on race now. This DiLorenzo article is a fine example of the black angels-white devils theory that Rockwell now embraces (or pretends to embrace).

Anonymous said...

"Ron Paul is the only candidate whose policies would:

• Dismantle Affirmative Action"

Then why is he afraid to bring up affirmative action in the debates?

Anonymous said...

Paul Kersey,

Are you a fucking nitwit or what? "Freedom failed?" "Libertarianism failed?" What are you smoking you fool? Both you and that other Paleo-"racialist" conservative Roissey are both stupid as fuck when it comes to poly-sci and political economy.

What libertarian policies failed? That's the same bullshit that the Left flings all over the place. You two dumb fucks are dumber than leftists. Not good.

* We have a welfare state - what does that have to do with libertarianism?

* We have public education both in the high schools and colleges - what does that have to do with libertarianism?

* We have a central bank issuing government mandated paper money - WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH LIBERTARIANISM YOU FUCKTARDS?

* We have anti-discrimination laws - what the fuck does that have to do with libertarianism?

* We have a society dedicated to the confiscation and redistribution of wealth - What does that have to do with libertarianism??!!!!

* We have hundreds of preventative law agencies issuing hundreds of thousands of regulations - what the fuck does that have to do with libertarianism.

Listen up Kersey, Roissey, Whiskey, Auster and all you other Paleo-Fuck-Tards!! Nothing about our society is LIBERTARIAN! Do you understand that you human feces. Read some books you worthless mohter-fuckers.

God, there is nothing on this earth worse than stupid, ignorant Paleo/Bio/HBDer Conservatives. Brain-fucking-dead.

Kersey, you deserve idiot of the year award. You cover a single issue - the destruction of the black community. And you don't even know why it is the way it is. No, you are stupid enough to believe that Sweeden's socialism makes it a haven for entrepenuers.

Dumb fuck. You'd be better off dead with that worthless peace of shit thing you call a brain


Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

Last anon,

I'm not a paleoconservative. I'm actually fairly on a number of issues.

With that stated, I'm capable of realizing and understanding that socialism does work in a homogenous environment.

Capitalism is the best system, of course, but guess what: before the influx of non-white immigrants, those systems worked pretty sufficiently over in Norway, Finland, and Sweden.

Libertarian ideas sound great. I loved Rothbard's magnum opus "Man, Economy, and the State," but unlike you, I understand that Austrian's, capitalists, and Adam SMITH didn't factor in Blacks into the equation.

Or IQ.

Black people change the game (yes, there is the so-called "Talented Tenth," but after yesterday's nationwide Black Air Jordan riot..."


Tell me what Libertarians would overturn? Rockwell once understood the importance of race -- hell, most of those connected with the Von Mises Institute still do.

You saw Black people rioting over fucking Air Jordan's yesterday -- nationwide! That so-called poverty excuse for crime is over.

So how will the introduction of libertarian ideas change all of this? By making Black people accountable for their actions and their livelihood?

America would be New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in one day. One day.

Never accuse me of not understanding libertarian policies or some of the more important tracts that guide your thought. Never.

I've read more in my 27 years than most people could ever read in 27 lifetimes.

I've come to the conclusion that race IS THE MOST IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION FOR BUILDING AND SUSTAINING A LONG-TERM SOCIETY in the 21st century and beyond.

Now, I never blamed "Libertarian" policies for any of the things you mentioned. I blamed DiLorenzo of being a disingenuous piece of smarmy crap for his pathetic article on National Review, when he had just praised Mercers' book on South Africa in pretty radical terms.

Go grab some obscure libertarian tract, purchase it through to help out the cause over there (whatever the flavor of the month is to these guys), and masturbate to it.

I'll look at the world and understand that race matters above all.

Have a Merry Christmas and never, ever accuse me again of being a paleo-conservative.

YT said...

There should be a 4th big thing RP has going for him: Vote of No Confidence!

I believe that counts for 70% of the ron paul bumper stickers and yard signs I see. I just find it hard to believe that the same house with a NASCAR flag, 2 beaters on blocks and trash in the yard is sitting around reading Hayek.

It's a way for people who instinctively know this whole game is rigged to give their finger to the elites.

