Attention Epstein: Jared Taylor is a Crypto-Nazi

In a comment responding to Sabotta Marcus Epstein writes:

Tell me if I am misinterpreting your attack. I approvingly cite Jared Taylor, who publishes a newsletter that has an article by a man who wrote a book (which was not entirely sympathetic by the way) about a man who is a allegedly a neo-Nazi.

Mr. Epstein,

I didn’t know Jared Taylor from a hole in the ground before I read Sabotta’s piece but it’s clear that you’re quite familiar with Mr. Taylor’s writing. Taylor wasn’t just a random guest on Scarborough Country the other night who happened to impress you. You’ve followed his appearances before with interest, along with Lew Rockwell. You’ve recommended Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance on your own home page, along with Vdare.com where Taylor has also written. You’ve read and recommended one of Taylor’s books. All Sabotta had to do was scan the main page of American Renaissance for a couple of seconds to find the piece on Rearing Honorable White Children. You can hardly be unaware that Jared Taylor is a white supremacist and even an admirer of Hitler:

Empire was doomed, of course, when the Ripons began to outnumber the Munros and the Milners. The British lost their conviction of superiority, and therefore their ability to act firmly.

Adolph Hitler, rather more a Rhodes than a Ripon, once explained to then-Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax, that the way to put down the Indian independence movement was to shoot Gandhi, and if that didn’t work, to keep shooting activists until the movement died out.

The British did not shoot Gandhi, and India was independent a few years later. Perhaps Lady Mountbatten’s affair with Nehru is the best symbol of the change in mentality from “rule Britannia” to today’s limp-wristed “cool Britannia.” No true daughter of empire would have dreamed of having it off with a native just as her husband, the final viceroy, was handing over the jewel in the imperial crown.

It is true, as Professor Ferguson points out, that Britain had been drained economically by two world wars, was more interested in paying for a welfare state than for a colonial army, and dared not defy the anti-imperial United States. Still, the end of empire was a failure of will, a psychological capitulation, more than anything else.

Get it? Taylor is saying that the British were losers because they lacked the firmness of Hitler and their weakness was exemplified in race mixing.

LRC has been screaming bloody murder about American imperial designs. Do Rockwellians have anything to say about Taylors admiration for racial empire? I ask because Taylor may well still be a member in good standing of Team Rockwell – you can still find links here to two articles by Taylor that Rockwell hosted, although the articles are now missing. Those articles can still be found here and here in the Internet Archive. Why don’t you check with Rockwell to find out if the articles were pulled intentionally, and if so why.

What really bothers me about LRC is the silence of LRC contributors who know better when you post nonsense like:

Taylor asked Griswold the very reasonable question of what majority Mexican neighborhood in the country he would like to live in. Griswold’s only answer was censorship claiming that Taylors arguments “were not worthy” of Scarborough Country and that it was “outrageous” that Scarborough would allow Taylor to even speak.

So Dan, what majority Mexican neighborhood would you like to live in?

Pay attention Epstein, because here’s the principled libertarian answer: It’s none of your damn business who wants to live where, except on your private property.

What’s troubling is not that LRC publishes foolish nonsense like your post, what’s troubling is that no one at LRC contests it. Instead you have Bob Wallace chiming in:

Innovation requires intelligence, perseverance, discipline, and creativity. If immigrants lack these traits–and one need look no farther than the countries they are from–then wage rates and productivity in the US are going to stagnate or fall.

Does anyone on Team Rockwell have any objection to that? I don’t hear it.