But simple image is really what politics is all about since we let just anyone vote anymore....

YT said...

* We have a welfare state - what does that have to do with libertarianism?

* We have public education both in the high schools and colleges - what does that have to do with libertarianism

The extremely calm gentleman brings up a good point:

Without enforcing school integration or anti-discrimination laws white people would be free to not associate with blacks. State borders are irrelevant if strong white nations exist internally that will not do business with the riff-raff. Imagine, business owners could decide if they wanted to serve blacks or not! Brings a tear to my eye.....

The welfare state thing is fairly straight forward....reduced ability to tax directly or indirectly with FOMC actions, the EBT stops and many would literally starve to death.

All that said, the U.S. is like a 400 lb fatty that's been eating snickers and watching TV for 30 years. You cant just expect him to begin running marathons....the recovery must be slow so the shock of change literally doesn't kill him.

If the EBT shutoff completely tomorrow, there would be enough "do gooder" liberals and Christians that the undertow would be spread throughout the country to be fed and continue causing problems.

Anonymous said...

I don't get you. You complain that BRA is destroying America, and yet, when a candidate like Rep. Dr. Ron Paul says he wants to restore America to pre-BRA values and vision, all you can do is complain?

SO WHAT if every niglet and ho start 'chimping out' when the EBT dies? It's only THEN, when the blood starts to flow, that the REST of the Whites in this land, will finally, inevitably WAKE UP. And it's only THAT, which will achieve a 'final solution' to the lies of the Multiculturalist Pimps in Office, once and for all. Do you PREFER the Holder 'make criminals of all whites' legislation just passed? Or do you prefer Liberty for WHITES?

If your readers haven't found a rural retreat, live in an overwhemlingly white area in a small town, own guns, gold, and wheat germ, why should the rest of us, who HAVE sacrificed for all of these things, KNOWING of the BREAKDOWN OF SOCIETY, care about them that remain? And please, no claims to 'christian' morality in this one.....

I'm sorry, but even Jesus Christ told his followers to (selfishly) 'flee unto the hills' when the Roman armies came to surround Jerusalem in AD70, leaving behind their fellow racial compatriots to suffer the 'greatest tribulation' known to the Hebrew Nation to this very day.

I look FORWARD to every Black and Hispanic butchering themselves, to 'reduce the surplus population' (with a nod to Dickens, who never would have believed how awful even Britain is, these days, when it comes to multicultis!) to let those of us WHITES, who have taken our Lord's advice to be as wise as serpents, but gentle as doves - to our own race and people- to be the ones to pick up the pieces after the war, frankly.

I know this may sound cold, heartless, etc. but there comes a time when Rome is burning (or Atlanta, or Detroit) and you just say, "I'm OUTA here." And for good reason. Only a fool stays where wild beasts are roaming free- especially the two-legged kind.

- Fr. John+

Californian said...

"Ron Paul is the only candidate whose policies would:

• Dismantle Affirmative Action"

Then why is he afraid to bring up affirmative action in the debates?

Probably because there is a lack of white political consciousness on this issue. Most white people really are not very much aware of how the system is rigged against them. Opposing affirmative action would to many white people as a marginal issue at best--at least until someone made it an issue.

To make it work, someone would have to turn the injustice of AA into a major issue. Look at the way that various folks have turned the Federal Reserve into a major issue, such that it is getting national attention. Someone would have to do the same with AA.

The thing is, single issues often work well in American politics, as long as there are enough people banging the drum: gun rights, abortion, three strikes, blacks and their constant chorus of "racism."

But when you try to make it part of a much bigger political thing, it turns people off. White Americans today might be willing to accept ending affirmative action as a topic for debate, but are not going to buy off on a return to segregation. Race realists, whatever the validity of their positions, are simply all over the place, dispersing their efforts.

Perhaps this is a project for race realists: bang the drum on how white people are being discriminated against by affirmative action. Once you have broken through on that front, you can exploit it to bring in other issues.

Tech9 said...

Paul - I concur with Friar John. I sincerely do not understand what problem you or anyone else has with Ron Paul.

Let's see, he's against foreign aid, needless and unnecessary wars and the nanny state.