46 thoughts on “Attention Epstein: Jared Taylor is a Crypto-Nazi”

  1. “It’s pathertic to call Jared Taylor a neo-nazi”

    Oh, yeah? Check this out:

    Another question you should all consider – How come the ARA, the ADL, the Weasel-thal Center and JDL only act against Holohoax Revisionists and the National Alliance, but do not demonstrate against or disrupt Jared Taylor’s Amren Confrences? When I thought about that question, I realized the method to Jared Taylor’s madness, over his well-known avoidance of the Jewish Question. Are you aware of what Revisionists endure when they plan for conferences? Hotels in the US and Canada are pressured by Jewish lobbyists into cancelling contracts that are already fully paid for. JDL and ARA terrorists have been known to disrupt and use violence at Revisionist gatherings. Do you remember the bombing of the Intitute for Historical Review center in California by murderous Jewish terrorists in 1984? What about the savage beating that French Professor Robert Faurisson suffered in 1989, that nearly led to his death?

    In contrast, our sophisticated friend, Jared Taylor, usually announces his conference venues months in advance. He ensures that there are some anti-black Yidistanis on the list of conference speakers, such as Michael Levin and Mayer Schiller. As you will notice from this story by an academic “anti-racist” organization, Jared Taylor invites Kikes to his conferences as insurance, to prevent the JDL, ADL and ARA from disrupting his conferences, and ensuring that the “three star hotel” (as the author puts it) contracts are not cancelled.

    Ya get it? The author of this piece realizes that American Renaissance is (at the very least) a fellow traveller of the National Alliance, with the caveat that Taylor is a smart, sophisticated Nazi.

  2. Neutral? You’re suggesting that Rockwell was neutral about that debate on immigration? Taylor and Buchanan are on his side of the debate and he highlighted them. He can hardly be unaware of Taylor’s views.

    Then there is Rockwell’s comment on Sabotta’s blog here. He chose to call it a death threat and chose not to say anything about Taylor. And of course he chose not to say anything in response to Epstein’s blog.

    I see plenty of opportunity for Rockwell to say something critical of the views of a contributor to his site. And no criticism.

  3. “He ensures that there are some anti-black Yidistanis on the list of conference speakers, such as Michael Levin and Mayer Schiller.”

    Ah. Michael Levin: regular contributor to the Journal of Libertarian studies and pre- 9-11) associate scholar of the Mises Institute.

    To repeat my point: Jared Taylor is no socialist or anti-semite. But than again, having the wrong views on race is enough to make you a national socialist, right?

    You also think Charles Murray is a “neo-nazi” because of his views on racial differences?

  4. OK, I took a look.

    Ooooh, you’ve got us now, guys. Taylor once apparently published an LRC piece against hate crime laws, and once against gun control.

    Well, those are certainly views no self-respecting libertarian organization should publish! My God, if that’s not evidence that everyone who has ever been associated with LRC loves Hitler and is secretly a crypto-fascist, I don’t know what is.

    And the pieces are gone. That couldn’t be, maybe, because Lew saw some of his other views and decided to remove the pieces? Of course, only because he agrees with them so much.

    Look, Sabotta, your panties are in a bunch because LRC has like 100 times the readers of No-Treason. But you’re really embarrassing yourself with this vendetta.

  5. I don’t blog at LRC.

    Also, in your ASC post, you said that LRC has “only good things to say” about Taylor.

    However, the only two things I found were Lew’s remark that he saw Taylor with Buchanan — a completely neutral post — and Epstein’s note that Taylor had a good come back to (whoever).

    Now, I disagree — I think Taylor’s comeback was dumb. (For one thing, immigrant neighborhoods are usually poor, and no one who isn’t poor wants to live in *any* poor neighborhood. What “white trash” neighborhood do Taylor or Epstein want to live in?) But merely saying, “X made a good point last night” is hardly high praise, or overall agreement with his views.

    So other than these, what else did you see?

  6. In fairness to Epstein, he styles himself a paleoconservative and not a libertarian. As such, his pro-state crypto-fascist authoritarian tripe is par for the course.

    – Josh

  7. Jared Taylor is right. If diversity is such a great thing why can all these multiculturalists never name just one single multicultural neigborhood where they would like to live.

    It’s pathetic to call Taylor a neo-nazi. Taylor’s political and economic views may not be a pure libertarian but they come a hell of a lot closer to classical liberalism (minus the immigration restrictions) than “national *socialism*”.

    BTW, are all libertarians who believe in racial differences (Michael Levin, Charles Murray etc.) “neo-nazi’s”?

  8. Exactly right, Mr. Kennedy.

    Take a look at this article, also from the front page of Amren.com.

    Taylor quotes that perpetual LRC target Lincoln:
    “[T]here is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

    He then adds:
    Today’s racially-conscious whites agree that separation is the only fair, long-term solution. Nevertheless, they part company with Lincoln in rejecting hierarchical race relations. In the past, whites have tried to square the circle by means of Jim Crow, segregation, apartheid, and pass laws but the inherent tensions of multi-racialism are simply too great to be contained.

    Later, he says:
    Until only a few decades ago, whites practised identity politics of the kind common among non-whites, and this was reflected in segregation, anti-miscegenation laws, and an immigration policy designed to keep the country majority-white.

    Taylor obviously doesn’t have a problem with using the force of government against non-whites. He simply thinks that apartheid is impractical, not immoral. Like Hoppe, Taylor is willing to use the State to achieve a “better” society. No doubt that given the opportunity, he’d break as many huevos as he needed to make his omlette.

  9. Gene: “For one thing, immigrant neighborhoods are usually poor.”

    Only if you exclude many asian / japanese neigborhoods.

    Why do you think that many black / latino neighborhoods are poor? White racism?

    Gene: “and no one who isn’t poor wants to live in *any* poor neighborhood.”.

    Right. White multiculturalists would die to to live in upscale latino / black neighborhoods. Are you serious, Gene?

  10. Silvertank,

    1) I know of no upscale Asian neighborhoods. Of course there are many wealthy Asians, but in my experience they live in mixed-race, wealthy neighborhoods. Look, my own house is a “mixed-race neighborhood,” since my wife is a Filipina, and our immediate family (aunts, uncles, first cousins) includes a black American, a Nigerian, a French-Canadian, a Mexican-Italian-American, an Irish-Irish, and a French-French. The best man at my wedding was a Jamican. But not a single one of them lives in an “immigrant neighborhood.” Not that living in one makes a person inferior, but they do tend to be places one moves out of once one can.

    Silvertank also said:
    “Right. White multiculturalists would die to to live in upscale latino / black neighborhoods. Are you serious, Gene?”

    Huh? I was pointing out why I thought Taylor’s question was stupid, not defending him! My point was that it makes no sense to ask a middle/upper class person defending immigration which immigrant neighborhood he would want to live in, since they are almost all poor, and few middle/upper class people want to move to poor neighborhoods. Look, poor neighborhoods have more crime, are more rundown, have fewer amenities, worse schools, etc., etc. The people *in them* don’t even want to live in them any longer than they have to.

    The fact that the CATO dude can’t name a Mexican neighborhood he wants to move to is no more a condemnation of his policy recommendations than the fact that he can’t name a Polish or a “white trash” neighborhood he wants to move to.

    Do you get it now? CATO dude (and me, and probably you) are quite fine with having Mexicans, Poles, blacks, Vietnamese, whoever, as neighbors. But we all want to live in a decent — indeed, the best we can afford — neighborhood. Immigrant neighborhoods rarely fit that bill, since they are populated by people just moving in from poorer countries, trying to get their start here.

    So, as I was trying to point out, Taylor’s question (and Epstein’s echoing of it) are bogus.

  11. “Huh? I was pointing out why I thought Taylor’s question was stupid, not defending him! ”

    I think Silvertank is pointing out why he thinks Taylor’s question is a good one.

    “My point was that it makes no sense to ask a middle/upper class person defending immigration which immigrant neighborhood he would want to live in, since they are almost all poor, and few middle/upper class people want to move to poor neighborhoods.”

    Would it change the moral situation if he didn’t want to live in swanky, upscale Mexican immigrant neighborhood?