I've read his campaign bullet points on his website. His position on illegal immigration and amnesty looks pretty good to me.

In a libertarian society you either sink or swim. I'm tired of paying for other people's children education under the guise of property tax.

In a libertarian world the little pet darkies would not have their free shit. The EBT card, WIC and other welfare payments would come to a screeching halt.

And if the pet darkies riot so what? If thousands of nigs and spics die off from losing the government tit, oh well. I say good! The herd needs to be thinned. Whitey appears to be terrified that roving gangs will roam the street.

Guess what boys and girls. Americans are armed. To the teeth. Our neighborhood is full of armed homeowners, none of us would think twice of defending our loved ones. If my spouse didn't zing them with the compound bow, they get an ass load of lead from me.

Maybe things need to come to a head. America is a festering boil that needs lanced. Sorry for the gross generalization, it's true.

Not only am I sick of paying for their freebies, I'm sick of looking at them.

I just came back from a large road trip all over the south visiting family. Drove 3,000 miles. Went through a lot of towns and talked to many people.

White guilt is over. Whitey is sick of being browbeaten over something that happened 200 years ago. Most people I talked to knows they're being displaced and singled out. The pioneer spirit is back and alive as well.

Silent Running said...

So think twice before slamming these guys, after all, they are probably closer to the ideology of the Founders than the most so-called conservatives of today.

Close doesn't count for much in this context. The differences between the Founders and the current crop of race-blind paleo-libs is fundamental. I'll let them tell you.

His position on illegal immigration and amnesty looks pretty good to me.

Yet Numbers USA gives him an F. I also recall Paul saying that a border fence could be used by the government to keep us in rather than to keep illegals out. It's this kind of lunacy that keeps most people away from libertarianism.

In a libertarian society you either sink or swim.

Libertarian philosophy hinges on the non-aggression principle. I've had libertarians tell me that deporting illegals is immoral because to keep Pedro from doing whatever he wants implies force. In a libertarian society, Mestizos (or whoever) can simply move into your neighborhood en masse and outbreed you. If a libertarian society were to ever come into being, it wouldn't last a decade.

Maybe things need to come to a head.

I agree completely.

Anonymous said...

I think commenter Oliver has it right.

There is absolutely ZERO chance of any person who so much expresses a realistic view on race getting elected.

To honestly allow a level playing field in American life would be a great improvement over the current situation where white people constantly have to subsidize the failures of black people. Ron Paul will help give us that level playing field.

Zenster said...

Anonymous: There is absolutely ZERO chance of any person who so much expresses a realistic view on race getting elected.

In this prevailing Politically Correct atmosphere, race will continue to the the electoral third rail for the younger set as Social Security is for the seniors.

Unfortunately, the second-best alternative to any clear headed treatment of race is something that carries all of the exact same stigmas; namely, immigration.

Check Silent Running's link to NumbersUSA. Ron Paul fails miserably on the litmus test for immigration. In terms of reducing overall immigration and halting the importation of unfair worker competition, Ron Paul is rated as "abysmal".

So much for even touching, however tangentially, upon the critical issue of race.

In fact, the entire slate of GOP candidates is a dog's breakfast of unpromising also-rans.

As I have noted before, this coming election will be more a matter of voting against Obama than voting for someone else.

So be it. America stands little chance of surviving a second term of Obama's terminal incompetence.

Zenster said...

A final point.

If the Libertarian Party can pull their socks up and start behaving half way sanely, then some real consideration needs to be given with respect to voting that way.

We are no longer in a two-party system.


I fear that there may be no way to fix it without a Constitutional Convention that sees universal term limits put in place for all Congressional and Senatorial offices. Term limits for the Supreme Court is beginning to take on some appeal as well. Lastly, all politicians must retire on regular Social Security benefits like the rest of us poor schlubs.

Implementing such measures simply is not feasible with the current crop of corrupt, hog-at-the-trough, me-me-me-me-me-me pathological narcissists that infest our nation's capitol.

YIH said...

What would you do if you got a bad haircut? If human you would either never go back there again or not tip.
OTOH, If you're not human you would pull out yo gat and bust some caps in day azzez!
More fun'n'games in Ratlanta!