  12. John, I think you’re right: I misread Silvertank’s query.

    OK, so, first of all, I defend anyone’s right to live in any sort of neighborhood he wishes to, as long as he doesn’t attempt to employ coercion to enforce that wish.

    Secondly, to address a (tentatively) correct reading of what Silvertank was saying: I can’t say what “white multiculturalists” would want. But as far as what I would want: Well, if some swanky neighborhood were exclusively black or Hispanic, I *would* be hesitant about moving into it. After all, such an exclusively “X” neighborhood might be an indication that “non-X” are not welcome.

    But I would have just as much hesitation about moving into an exclusively white neighborhood, because I’d wonder if my wife, my children, and my children’s relatives would be welcome there.

    The neighborhoods I look for are places where most of the residents have at least somewhat “bourgeois” attitudes. In the place you visited me in CT, John, a black family from Zimbabwe who lived down the street from me definitely did have such an attitude, and were wonderful neighbors. The “white trash” old-timers who lived up the road from us did not, and were obnoxious to live near.

    That’s the only point I’ve been trying to make: Sensible people choose or reject neighborhoods based on their quality of life and the attitude of the people living there, not on skin color. Most middle and upper class *Mexicans* would not want to live in a neighborhood full of recent Mexican immigrants, not because they are anti-immigration or racist, but because such neighborhoods would not facilitate the life they want to live.

    In other words, if some person, well-established in the US in a middle/upper class neighborhood, says, “The state should not restrict immigration,” it’s fatuous to ask them what immigrant neighborhood he would like to live in. He would like to live in the middle/upper class neighborhood he *does* live in. It just doesn’t follow that, therefore, he must be in favor of legally forbidding poor Mexicans from moving to a neighborhood he himself would avoid.

  13. “Innovation requires intelligence, perseverance, discipline, and creativity. If immigrants lack these traits–and one need look no farther than the countries they are from–then wage rates and productivity in the US are going to stagnate or fall.”

    Alas, Wallace’s cartoon-derived sensibility often has him saying silly things.

    Mr. Callahan, I think it’s highly dishonest of Mr. Sabotta to characterize Mr. Rockwell and “paleolobertarians” as crypto-fascists (and probably has more to do with his disagreements with them about the War On Everything Else than anything), but their thinking grows egregiously collectivist whenever immigration is brought up. LRC has often gotten kind of loopy, with the exception of your own articles and those of a couple other writers there that are pretty consistently good. It would be interesting to see a principled challenge to the Rockwellian party line on immigration at LRC.

  14. Well to get everything out in the open, yes I do read American Renaissance regularly and have read much of Jared Taylor’s work. That still does not change my point about Mr. Sabota’s guilt by association techniques. To the best of my knowledge, American Renaissance takes only three official positions. 1: racial differences in intelligence, aggressiveness, time preference and other factors do exist and are at least partly biological. 2: Anti-Discrimination Laws should be abolished. 3: Immigration should be drastically reduced. I agree with all of these positions and I don’t see how any of them are unlibertarian. This does not mean that I agree with everything that that AmRen or Mr. Taylor has ever written or approve of whatever links some contributors may or may not have. Just as I do not agree with everything written in Counterpunch or by Gore Vidal who I also link to on the blog and approvingly cite.

    Also it seems absurd to call Taylor a white supremacist, crypto nazi, or crypto fascist. He has, to the best of my knowledge, claimed that Whites should dominate over non-whites. He has pointed out that on many categories like not committing violent crime and intelligence, whites out preform blacks, but Asians also out perform whites-does that make him a “yellow supremacist”? As for being a fascist, fascism has little to do with race and much more to do with economic and state organization-something Taylor rarely talks about. As for being a Nazi- apart from having politically incorrect views about race-which were held by 90% of the World in 1930s, not just Hitler-, I don’t see what could possibly make him a Nazi. BTW, he was not praising Hitler. He was simply quoting him, to demonstrate that British Imperialism was intimately connected with a belief in racial superiority which they relinquished when they gave up their empire and the United States clearly does not have.

    As a whole Taylor’s views are more/less libertarian. He opposes anti-discrimination laws, gun control, American intervention abroad, and supports the free market. He even gave a very favorable review to Hoppe’s Democracy: the God that Failed.

    Finally, The views I expressed are my own, and I don’t see why Lew Rockwell should be responsible for everything I or any other of his contributors happens to believe.

  15. Read Marcus Epstein’s last entry for a thoughtful response or the discussion on anti-state.com about Jared Taylor’s political views.

    “disgusting”, “stupid”, “empty-headed”… at least Jared Taylor has the advantage of being more civilized and less hysterical.

  16. Mr. Ridinger,

    You wrote:

    ” Mr. Callahan, I think it’s highly dishonest of Mr. Sabotta to characterize Mr. Rockwell and “paleolobertarians” as crypto-fascists”

    Yes, Lew is a principled libertarian and a thoroughly decent man, even if I think he is wrong on this issue.

    “It would be interesting to see a principled challenge to the Rockwellian party line on immigration at LRC.”

    This is something Kennedy keeps harping on: Why don’t I publish my views on this at LRC, instead of, let’s say, Strike the Root.

    Well, look at the name of the site: LewRockwell.com. As I understand it, Lew put up this site to promote *his* views. I don’t see why he is under any obligation to publish views he disagrees with. He publishes Paul Craig Roberts, but he wouldn’t publish him arguing against free trade. He publishes Charlie Reese, but not when he argues against free markets.

    When my views agree with Lew’s, I send him a piece. When they don’t, I send it to someone else. This is just the way periodicals work. I write for Reason, but I wouldn’t pitch them an anti-stem-cell-research piece. I write for The American Conservative, but wouldn’t send them a free trade piece. Founders of opinion journals start them to promote *their* opinion. Professional writers recognize this fact, and send them pieces that reflect that slant. If a writer is honest (as I hope I am), he never writes something he doesn’t believe in order to get into a particular publication. But I find the idea that all publications are obliged to publish all opinions absurd, and I believe those who think that someone who writes for publication X but disagrees with its opinion Y is obligated to badger X with not-Y have no idea what the profession of writing is like.

  17. “To repeat my point: Jared Taylor is no socialist or anti-semite. But than again, having the wrong views on race is enough to make you a national socialist, right?”

    Wrong. I have no problem with racism as in terms of moral principle: I personally consider it both stupid and disgusting, but folks like Taylor have every right to use their property to promulgate stupid and disgusting ideas. Not that he’d concede the principle that I have the right to do with my property as I see fit, of course. As I said in comments to a previous post, white seperatism is compatible with libertarianism, but that isn’t what Taylor advocates: he advocates using the State to achieve a better society, with “better” being defined in terms of race.

    Is that not being a “crypto-nazi”? Since you continue to claim that it is not, what would you call Taylor? A “crypto-racist”? An “empty-headed collectivist”? A “paleolibertarian conservative who supports True Americanism”, perhaps?

  18. Mr. Callahan,
    “Well, look at the name of the site: LewRockwell.com. As I understand it, Lew put up this site to promote *his* views.”

    I understand that, of course. I was commenting that it would be interesting to see the (principled) anti-immigration case made, or at least argued against. I didn’t mean to imply I think he’s obligated to run anything on his site. I also would like very much to see a deathmatch between Michael Pierce and Tim Starr, but I don’t hold either of them as obligated to fight a duel for my entertainment.

  19. Mr. Epstein:

    So you are saying that a “non-profit site with a specific political mission” is not a fit target for criticism, but a “multinational corporation, that claims no ideological agenda, and has a virtual monopoly on all ownership of all radio stations” is?

    By what principle? Pity?

  20. LewRockwell.com is a non-profit site with a specific political mission that is run largely on donations from people who wish it to further that agenda.

    Clear Channel is a multinational corporation, that claims no ideological agenda, and has a virtual monopoly on all ownership of all radio stations. No one is suggesting that the government step in and force Clear Channel to give “equal time” to antiwar conservatives, but I still think it is perfectly legitimate to object to its practices in print.

  21. Gene Callahan wrote: “As I understand it, Lew put up this site to promote *his* views. I don’t see why he is under any obligation to publish views he disagrees with.”

    He’s not under any such obligation, but then neither is Clear Channel under any obligation to air the anti-war views of Charles Goyette during drive time. And yet, Lew Rockwell states in his weblog that Goyette is Another Sad Casualty of War. He seems to agree that Goyette has been unjustly gagged by Clear Channel.

    So Gene, if Lew Rockwell believes that Clear Channel should air Charles Goyette’s deviation from its editorial slant regarding the war with Iraq, wouldn’t that give you some reason to think that Rockwell should also welcome your pro-immigration submissions?

  22. “Clear Channel is a multinational corporation, that claims no ideological agenda,…”

    Goyette (and Lew Rockwell) had no complaints before the war when his station’s on-the-air lineup was exclusively conservative, so how’s it different if they want only pro-war hosts now?

    Do you think conservatives dominate talk radio because of a political agenda of station owners? No, the conservative hosts have more or less been producing what the talk radio market wants. In the wake of the war pro-war hosts are dominant and I see no reason to think that doesn’t reflect the tastes of the same market.

  23. “I understand that, of course. I was commenting that it would be interesting to see the (principled) anti-immigration case made, or at least argued against.”

    Why aren’t Callahan’s criticisms of Hoppe on immigration even addressed on LRC? Surely defending Hoppe’s revolutionary insight would not compromise the message at LRC.

  24. Nice to see Callahan admitting that Lew Rockwell agrees with those who cite crypto-Nazis approvingly, and that it’s not worth even bothering to try submitting contrary views to LRC.

    Mr. Epstein ought to check with Justin Raimondo about Jared Taylor:

    “the well-known white racialist Jared Taylor, and a key activist in the “white nationalist” movement which holds that non-whites are genetically, culturally, and morally inferior to whites. A graduate of Yale University and the Paris Institute of Political Studies, Taylor has for years been trying to apply a highbrow veneer to views that have literally come out of the political gutter.”
    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j120400.html

    Of course, Raimondo can only be bothered to point it out when neocons are associated with crypto-Nazis…

  25. More of Raimondo on Jared Taylor & the rest of Mr. Epstein’s pals at American Renaissance:

    ‘…these guys are neo-Nazis, and they make no bones about it. For them, race “purity” is everything, the defining principle of human life ? an idea that, these days, must condemn its advocates to the blackest pessimism.

    ‘…

    ‘For all his pseudo-intellectual pretensions, Taylor is little more than a Park Avenue George Lincoln Rockwell. News accounts of the conference pointed out that the invitation sent to all attendees specified that a suit and tie were required, a measure no doubt taken on account of a tendency to show up at these affairs in full Nazi regalia…’

  26. Denial of Taylor’s crypto-nazism is unpersuasive. Taylor’s review of Hoppe’s book is non-committal as to Taylor’s preferred social order, and if his views truly are similar to Hoppe’s then that would be an indictment of Hoppe, not an exculpation of Taylor.

    The link to a pack of anti-Semitic lies about Israel (that it steals Palestinian land, etc.) hardly does anything to cast doubt upon the claim that Taylor and his sympathizers are crypto-Nazis. For some truth about Israel, try Alan Dershowitz’s “In Defense of Israel,” and for an objective look at Holocaust Denial see “Denying History” by Shermer & Grobman.

  27. If Taylor were really an Asian Supremacist, wouldn’t he be agitating for an “asians-only” immigration policy?

    Further, if Taylor was really concerned about culture, mental abilities, etc, wouldn’t he be agitating for testing for these things, rather than peddling bell-curve statistics?

  28. Recent debate on Anti-State.com about Raimondo and Taylor:


    There may be good reasons to be critical of Jared Taylor and his organization but:

    a) He’s not a national socialist. His views are not that much different from someone like Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Read his review of Hoppe’s book on Vdare:
    http://www.vdare.com/taylor/hoppe.htm

    b) He’s not a white supremacist (if he would be a supremacist he would be an asian supremacist).

    c) The AR / LRC link should not be obvious at all because many writers for AR are atheists and evolutionists. See the christianity debate on AR: http://www.amren.com/xtian.htm

    One paleo writer who really hates Taylor is Justin Raimondo because, you see…one of the writers of American Renaissance also writes for Frontpage Magazine and what better way to attack the “neo-cons” than to suggest a “neo-nazi” link:

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j120400.html

    How to do this? Find a quote where Taylor considers different theories about the decline of the white race (but considers inadequate, including “the jews”!) and suggest that Taylor shares one of these theories based on the applause of some in the audience.

    Or does he just want to show that some in the audience of an AR conference are neo-nazi’s. Who would have thought that! A pro-white conference and some neo-nazi’s show up!

    If Raimondo is so desperate to find conservatives or libertarians critical of “the jews” he could have better devoted his article to the libertarians at The Last Ditch:

    P.C. libertarianism and the Jewish taboo:
    http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/fields_pclib.htm

  29. Only someone who believes that Jews have a metaphysical collective right to an ethnically pure homeland (like Paul Gottfried) could support Israel and its eminent domain policies.

    I see the State of Israel as just another state, one that happens to be a good friend of the state that does the most harm to me. Naturally I hate it. The friend of my enemy is my enemy.

    By the standards of Starr, Sabotta, etc. I suppose I am a crypto-nazi, anti-semite, closet-communist, whatever. That kind of inanity tops anything I’ve seen run or linked on LRC, and that’s saying a lot.

  30. Callahan, you’ve been brilliant.

    Rockwell is not only under no obligation to publish stuff he doesn’t want to publihs, he is also not under any obligation to go around condemning everyone some critic on the side suggests he denounce.

    LRC is also not a debating society, so it would not be appropriate to have a debate on the blog. Anyone who was pro-immigration and blogs there is free to put up a polite post about this. As for publishing pro-immigration stuff–hello, look at the Mises Institute’s Journal of Libertarian Studies, vol. 13, no. 1., on immigration, which had pro and con pieces, including “Are There Grounds for Limiting Immigration?,” by Julian Simon, and “A Libertarian Case for Free Immigration,” Walter Block. http://www.Mises.org

  31. Tim:

    “The link to a pack of anti-Semitic lies about Israel …”

    Honestly and truly you cannot judge whether somebody is anti-semitic by what they write or say about Israel. Particularly not when it comes from somebody who is libertarian. My best libertarian pal gets very worked up when he gets on to the subject of Israel. But he isn’t in the slightest bit anti-semitic. There are many like him. I found it a bit un-nerving when i first became actively involved with libertarians but I have no doubt that the vast majority of anti-Israel libertarians are not motivated by anything other than libertarian principles. Also, if you argue back on libertarian principles (“But are you saying that jews had no right to buy land from Arabs in the 1930’s?”) then anti-zionist libertarians will isten, unlike true anti-semites. For goodness sake, Rothbard had nothing good to say about Israel but you can hardly accuse him of having been an anti-semite!

    p.s. Apologies if I am going over old ground. I am new to this website. Hence my flurry of (perhaps over-) enthusiastic postings.

  32. Mr. Kinsella,

    Are pro-immigration bloggers and contributors to LRC free to put up an impolite post? The last few paragraphs of Hoppe’s most recent diatribe didn’t strike me as particularly polite. Jeffrey Tucker’s response, on the other hand, was notably cordial. He didn’t seem to feel the need to psychoanalyze the opposition.

  33. Ghertner: “Are pro-immigration bloggers and contributors to LRC free to put up an impolite post?”

    Why are you asking me this? You can read and judge the existing postings as well as I. So I don’t think it’s a serious question.

    “The last few paragraphs of Hoppe’s most recent diatribe didn’t strike me as particularly polite. Jeffrey Tucker’s response, on the other hand, was notably cordial. He didn’t seem to feel the need to psychoanalyze the opposition.”

    Why is psychoanalysis necessarily impolite? I found his analysis amusing and insightful.

  34. Stephan,

    I’ve said before that it’s fine not to publish pro-immigration pieces on LRC, but why don’t anti-immigration pieces at LRC ever even address the pro-immigration arguments of LRC and Mises contributors which appear elsewhere?

    Surely it would not compromise the principles of LRC to defend it’s anti-imigration postion against criticisms published elsewhere from people like Gene Callahan, Walter Block and Roderick Long? Why doesn’t that debate ever happen in public?

  35. Pingback: No Treason!
  36. Pingback: No Treason!
  37. I am sorry but I do have to say that sometimes libertarians are a little nutty when it comes to racial views. They cry freedom and an end to PC garbage, which is good. Then they chime in on the same government approved, PC, multicult idiocy that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.

    I have no trouble whatsoever being BOTH libertarian and still having a strong racial consciousness.

    Let me give you a tip for those libertarians out there living in that misty smoke filled fantasy of drop the government and everything else will work itself out fine and dandy. Most of Africa would be considered very libertarian, anyone raising their hands to go and live in this perfect wonderland! Common guys almost ZERO government! Letâ??s buy plane tickets tomorrow, didnâ??t think so. Quit lying to yourselves, Yes I believe in a TOTAL FREE MARKET, and I believe in free association, so does Jared Taylor, but that does not mean I am so stupid as to buy into Multicultural utopian ideas, its why I hate Democrats.

    The reality is people do form groups and these groups can be very hostile to each other,(even if there is no government) and this usually has resulted in lots of blood and death.

    But as most libertarians LOVE history, myself included, why on earth would they assume that something that has NEVER happened in history, like a multicultural utopia for instance, would work now.

    Like I said I am a libertarian, I became a libertarian because I enjoyed the fact that they used common sense to approach problems, but this is where they decide to throw logic and common sense out the window in favor of PC ideals.

    Humans compete, that is good, but if you pack large groups of racially different peoples together you do not get free trade you get the Balkans, and you get blood misery and death.

    People like me do not wish the government to FORCE other races out. As a matter of fact anyone with a little honesty would know that the opposite has happened, they have forced people who WANTED to be separated, together.

    Honesty is not evil, and neither is preferring to be around my own race of people without coercion. Sorry but facing reality is not as simple as it is on TV.

  38. African countries having almost zero government? I guess I could see that if it weren’t for the numerous brutal dictatorships and large governments that populate, oh I don’t know, basically every country on the continent.

  39. People like me do not wish the government to FORCE other races out.

    Get this: I couldn’t care less about what Taylor, Hoppe, or Epstein think about by genes.

    I’m far more concerned with their cheerleading of government violence.

  40. I once knew an individual who was an anti-Semite, racist activist and he invited me to a lecture of his old friend Jared Taylor. He told me that Taylor had been a Klan leader. Taylor does preach white supremacism and that has been clear for some time. His conferences are organized to preach just that idea and that idea alone. Of course a bigot like Taylor fits in well with bigots like Hoppe. Taylor is pretty open about his white supremacy views and the people at the Rothbard Institute had to know it. But then they don’t mind such views there. It fits in very well with people like Sam Francis, Joseph Sobran and their buddies in the League of the South. It is disgusting what this band of lunatics, racists and assorted other kind of bigots have done to the reputation of Mises.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *