Libertarian Bashing

Watching the kids savage the shills of TP-USA this week, put me in the mood to lash out at the libertarians. It is easy to forget that what is currently called the conservative movement is really just left-libertarianism. On the one hand, it is shilling for global business, open borders and post-nationalism. On the other hand, it is the left-wing war on western culture. Other than some vestigial references to religion and traditional values, there’s no difference between conservatism and libertarianism now.

I know a lot of old school libertarians think that their thing has been hijacked by infidels and that real libertarianism can be compatible with the dissident right. The trouble with that is they need to explain how their thing was so easily taken over by the left-wing degenerates that now dominate the racket. Again, the same critique applies here as to Buckley-style conservatism. The reason these 20th century responses to the Left failed is they all contained a fatal flaw that allowed them to be co-opted.

Now, there is a case to be made that the undoing of libertarianism was its associating with Buckley-style politics. The great paleo thinker Sam Francis observed that the Buckleyites would inevitably be absorbed into the managerial state, as they were engaging in politics on Progressive terms. In order to gain a place on stage, they were forced to accept the basic premise of Progressive politics. That is, they had to embrace the blank slate and egalitarianism. That could only lead one way.

Perhaps that is so, but it does not change the fact that libertarianism is now one of the heads of the monster. You see that in their response to dissident politics. They immediately drop the mask and begin howling left-wing talking points. The response from them to the groyper rebellion is a perfect example. You see the same hysterics and name calling that you see from the Left. It is a good reminder that these people are just part of the candy coating of the Progressive nut inside.

This week I have the usual variety of items in the now standard format. Spreaker has the full show. I am up on Google Play now, so the Android commies can take me along when out disrespecting the country. I am on iTunes, which means the Apple Nazis can listen to me on their Hitler phones. The anarchists can catch me on iHeart Radio. YouTube also has the full podcast. Of course, there is a download link below.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

This Week’s Show


  • 00:00: Opening
  • 05:00: Community Last (Link)
  • 15:00: Callous Bastards (Link)
  • 25:00: Sacrificing To Baal (Link)
  • 35:00: Fantasy Land (Link)
  • 45:00: Unreliable Liars (Link) (Link)
  • 55:00: Closing

Direct DownloadThe iTunesGoogle PlayiHeart Radio, RSS Feed, Bitchute

Full Show On Spreaker

Full Show On YouTube

162 thoughts on “Libertarian Bashing

  1. Late to the party. Had a bit of resentment with giving the chosen people a pass but who can stay mad at someone who plays The Allman Brothers ?


  2. The straightforward answer is probably the most likely answer: After Mueller crashed and burned, Pelosi and Trump sort of agreed to a cease fire. Pelosi would tamp down “impeachment”, but let her crazies keep working on it to keep the flame alive and avoid dispiriting their base. Trump wouldn’t let the Barr investigation get too far, or so Pelosi assumed.

    THE trigger that launched impeachment wasn’t Trump tellling Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. It was Trump mentioning “Crowdstrike”. Crowdstrike is the company the DNC hired to “prove” that they were hacked by the Russians. This so-called fact was accepted by the FBI without a shred of proof, and subsequently used by the FBI, CIA, DOJ and Mueller to claim that Russia interfered in the election. Without this fake evidence, all Mueller would have in his report is a couple dozen Russian trolls saying bad things about Hillary on social media. Their pathetic efforts amounted to a fraction of a hundredth of a percent of total anti-Hillary messaging on social media in 2016. It is also the pretext for social media companies to silence dissent, deplatform alternative voices, and generally go full throttle authoritarian.

    If Crowdstrike is a fraud, the whole charade falls apart – including ALL of the convictions won by Mueller to date. Flynn’s case gets overturned. Stone’s case gets overturned (it is all based on the “fact” that Russia had the emails…they don’t). It re-opens the question of how wikileaks got the emails and it reopens the curious case of Seth Rich.

    Furthermore, Ukraine was a way to pump foreign aid into the coffers of prominent Government Party members. Obama did this with the stimulus too…$1T in spending pumped into labor unions which was donated right back to the DNC and Obama coffers. Foreign aid is a perfect scam. Send aid to a country, set up a “non profit” to help disseminate the aid, and collect the aid money from your phony non profit. There are probably more than a few prominent Democrats and Republicans and government party bureaucrats who cannot withstand a full audit of where that money went, who got it, and who profited. They have to SHUT IT DOWN SHUT IT DOWN NOW.

    So, a bunch of Biden/Obama staff operating in the 5th Column within the Trump Administration, here the word “Crowdstrike” and “Biden” and they put the pieces together. This launches the Democrats in Congress over the moon in panic, and they immediately launch Coup Part Two using essentially the exact same strategy as Coup Part One:

    1. Get the CIA to write a “dossier” (called a “whistleblower” complaint) and get the IC IG to suddenly allow hearsay complaints to be elevated as legitimate complaints.
    2. Get a bunch of so-called experts to express shock and alarm about the contents of the fake dossier.
    3. Start a on-sided investigation to “get to the truth” which is nothing but a one-sided kangaroo court designed to railroad Trump.

    That the IG Draft Report got sent to Barr on/about 9/13 just amplified the panic. The draft mostly likely contains criminal referrals from the IG that go beyond the usual “lack of candor” bullshit from prior reports. The criminal referrals are meaty and they matter.

    Those criminal referrals reveal that Coup Part One and Coup Part Two involve the same fricking people doing the same fricking thing, which means guys like Schiff are in mortal legal peril.

    So, Pelosi lets the rabid dogs off the chains believing that the Senate will stop this before it gets out of control.

  3. Libertarians have become the new left in some ways. They truly think that race, IQ, and culture do not matter. I’m not really sure where the open borders stupidity originated. Things like community and social trust among people who look similar is lost on them as well.

  4. As a Kentuckian, allow me to expound on the fall of Matt Bevin for a few minutes. Short version: Matt Bevin is a flaming douchebag who managed to barely lose his race while every other GOP candidate down the ballot not only won his or her race, they curbstomped their Democratic opponents by double digits. Bevin’s loss is on Bevin and Bevin alone.

    The closest race down the ballot was for Secretary of State, where the no-name GOP candidate beat a former Miss America by over 60,000 votes. Watching his victory speech, one was left with the impression that no one was more surprised by his victory than he was. Three of the other winning GOP candidates won by 100,000- 200,000 votes.

    When you compare the vote margins that the other GOP candidates for compared to Bevin, you see that most of them got 100,000 more votes in their statewide races than he did. Not only that, all of the other GOP candidates for statewide office also got 100,000 more votes than New year did. A 100,000+ voters hated Bevin and Beshear both so much that they didn’t vote for either candidate for governor. The Libertardians can crow all they want: they didn’t spoil anything. Bevin lost because six- figures worth of GOP voters left their ballot blank for the governor’s race. Any other GOP candidate for governor would have won.

    So why does Bevin suck so much? He’s Trump without any of the roguish charm, picking fights and insulting his enemies and allies with abandon. He picked a huge fight with the teachers over their pension system and, frankly, made it personal by trying some Trumpesque insult comic shtick that didn’t go over well with the wammins. Then, when the GOP dominated legislature didn’t move quick enough to suit him, he picked a fight with them as well. The Republican establishment already didn’t like him, because he’d tried the outsider shtick in his various political runs and picked fights with all of them before. He was primaried for this most recent race and his opponent, a backbencher from the state legislature, got 40% of the vote.

    As far as our thing goes, he’s a David Frenchian cuck of the first order. In fact he out “Frenchs” David French, having gone to Africa to adopt a virtue signaling black baby three times. He’s also one of those “Right on crime” thug- hugging Jesus freaks. His running mate for his first run was a ridiculously unqualified black wammin, picked to suck up to the blacks and she was a Libertardian to boot. Of course, she ended up hiring a bunch of incompetent cronies as her staff, and she and Bevin ended up suing each other when he tried to fire them. He went with a Hispanic for his running mate this time.

    I will shed no tears over Matt Bevin. The legislature remains GOP dominated, so Beshear won’t be getting anything through. I figure he’s one and done in 2023 to literally whichever Republican runs against him.

  5. The thing I hear from John Mark and the idea of propertarianism and a new constitution that I think is correct.
    Our nation here in North America has a long history of a constitutional document laying somewhere on a table, after all we were founded by the English.
    The normies need a constitution similar to the one we currently have to get buy in in my opinion.
    It will not be easy to move to anything like a heirarchal form of government even though our democracy as currently constituted is a failure. We must take baby steps to move away from our democratic fallacies.
    I like the idea of some kind of monarch system with veto power only st the monarch level.
    But whatever happens in our future we must preserve culture over economy.
    The Z is right about that.
    Libertarianism is nothing but economic raping and pillaging with little regard for the damage to culture.
    Wal Mart Inc was our first big sign of this kind of damage 40 years ago.

  6. Z Man, I’m sorry, but I have to take you to task for comparing the Shire to libertarianism.

    The Shire had, among other governmental powers:
    Mayor of Michel Delving (an autocratic ruler, with no legislative or judicial backstop)
    a Thain (a ruthless military strongman )
    the Warden of Westmarch
    Shirriffs and Bounders (jack booted government thugs)
    the Shire-moot, and captain of the Shire-muster and the Hobbitry-in-arms
    (collectively right wing storm troopers)
    and two Big Men:
    the Master of Buckland
    the head of the Took clan

    Libertarians? Bah! Good solid Fascists if you ask me!

  7. The Zman may be basking in my salty libertarian tears, avidly drinking my milkshake, but Severian is in thrill kill blackpill over at Rotten Chestnuts!

    (Thanks to a reader for the reminder of uni goodness.)

    Wait, wait, I got a solution:
    Let’s ban weed and beat the kids!

    That’ll solve, like, everything (!)– and I’ve seen the light, I am now a proud Conservative!

    Love you, Benny! Love you, Sean!
    You’re a great American!

  8. You refer briefly to Sam Francis. When I came here four or so years ago I had no idea who that was…reading him was a revelation. His book “Shots Fired,” is available and tho 20 years old, is fresh and current today. There’s a good introductory essay on him at

    Just as an aside, Francis and a lot of other good people were bounced and attacked by National Review. That place is in the dumps now, and all the weasels who did it have been let go, politely, with nice press releases, but are now “pursuing other interests.” They’ve appointed a guy from The Federalist to resurrect it. He’s pretty much a standard libertarian. That should work so well….

    • Tierney married his mobbed-up client. Her kid got the soft bounce for dealing back when I was a kid. She took the hit for him when the feds were closing in. And was let loose weeks into her “incarceration.” A week ago Wednesday there were three (3!) carjackings by “teens” in the Merrimack Valley. One North Andover guy just pulling up in his driveway coming home from work. How much media coverage did that get? Or the off-duty cop assaulted in the YMCA parking lot. Valley “teens” again!

  9. Another reason things like basic healthcare for all can’t work in America, is just how much of a racket healthcare has become. Billions and billions of dollars are bilked every single year. Just recently I read a story about how Indians and other Asians ran the biggest medicare racket in our history selling fake back braces and knee braces to medicare patients via telephone and TV ads. God only knows how much of the federal and state spending on healthcare is just entirely fictitious and just a racket.
    What is the libertarian answer to a lot of the high costs? “Tort Reform” They want to take away your ability to be compensated if some Indian quack screws you up for life. Of course, Jew lawyers chasing ambulances doesn’t help. There really is abuse of the tort laws, but the fix isn’t to make being made whole again illegal!

    They deserve all the hate they get.

    • To me, the biggest problem with healthcare is that we think it actually can make people better. There are a few advances, sure, but so much of ‘healthcare’ simply overpromises and underdelivers.

  10. First common ground. Libertarianism equals unrealistic fantasyland and hypocrisy bad. Same applies to the notion that we can talk our way out of the mess that we’re in (mega fantasyland). Consequently, the dissident movement’s focus on finding the right magic words to spread around and thereby rally the masses is also not a realistic solution to what ails us. At best you just slow the rate of veering into the ditch. Hard truth is a bummer both ways.

  11. The callous bastards segment made me pause the audio to respond to it. Z wants his neighbors to have access to health care. Fine. I can’t for the life of me remember when someone was turned away from a hospital or ER. Everyone has access to health care. How it is paid for is not the same thing. It muddies the water to claim all don’t have “access to healthcare”.

    • Last year I had to bring my wife to the emergency room. A month later of course we get bills for absurd amounts, which insurance covered most of. She asks me how the hospital can charge so much. I tell her to think about all the Mexicans waiting in the ER when we arrived. Our bill was for her care and all of theirs because they damn sure aren’t insured and will just throw the bills away if it ever finds them.

      • We hire experts to testify as to the reasonableness & necessity of medical costs in civil trials. The multi-layered negotiations between insurers and providers as well as the transfer payments (“collectibility” considerations),, bundling, cost-shifting & buck-passing leaves jurors either drowsing, flabbergasted or outraged. The IRS & SEC couldn’t figure out half of the “accounting” involved.

        The cost of medical care bears no resemblance to a pricing mechanism anyone from the Before Times would recognize or understand. We’re coming full circle to the point where doctors who only accept direct upfront payment for their services (almost always from rich guys you can afford it of course) are being used to set the bar for reasonable costs medical costs now.

        • I think there’s a pretty good RICO/Sherman case against the Insurers and the hospitals. Collectively rigging the prices and giving discounts only to preferred payers in order for the individual payer to subsidize them sounds like a lawsuit to me.
          And don’t give me the bulk purchase crap: if there’s one good/service that’s delivered one at a time, it’s healthcare,

      • The first thing the border-jumpers are instructed to do by their enablers is have an anchor-baby. The majority of births in the most populous states (CA, TX, FL, NY) are Medicaid births charged to the national debt. That along with ER usage is why healthcare is, at present, unaffordable.

        • I’m breaking my own promise to not post, but I can’t help it. I gotta get it off my chest.

          A gal living in China gets pregnant and comes here to have the baby. The same gal gets pregnant in China again by the same guy and comes here and has the baby. My friend eventually meets her on a dating site at age 54, marries her in a community property state, but says to me that she cannot find the father in China so as to make him help pay for child support. I’m not liking her for this.

          To make things worse, I feel that these Chinese and Taiwanese have already brought over big sums of money and bought a lot of land and homes. And I can’t leave out the Koreans. I understand now why people in Red state don’t want Blue staters with money coming to their states. So we fight with each other after poor immigration laws with loopholes started the whole thing in motion.

          Now if they’re one standard deviation of IQ above us, and if they know it, they too have plans of making us kowtow to them in a generation or more.

          Sorry. I could not help myself after I read your comment.

          • If they’re one standard deviation of IQ above us, why must they invade our nation? Why can’t all the clever Koreans, Vietnamese, and Han stay home and achieve in their own nations? What’s that you say, IQ alone isn’t sufficient? Culture (i.e. RACE) matters?

            And by the way, if your “friend” married this scheming Han, he’s A) STUPID and B) not your friend.

          • Thanks for replying. Why are they coming here? Plunder while escaping their own economic oppression? They don’t see what they are buying into, for sure.

          • That’s called Birth Tourism. Big business on both coasts. Have your kid and return home with a birth certificate and passport. Later through chain migration that kid can sponsor the whole family to come to the US.

      • A dozen years ago I had an ER visit for stitches on a finger. While I waited and waited, I could hear the doctor on the other side of the curtain upbraid a Mexican family (through an interpreter, of course) for bringing their young daughter to the ER for nothing more than the sniffles. He made it clear that this was far from their first visit under those circumstances. Even he sounded like he was at wit’s end dealing with this shit.

      • “Our bill was for her care and all of [ the Mexicans waiting in the ER when we arrived]”

        Yes, but that’s not the only reason the pricing and billing are so byzantine. Now I am only speaking from the perspective of a lowly MD and not one of the Gods of Adminstration, but what is billed and what is collected have very little relationship to each other. Massive discounting is built in for the insured, whether privately or through govt programs.

        Let’s take a concrete example (numbers are made up, but close to reality). Dr Jones orders an echocardiogram (cardiac ultrasound examination) for his patient Dave Smith, who comes to the clinic and gets scanned by tech Nancy. Dr Mike then “reads” the echo and generates a report. The hospital bills Dave for a total of $1800 for the echo study. Of this $1800, $1500 is the “technical fee” and $300 is the “professional fee”. (Technical fee goes to hospital, pays Nancy’s salary, electricity, rent, etc; professional fee goes to the MD.)

        Dave has good Blue Cross insurance which leaves him with a total co-pay of $75. Does BC pay the remaining $1725? Hell no they do not. They pay $250 toward the technical fee, and $50 of the professional fee. I.e. the hospital collects a total of $375 ($300 from BC, $75 from patient Dave), and that’s all it gets. Hospital takes $300 of that total, and $75 is credited to Dr Mike.

        Why the yuuuge discounts? (“why so serious?”) Because big insurers and Medicare/Medicaid have a lot of clout. They tell the hospital (and the docs), “We’re going to pay you 20% of the billed amount, take it or leave it.” And because they cover (i.e. control) such a large proportion of the potential patient pool, we bend over and say, “Yes, we’ll take it.” So the hospital says to itself, “If we only get one-fifth of what we bill, we’ll simply multiply everything by five when we put it on the bill.” Problem solved, right? It’s all a sham, but it all works because everyone is in on the crooked game.

        Not so fast. The problem is when Tom Carter, a small businessman who works hard and pays his taxes — but makes too much to qualify for govt assistance, and not enough to afford private insurance — needs to get the same study done. Poor Tom gets hit with the full $1800 bill, and is pursued if he does not pay it in full. Because Tom is not in the loop.

        It gets more screwed up than that. Dolores Brown has some sort of coverage, but can’t afford her co-pay. I learned that I *cannot* waive my portion of the professional fee that comes from the patient co-pay. Apparently waiving even the pittance ($25) of Dolores’ co-pay makes the whole submitted bill “Medicare fraud” and therefore verboten. Whether that is true is above my pay grade, but that’s what I was told by Admin.

        The TL;DR is that not only is a deeply screwed-up system, it’s an almost incomprehensible screwed-up system.

  12. The paleo-libertarians were mostly concerned about the limits of the State, but they were also skeptical about unfettered capitalism as well. Obviously, one part of their perspective was congenial to patronage by capitalists and one wasn’t and, as they say, made all the difference. Commutarian libertarianism basically disappeared from the political landscape and pro-capitalist, libertine libertarianism was promoted. Which is how we got to today, where ‘conservatism’ is simply Leftism on installments.

  13. Pretty hilarious podcast but while I love to mock libertarianism and the grifters who run the thinktanks and magazines, I try to remember that many of us came to the dissident right via a brief stop in libertarianism. Hell, I voted for that idiot pothead Gary Johnson twice. Mock the philosophy all you like, I have been dropping some biological realism on the Mises page for fun, but be gentle with the average libertarian. They might be on our side before you know it.

    • I doubt it. They’re now wholly owned subsidiaries of Cato “we’re an economy with a country” and the like.

    • It’s quite possible, if not *probable*, that a majority—and possibly a *large* majority—of the people here are former libertarians. What say you all? Vote now! 🙂

  14. When confronted with librarian philosophy in total it was obvious that too many things just did not add up. Same as it was when reading what the conservative inc. bozos were putting out. if dissident realism is where we are now. What will we become on the other side of the hill. Identitarian realists maybe.

  15. That segment on African socialism was very dark comedy.

    In fact Atlas Shrugged is the intellectual property I would most like to see blackwashed in the contemporary Hollywood style.

  16. The shortest summation of libertarianism is: political eunuchism.

    It’s powerlessness as a matter of principle. But if the central principle of your opponents is amassing power, and your central principle is renouncing power, how is that going to work out?

    It’s like a religious cult that renounces sex. Marginalization and extinction are built right into the logic of it.

    Libertarianism really is a cult of renunciation, with an unpleasant mix of cowardice and vanity just under the N.A.P. preening.

  17. Occasionally, I still drop in to a few of the lolbertarian blogs and sites that I used to frequent and even write for. It’s wall-to-wall muh open borders and muh tranny rights (“love wins”). Back in the 1990’s when I got involved, it still had a few decent critical thinkers and civilised Western men but they have long gone.

    For all intents and purposes now, they may as well be considered as a wing of the far-left.

    • Me too, Tut. I always distinguished myself as a “right-libertarian”, but that’s not feasible anymore. Not after the LP put up uber-PC-statist Bill Weld on its Presidential ticket. Long since time to leave ’em behind.

  18. Now I can’t see or hear the phrase “Reason Magazine” without hearing the horn in my head. Thanks, Pavlov.

  19. I think some of the young libertarians are not dishonest, just naive.

    The comparison between Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged is perfect.

    I think a lot of young libertarians basically have recently finished Atlas Shrugged, and just haven’t realized yet that real life doesn’t work like that.

    * (“young libertarians” = me, LOL)

  20. I told myself last night after my 14th comment, “Don’t comment for a while, just listen or ask a question.” I might have to listen to this twice since I find myself distracted with 6 to 10 tabs open on my browser. That many tabs open and listening to Z doesn’t work.

    Scenario: Chinese couple owns a big house in an affluent area, own a house in Taiwan, and one in Beijing. The wife was a successful Taiwan business woman and the husband makes a good living, and they are part owners in a business in the states. They live here 4 months of the year. She’s a citizen; I don’t know how long. He’s not, doesn’t speak English. He gets Medicare.

    How? WHY?

    • That’s why you should not hesitate to take everything you can from the system short of risking jail or bankruptcy. You are paying for the system everyone else but you and your family are permitted to abuse.

      As Queen Ann said recently, we may as well vote for Bernie at this point – his immigration policy can’t be worse than Trump’s in practice and Whites may get some free stuff on the side.

        • Pirate gold can’t be stolen, only salvaged. Or consider it reparations like your wanna-be replacements do.

          The only guy playing fairly in a rigged game can only lose.

        • Start by taking your Social Security at 62. Find ways to exploit the tax code. For example, I started a Sched. C business that generates just enough revenue to cover my health insurance premiums to take advantage of the topline deduction as opposed to the much less generous Sched. A itemized deduction. The new 20% small business deduction more than covers the increased FICA self-employment tax. Whatever flavor of DR that Our Thing is able to create, I will always starve the beast because I am, though decidedly NOT a libertarian, still the best manager of my own money and a firm believer in the principle of subsidiarity, i.e. making decisions at the lowest organizational level necessary.

          • Yes, subsidiarity, Maus. I know where that comes from. Thank you and God bless. I will follow your posts.

    • It’s probably best not to do anything but ask questions for the first year or two. Journey of a thousand miles and all that.

      If you feel a burning need to act, restrict yourself to sending money. Sending money with questions means they usually will get answered.

    • If he gets Medicare he either disabled or managed to convince Medicare he is. There is a entire industry of crooked doctors who will help you get Medicare if you are under 65.

      That said, this is how the system is designed. You either take advantage of it or you don’t. The system doesn’t care.

      You just have to gin up enough nerve to use it for you and yours. For example get work in the underground economy and then go on welfare like the Mexicans and Asians do. To the system you just look impoverished.

  21. I’ve never understood how either Buckleyites or libertarians could be taken seriously long enough to even bother to refute them.

    When I was a kid I knew and cared almost zero about politics, but even as a teenager I knew implicitly that Buckley was an asshole just by seeing him on television for a few minutes. The absurd body postures, that insufferable accent, his squid-tentacles manner of speaking… I took one look at the guy, shrugged and said, That guy’s an asshole. Who cares what he has to say? (It’s funny to note that since I didn’t care what Buckley was saying, I just sort of assumed he was a leftist because he looked like such an asshole.)

    Same thing with the libertarians. When I was a teenager, everyone I saw carrying around those Ayn Rand books was an asshole (viz. I knew these kids personally, and knew they were all idiots and assholes.) So I just assumed — correctly, as it happens — that libertarianism was a doctrine of assholes. Finally I asked one of them to explain “libertarianism” to me, and when they finished, I just shrugged with incredulity and asked, “And you actually believe that horsesh!t?” It was so stupid I didn’t think it even needed to be refuted.

    Most of what I think of politics actually just comes from raising beefsteak tomatoes and eggplants in my back yard as a kid. If you do your gardening libertarian style, you get a lot of very fat worms and bugs and a lot of weeds, and no tomatoes.

    • +1 on the allegory of the tomato garden. As a kid, my favorite activity was putting salt on the slugs and applying sunlight via the magnifying glass to the worms. It’s a great way for fathers to teach their children by concrete example about enemies and the need for vigilance.

    • I had the same impression of Buckley growing up in the 70’s – the guy was a total asshole and effete snob. How could anyone take him seriously? Apparently he fooled a lot of people. But hey I was just a kid from a working class family so what did I know.

  22. I flirted with libertarianism for a while after HW Bush dropped the mask on mainstream fake conservatism. They appealed to me on small government (government seems to attract evil sociopaths so of course I want to minimize it), and basic economic math stuff like Warren story.
    But I could never go all-in for many of the reasons Z cites. They absolutely refuse to acknowledge that their open borders ideas are stupid and suicidal. Culture, history, and race are simply ignored. Scratch them hard and they always jump left. And now places like Reason are openly funded by guys like the Kochs. They really are assholes.

    • Here’s the thing about libertarians: if they really hated the state as much as they hate the nation, they might actually be good for something. Unfortunately, they seem to be perfectly happy with the state as long as it sticks to the business of wrecking the nation.

  23. If you’re not allowed to think of yourselves as a people, then every discussion boils down to material wealth. Conservative Inc continually hammers the idea that America (and thus Americans) was founded on the idea of freedom and the chance to build a better life. Libertarianism fits that perfectly.

    If you start with that premise, immigration, building a business, etc., are all opportunities for individuals to fulfill those ideals. The hard-working, freedom-loving immigrant will find his paradise here and become a productive American, just like your ancestors did. The entrepreneur (truly the greatest American) will build a better life for himself, his family and his workers.

    We counter that with the amorphous ideas of “community” or “Americans first.” Those are decent but not as powerful and as ingrained in the white psyche as “freedom” and “chance to build a better life.”

    We need to counter with rhetoric that beats “freedom” and “chance for a better life.” What cuts through that BS: Survival.

    “Among their age group, my kids are a minority. What kind of life will they inherit? Is Mexico a free country? Is Africa a place where whites can build a better life?”

    “The government already allows discrimination against whites. You say that you’re against this, yet you want to allow in people who would vote for politicians that are openly anti-white? How can this be?”

    “Why is identity politics wrong? Why shouldn’t a group, particularly an ethnic group, band together to protect themselves, especially in a multi-ethnic country?”

    “By definition, an ethnic or racial group is just an extended family? What wrong with having ethnic political organizations that advocate and protect their extended family? Isn’t that family values?’

    I could go on, but you get the idea.

  24. Jon Haidt owes me some dough for shilling him like this, but I’ma do it again.

    Libertarians are aboriginal liberals. Compared to ethno-nationalists, they are moral horseshoe crabs in the tree of political life.

    Libertarians seem to have moral eyesight even less diversified than the liberals Haidt found were limited to the “harm” and “fairness” spectra. They are almost entirely limited to the “harm” spectrum.

    Like Popeye McCain, a Libertarian has one I but cannot see, but in the Conservatarian nation of the blind, every one-I’d man is still king.

    • ” a Libertarian has one I but cannot see”

      I can’t believe this only has 3 upvotes. This is simultaneously a luminous phrase and cutthroat razor encapsulated in eight words. Bravo!

      “Moral horseshoe crabs” isn’t bad either.

  25. Great minds think alike. My favorite American commentator–the Zman–and my favorite English commentator–Morgoth–have recently both smashed down the idea that we should serve the economy, instead of the other way around.

    Here’s Morgoth’s video:

    Morgoth is necessary viewing (and reading; he has a blog) for anyone in our thing.

  26. “The trouble with that is they need to explain how their thing was so easily taken over by the left-wing degenerates that now dominate the racket. Again, the same critique applies here as to Buckley-style conservatism. ”

    That’s a good point. Does it apply to Christianity, too? I’m not at anti-Christian, I just think it has a soft-underbelly, and has poor defense mechanisms against Progressivism. Let’s face it: Christianity was the dominant cultural force in the West and it got routed by the Left.

    • ” Christianity was the dominant cultural force in the West and it got routed by the Left.”
      (((Almost Correct)))

      • Spot on. “Judeo-Christianity” was a “little-hat hack” on the Christian mainframe at the root/OS level

    • Christianity is, at its core, progressive. When you look back at how Christianity began you see the appeals to women and slaves. The early church made a lot of money by acting as a place for widowers and daughters to hide their inheritance from their husbands (Roman law gave the family patriarch a lot of power).

      Further on, Catholicism outlawed cousin marriage to fight the clans of Rome and the Germans. This caused Europeans to develop this poisonous individualism that we have taken WAY too far, to the the point of Libertarianism. The Reformation was a massive upheaval in it’s own right. The Anglican Puritans gave us the beginnings of scold culture. Which is the force behind Abolition, Prohibition, and Diversity. To fill the pews, churches have become Refugee Rackets.

      The problems of the West are deeply rooted in the West. The (((problem))) only really takes off with the rise of urbanization, industrialization and the growth of banking. Western Civilization was in effect terraformed for Jews in the 19th century.

      • Regarding slaves and women, you could make that argument for Islam if you go solely by the Quran. Muhammad — and probably Jesus — found the rich to be less reliable allies. But their money’s still good!

      • Outlawing cousin marriage was eugenic, whatever it did to social bonds, the genetic improvements are clear. Witness the genetic problems with cousin-marrying populations today.

    • Nonsense.

      Christianity has withstood Romans, Moslems, uncounted tribes of barbarians, socialists, fascists and other turd burglars. It has gone into chit holes like Africa and established civilizations. From the Dead Sea scrolls, we know our bible has passed from antiquity to today, virtually unchanged.

      What you see is the dross being boiled off. The bible itself predicts this with exacting detail. The parodies of the church and faith communities are collapsing; classical Christianity is very much alive and well. It takes some digging but they are there. We keep low profiles for the same reason dissidents do – because we are now viable, legal targets for the pozzed leftist institutions. They hate us for the same reason they hate you: we think for ourselves, we won’t submit to them … and they know that eventually we will have to destroy them.

      Don’t seek shelter or friends in the pozzed churches. The fakes are easily spotted by the fact that they will support sinful behaviour.

  27. Well now, the Booby outgrew his Libertarian faith many moons ago, but let’s be fair. There’s nothing inherently “open boarders”, for example, about Libertarianism, per se, It’s just that that’s what the mainstream academic face of the movement has adopted.

    Problem is, Libertarianism is impossible to define, as every Libertarian will give you a different definition of “what it means to be a libertarian”. Frankly, if a people freely decides it doesn’t want open boarders and prefers to preserve an ethnic identity within the boarders of a nation-state that can be a perfectly Libertarian outcome… problem is, so can the opposite.

    In the final analysis it seems Libertarianism is a desire to be seen as, not so much as righteous, but nice, by always falling back on “individual freedom” as some undefined goal, because anything less than this “freedom” (whatever that even means) as they see it would require taking a stand that may be perceived by some as “not nice”.

    Just the Booby’s two cents.

    • I agree to a point. You can make a perfectly functional libertarian case for citizenship as a property right and immigrants as “free riders.”

      Libertarianism can’t seem to deal with the Hume-ian “is-ought” void in its ideology though. It eventually gets syllogized into silliness and libertine’d down by lawyering.

      Even if a group were sensible enough to say their “social contract” was not open to expanded membership, incessant lawyering and deconstruction would permit entryism and subversion at some point.

      “Because we live here” is ultimately a will-to-power concept that lies above and beyond logical deconstruction and proof (albeit well within the reach of common sense).

    • The only thing consistent from one libertarian to the next, is how smug they are whenever they let you know they are libertarians.

    • You can’t run a civil society on the Rand-Hickman “What’s good for me is right” philosophy. That’s how our ghettos and most of sub Saharan Africa operates. I found Rand’s books to be beyond tedious.

    • Part of why I adopted libertarianism ca. 2009 was that I wasn’t a liberal but I was embarrassed to be associated with the party of W.

    • Libertarianism is egalitarian. “I leave you alone, and you leave me alone.”

      In that framework it doesn’t matter who’s in your neighborhood, city, or country because you all agree on the same rules, and leave each other alone.

      Except in the real world nobody agrees on those rules except libertarians. And they will never admit that entire nations and races have no chance of ever agreeing on those rules- because then libertarians would have to have new rules to handle it. If they admitted that libertarian rules can’t work, they would stop being libertarians.

      So instead right libertarians come up with convoluted free market arguments to explain why borders are “libertarian.” It’s just a way of lying to themselves.

  28. >libertarianism is now one of the heads of the monster

    This. Libertarianism in the current year is objectively anti-white.

  29. My view of the Right libertarian leg of the Fusionist stool is that they either assumed that culture was a given, or they didn’t care. They just wanted the unfettered ability to exploit the economy: low taxes, reduced regulations, busted unions, etc. I could be wrong about this, but their love for the brown hordes invading the land seems like a later innovation, perhaps motivated by the end of the baby boom.

    The Left libertarians just want to dress up like girls, ponies, etc., and spread venereal diseases. Right libertarianism ceased when they embraced dress up and sodomy.

    • I think the root of all politics is simply people twisting things to their personal advantage. It gets muddied up because so many people are pushing and pulling in different directions…

    • Sleepy, I was going to ask the august Zman how he defines “libertarians”, but I think you’ve covered it.

      I wish Z would bring back his classic quote, something along the lines of “I love the leaves in fall, they remind me that there may be a God, and of why I hate libertarians.”

    • I agree. It’s a white European male thing with no mechanism for keeping it that way.
      It is, to a very large degree how whites relate to their neighbors but doesn’t seem to be scalable.
      It’s my instinctive approach but has to be amenable to having limits on liberty (other peoples first, of course)

      • Even Whites are constrained by the Dunbar Number. best together in much smaller groups than millions

      • Jones, yeah thats how it strikes me as well. Libertarian blank slate starts with a middle-aged professional with a nice home and manicured lawn – that he cuts himself!

        That kind of projection is necessary to prop up a system so ripe for hijacking.

        My earliest encounters with libertarianism as a high school aged kid was a Lutheran family i knew. Owned their own business with a couple of uncles. Super churchy. But no sons only daughters.

        A lot of ‘roll up your sleeves’ and ‘bootstraps’ morality that they actually backed up. Good people, but something was off.

        Later it became obvious, they were Progressives wrapped in an economic argument protecting their self-interests.

        They hated government regulations and taxes and of course adopted the feminist-lite egalitarian talking points to make sure their daughters could out-compete the men they were supposed to marry.

        It all worked out for them of course so now their private philosophy on life is as robust as ever.

        And they are more than happy to tell you at every opportunity how the future of a brown female is the natural progression of gods plan or some shit.

        They sold the biz for millions right before the semiconductor market imploded. Have spent the last 25 years sailing and working on mission work in mexico. Not total shithole mexico but Cabo. Because the poor counties surrounding their hometown don’t have any white people in need.

        The small town where they started their biz is overrun with mexicans, their factory long shuttered. It is bordering on shithole status.

        Their money has greased the tracks for their daughters, now married with children and repeating the same libertarian-prog posturing.

        Their grandkids, however, all BOYS, are entering a world that will not be so hospitable to the self-serving utopian delusion. But at least they are not racist.

        Libertarians. Chameleons.

    • So? They’ve never cared about the USA – only the dollar. They unite with the Left in supporting globalism and open borders. Same result, different motives. Some of them used Libertarianism as a way to channel people away from a REAL conservative movement based on “Family, borders, Culture”. If the Left is 100% evil, libertarians are only 75% evil – give them a brownie point.

  30. It’s so interesting to notice: Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh and whatever other idiots spend the entire show whining about “the left calls everybody nazis they disagree with boo hoo” and then spends the whole q&a calling the groypers nazis lol.

    Same with the gay black guy at OSU, he was going on about how conservatives should be accepting of gays, then at the end he says “lol if you want gay sex you can find it”, using gay as pejorative.

    These clowns are total frauds and I’m glad they’re being exposed. Demographics, demographics, demographics. Keep hammering away.

    • Survival, survival, survival. Keep hammering away with that.

      Neither the GOP (which I don’t care about but Joe Normie does) nor whites will fare well as our numbers are reduced.

    • You can see from the way that they operate entirely within the left’s framework, and so instinctively and unashamedly use the left’s demonology, that they are not the right, but merely the right of the left.

      Just the monster’s rightmost head, as the Zman would say.

      I think of it as Cathedral FC (Football Club). Globohomo is all one team. All working together.

      Forwards: ADL, the intelligence agencies.
      Midfielders: Antifa, Jewish gazillionaires, the media, Hollywood
      Defenders: Academia, Wine Aunts, LBGT, Conservative Inc.
      Goalkeeper: Pedophiles

  31. Broad coalitions sound good in theory, but different groups have different interests. Those interests often conflict. Advances for one group often come at the expense of another. That’s why broad coalitions are more susceptible to resentment, division, and eventual dissolution.

    With that said Ethno-Nationalism is Un-American.

    It has NO place in the conservative movement

    You need to builf broad coalition to make America great for EVERYONE

    believe in natural rights for ALL

    believe in E Pluribus Unum—out of many one

    e condemn the hateful ideology that is white supremacy

    • To paraphrase Ayn Rosenbaum, “In any unum of food & poison, the pluribum is still toxic.”

      Judging by the state of the “conservative” movement, you are technically, if only partially, correct – ethno-nationalism has no place in the conservative movement.

      Your main error among many lies in conflating Second Founding conservative mythology (proposition nation, all men created equal, statue-poem) with “American.”

      The immigration act of 1789, the first significant legislation passed under muh Constitution by muh Founders, was ethno-nationalist. Your idea of Americanism was manufactured and smuggled into our history post-Reconstruction to justify the first efforts to import a new people to radically transform American society.

      Irish, Italian and Central-South European mass immigration didn’t follow or reflect American tradition. It radically accelerated the transformation of America from a republican confederation of allied ethno-states to an imperial hegemony of largely New England Puritans, merchants, bankers and Jews based in New York, Washington and elsewhere, mostly in the northern and coastal Atlantic states of the original 13 colonies.

      This NuMerican Wave 1.0 voted by bloc and clan and overwhelmed the legacy population with sheer numbers. Their lack of civic engagement and relative political passivity, combined with one-man-one-vote ideals bottlenecked political power to such an extent that America finally had one neck that 1% could squeeze.

      Throw in female suffrage and you have the critical mass of atomized individuals from which a Jew-clear reaction can be generated.

      A 40 year immigration moratorium served to assimilate the First Wave but 1965’s Hart-(((Cellar))) Act re-toxified the mix to fatal, if slow-acting, levels.

      White identitarians seeking to forge a functional polity out of the mess of your twisted ideals are not “supremacists.”

      Ethno-nationalists condemn the supremacist, hateful, genocidal covert and subversive agenda that is Zionism whether it masquerades as Americanism, Bolshevism, Globalism or “human rights.” Zio-Americanism is anti-biological, anti-scientific and anti-human life, cultural advancement and happiness, as well as “un-American.”

    • Hi, TinyDuck…

      you forgot to mention that white wymyn love big blck kock.

      have a good weekend, see you Monday.

    • Piteous Christ you’re a buffoon. Not just personally, but technically: everything you say is always wrong. I mean actually, demonstrably wrong. It’s just that nobody can be bothered to pick the corn out of your poop.

      Honestly, don’t you ever get tired of this?

    • Parsing your comment, it occurs to me that I’ve never told anyone to condemn anything, no matter how I felt about them or their ideology. The fact that you (and others) even use this language, makes you sound like some kind of grand inquisitor or quasi-dictator: “Condemn this, now!” How about, “No.” A guy walking around with a sandwich board that says, “Repent” is reasonable by comparison

  32. “[T]hese people are just part of the candy coating of the Progressive nut inside.”

    Z, where do you get gems like this?

    • Personally, I’ve always described that situation as, “The same shit sandwich with a different choice of sides.”.

  33. I still get spam email from mainstream conservative and libertarian operations I haven’t visited in ages. What I’ve noticed about all of it is the weird totally spectator nature of the discourse. These tea party sites and Breitbart talk about everything in a “Did you hear about Hugo and Kim?” tone, as if politicians are popular kids in school and everyone else is just at the margins of some high-school drama. The browning of America of course means that politics will basically just be fat black and Jewish women doing a coffee klatch (like The View) but the whites are even worse. Zioclops’ (Dan Crenshaw’s) only argument against those young white males was that they wouldn’t get laid unless they put on uniforms and died for Israel. I think that’s the only reason your Ben Shapiro types push back against Trannies in the military; they need young white guys to fantasize about battling alongside bros and not inter-gender types while dying in the sandbox.

  34. OT: I was working out at the gym, on a bike. I read while cycling, but when the chapter ends before the workout I might look up at all of the TV screens scrolled across the wall.

    Yesterday I saw an ad, in Spanish, with text reading, “Voting determines the future. Don’t let them determine our future. Register to vote.”

    They come to this country to determine our future. And they consider us – the existing country – to be ‘them’. How is that not an invasion, deserving of being repelled by force of arms?

    Mexicans have already determined the fate of one country, the one they flee. The results will be the same wherever they become a majority.

    I agree with yesterday’s thesis: this is what our elites want for us. It is not accidental or unforeseen. It is the plan. There’s probably a white traitor paying for those ads.

    That guy better have a good bolt-hole when tomorrow belongs to us.

    • They do consider it an invasion. You just have to tease it out of them. The conversation goes like this. You: “You can’t come here illegally.” Them: “Your people took this land from mine and the Reconquista requires me to fight for the establishment of Aztlan.” They won’t be that succinct; but it’s the message. To be fair and also give Perot and Buchanan their due, Mexico wasn’t anymore of a craphole decades ago than Iraq was (look up Baghdad in the ’60s; it looked like Rhodesia). There’s nothing worse than the Hispanics in academia, but they have about as much in common with the peon types as Obama does with ghetto blacks. Manuel Labor can be bussed to a voting booth but Leaf Blower guy isn’t really the problem. I don’t hate Mexican peons or ghetto blacks even (though I prefer to avoid them). I hate the people who have weaponized them.

      • Is that really what the Mexicans think, or is that just the idea that white (((liberals))) have put in their head?

        The “we are reconquering the land” bullshit sounds like he just can’t admit that his own country is a shithole (because of people like him) so he fled. It’s all coping.

        • It’s hard to lose $$$ selling someone what he wants to hear.

          I grew up within an hour’s drive of some of the poorest, least-developed White communities in America (Kentucky & WVa), and at our worst we were at least one if not two standard deviations of civilization beyond the Mexican average.

          At the risk of offending Freduardo Reed at Unz, if I were Mexican I would be looking hard for a cope.

      • It’s worth remembering that as a strict factual matter, the justification “your people took this land from mine” is entirely false.

        The United States conquered (not stole, conquered in war, fair and square) a large swathe of almost-entirely unsettled land from the Mexican Empire. Which swiped it from the Spanish Empire on their way out the door. (It’s worth recalling just how unsettled this territory was; it was “Mexican” or “Spanish” pretty much on paper only.)

        The Spaniards, in their turn, had swiped it from the Hopi, the Navajo, the Comanche, the Paiute, and other smaller Indian nations whose lengthy tenure on the land pretty much makes them the earliest known legitimate claimants (viz. precisely who THEY swiped it from is lost in the mists of time).

        But — and here’s the kicker — the Hopi, Navajo, Paiute, etc were never Aztecas. Lived so far away that the Aztecas probably never heard of them (if they had, the Aztecas would have conquered or murdered them). The place was never “Aztlan” because Aztlan never existed. And the Mexicans are not the Paiute, never were. Short fat diabetic goblins from the Yucatan are not identical with the Navajo, simply because there’s no ocean between one territory and the other. This would be like the Belgians stating they “really” owned Serbia because they’re both in Europe.

        The Mexican moral claim to the Southwest is utterly bogus. Not that pointing this out will stop them, but still.

        • Remember: moral, not logical arguments will win. Your Ben shapiro style “facts and logic” spiel just doesnt work.

          • I enjoyed that refreshing dose of real talk. Winners write the history. Nobody likes to lose; but losers can bitch and moan like “victims” or they can build casinos to bleed the weaker elements of the victorious party. Or flood the lands that were “conquered” with unproductive human detritus and cheap tar heroin. White Americans need to remember the deeds of their forefathers; start acting like winners; and tell the losers to FOAD

        • The reconquista is what is taught in the colleges these days. La Raza on campus, or whatever they call themselves now. Before they invented it, it didn’t really exist.

          • I’ve had an inordinate amount of interactions with both new citizens to the U.S. from Mexico and their first gen U.S. born children. I generally like them, with the exception of the Cholo types. Funny thing is, oftentimes, at some point they’ll refer to white people and they’ll inevitably use the word “Americanos” interchangeably. Its subconscious but infinitely telling. They know. Deep down, they know.

        • And to add to what AntManBee said, the few places in Norte Mexico that did have any sort of civilization (ie the Mission Towns of California, Santa Fe, and San Antonio) we’re all built by white Criolo Spaniards. Mestizos had nothing to do with it.

        • You are killing it Ant Man. Unfortunately, as I have discovered throughout my life, perhaps 5% of the population at most can be persuaded to change their thinking or beliefs based upon evidence or reason. This is why outright atheism will never displace some form of faith in that which cannot be either confirmed or falsified. It is also why most of the population cannot become scientists and engineers. Ultimately, it is why so few want to buy what we are selling.

        • (Precisely who THEY swiped it from is lost in the mists of time) the Hopi, Navajo, Paiute never knew the Aztecas (Oh yes they did!) –Antman

          The mists of time have lifted and we know. Lots of old ones in the southwest for 10’s of thousands of years: The Folsom culture made seriously amazing effective, beautiful fluted killing points and wiped out the last of the Beringian large animals, post ice age, mammoths and mastodons. Moving forward, the Basketmaker Culture spanned 7,000 BC to 750 AD.

          Ancestral Puebloans aka Anasazi (that’s what the Navajo called them when they arrived (approx. 1400 AD from Canada/Alaska) meaning “enemy ancestors” meaning the Hopi, Zuni, Acoma and others Puebloans/desendants of Anasazi. The Hopi hate that term and called them Hisatsinom—People of Long Ago….the forefathers of the Pueblo culture.

          A big drought and “climate change” around 1100 AD and big cultural destabilization (violence and burning down the villages all across the southwest) drew the Anasazi to move from Utah-Colorado down into Arizona-New Mexico down along the Rio Grand country, then some eventually into Northern Mexico.

          The influence of MesoAmerica was profound and very influential in the southwest 1000-1350 AD. Rooms full of thousands upon thousands of parrot and macaw feathers and cages with bird bones. The acquisition of scarlet macaws likely required lengthy trips between Chaco and the lowland tropical forests of MesoAmerica. These birds historically lived ∼1,800 km from Chaco,

          “The Hopis felt that Chaco (approx. 850-1150 AD) should never have happened, that it is stained with a dark history, with sorcery that once delved too deeply into the supernatural. Some members of the modern Hopi tribe have stated they will not visit Chaco Canyon, that an ancient incongruity dwells there. Chaco may have been like a Tibetan temple, with colorful ceremonies and festivals, but it was also like the Mayan world of the time, rife with ritualized violence and human sacrifice. The same knives known to have been used in MesoAmerica for cutting out beating human hearts have been found at Chaco.

          In the end, Chaco burned. Kivas were set on fire and whole rows of houses with wooden ceiling beams and thatched doors went up in flames. It is a way of leaving things behind, the mark of an intense people on their way to someplace else.”–House of Rain

          • Tlaloc…The god of Rain…the House of Rain. Some MesoAmerican people still worship him today. Culture can move backwards in time. NEVER underestimate the MesoAmerican taste for sacrifice. Just because Turkeys are sacrificed now, sacrificed turkeys found in Chaco 1,000 years in the past, does not mean over a span of time, it won’t regress to a new-action version of the violent and death times, quietly with stealth. They perceive reality as a much longer continuum than we do.

    • I wish I could be optimistic but never in human history as multiculturalism existed without conflict, strife and warfare. What to do??? My best sane recommendation is to (1) Prepare, (2) Be better than ‘them’ in every conceivable manner – i.e. take it personally and have fun competing against ‘them’ and (3) keep calm, don’t do anything stupid or rash as it demeans you and your people.

    • “Mexicans have already determined the fate of one country, the one they flee.“

      That is one powerful statement. Thanks.

    • “There’s probably a white traitor paying for those ads.”

      He’s doesn’t consider himself white. He’s also not a traitor to HIS people. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. He’s being perfectly rational. I respect our opponents and find their tactics perfectly understandable. It’s not their fault that we’re too stupid to see through the propaganda and realize that they’re not one of us.

      • @Citizen
        Exactly right Brother…They know if we do what they do to us which is band/tribe together we would win in a heartbeat which is why they troll these comment section to do everything in their power so that we don’t…It’s to bad we listen to them…

      • Our universalist creed, born of the Enlightenment and Judeo-Protestantism, has inoculated non-whites against our predations. Once we gave up the practice of involuntary servitude, we leaped into the arms of radical egalitarianism. What our ruling class has in store for us next is anyone’s guess. They demand cheap labor in the Age of Equality, something that can only come at the cost of the middle class.

    • This is a prime example of why we are not going to talk (or vote) our way out of the mess we are in. Demographics is destiny in a liberal democracy.

  35. InB4 I listen, on topic – one of the Americans I spoke with after Oslo Scandza was trying to sell me pretty hard on Propertariansim. I’ve tried to deep-dive on this before but pulled the rip-chord after a few hours because it just sounded like a re-branding of hard philosophical libertarianism. In last year’s pod on “fringe politics” Z conveyed the same impression on Propertarianism.

    I tried the Doolittle-brand packaging and the Mark-brand packaging, neither turned me on. Doolittle struck me like a libertarian Moldbug, even less appealing than Mark. When I told the Propertarian that it just seemed like a grander Kantian-Calvinist-grade hyper-complex built on the same falacious quicksand of man as homo economicus, he acted like I had just reduced Romeo & Juliet to an 80’s Sean Penn movie.

    Am I really missing something? Am I a Philistine? Somebody put me some knowledge on this if I am.

    • That was pretty much speaking in tongues as far as I am concerned, though I’m sure it’s the usual good thinking 😉

      • If you think my Cliffs Notes version sounds wonky, try the original straight from the bottle. Migraine-fuel.

    • You are what comes next, E. It is entirely possible you could a philosopher king like our host! Looking back on my journey I was told to line up behind our allies (which included libertarians) and not talk or even think about the gathering, growing darkling shadows that we talk about here every day. I was fed up with Conservative Inc long before they called it that.

      It’s a tough place to be, isn’t it? I flirted with NRx, they have some good ideas but lots of baggage too. The Alt Right looked good until fags like Milo and Vox Day hijacked it… and I started scrabbling around trying to find my tribe and allies. It’s tough because I am a marginally aware Normie and Yesterday Man… I don’t have the time or the brains to wade through books and reams of endless essays… and the loons produce their flatulent dreck at twice the volumes the intellectuals can.

      I wound up here only by sheer luck… I think Vox was pissed at him for something and was throwing a tantrum about it, so I came here to check it out… and just sighed with relief. I took a place in the cheap seats in the back, pulled out my pipe and flask… and I’ve been here ever since! 🙂

      Where will YOU end up, Exile? Our esteemed blog host is worth the price of admission, but the visiting academics, intelligentsia and ignoratti in the comments are a boon too! Please keep us posted on your journey, I will be most interested in your travels.

      • John Smith,

        I generally try to be honest with myself and I realize I’m clever but not terribly bright. I do what I can with my gifts and faults to walk the line between delving into theory until I reach the level of my ineptitude, and being a stalwart suportive hammer ala Popeye’s “I knows what I knows and that’s all that I knows.” I’m quick to recognize patterns and figure causalities but am often stymied developing solutions. I’m okay with that. The latter isn’t my gift.

        You are right, at some point when we emerge from the shadows, we will need a coherent vision and logical approach to preserving Our people. Exile’s type will be the next iteration of Our Thing. People like ourselves can provide the heart or the muscle, verve, elan, esprit d’corps, what-have-ya… and even some valuable homespun wisdom on occasion. (I think you have offered a lot up here with your posts and are no slouch).

        Whether Our People’s future involves reclaiming America, forming enclaves, winning a war of annihilation, forging a new nation or simply surviving as best we can in a multi-culti U.S. (I’ve read all the predictions here and Lord only knows what lies ahead), I just dont know.

        Theories are interesting and eventually decisions will have to be made for the path ahead. Right now I simply boil most of this down to that fellah looks like me, we share a common ancestry and culture and we think alike. Maybe he’s not here yet but open to it. Maybe that gal there is beginning to Notice. Maybe I can spark a little interest in Our People’s history or art in a young white person. Maybe encourage another to reject materialism, ghetto culture or begin to take umbrage with the anti-white slights that are eponymous in our current vomitorium of a post-modern culture.

        Perhaps that’s what the likes of someone like me can contribute and I’ll let others with a higher IQ and a shared love for Our People do the tinkering with philosophical/economic/theoretical future mapping.

    • Propertarianism is utopian fantasy. It’s just libertarianism to the nth degree.
      No ‘ism’ is going to save us other than pragmatism and opportunism.

    • My understanding of “propertarianism,” just from watching the John Mark videos, is that it’s really just ordinary separatist and reactionary thought, but with everything spergily translated into economic terms.

      In particular, they seem to try to calculate a monetary value for every social wrong. Like, if your neighbor plays loud music or is a tattooed freak, they want to calculate some kind of “market value” of the psychic damage to the neighbors.

      Of course, it’s absurd. Not all social ills can be monetized, and it’s willfully reductive to even try. Ordinary laws are perfectly fine to handle things like that.

      Actually, Mark is best when he’s tearing down the left instead of explaining the spergy propertarian system. This video, for example, is an excellent summary of bioleninism and why it’s so dangerous:

      And this video, about the importance of using power to punish your enemies, is excellently anti-libertarian:

      • Spergs are best at deconstruction & destruction. Creativity & the construction of human networks require flexibility & a tolerance for ambiguity they lack. The old “all they have is a hammer” thing.

        • Yeah, for that reason I could even put in a kind word for that nasty old bird, Ayn Rand.

          Her polemics against the resentment-driven politics of the left are so convincing that you can never really look at them the same way again.

          But her own system is so utopian that it doesn’t survive the slightest contact with the real word. So she’s actually pretty good at peeling youngsters away from leftism, but then freeing them to find their own answers.

          • Same. When you are 17 and read someone that sees all the envy driven insanity around you and tells you its not okay, you can easily get roped into following some of her more utopian ideas. Especially in the modern age where so many people believe that people are actually rational animals. In hindsight, one wonders how on earth you could worship reason after just reading about how people arent reasonable at all.

        • I think John Mark has done some good work. Curt Doolittle seems like a pretty intelligent and thoughtful guy who has a vision as to what might work for American Westernkind. I’m not going to pretend that I understand everything about Propertarianism, or even all that much about the details, but I don’t think P-ism is just crackpottery.

          In Doolittle’s analysis, he thinks one of the primary advantages of the West has been rule of law and P-ism seeks to make the most of this feature of the West by extending (and defining) the notion of ‘property’ in such a way that it would allow juridical challenge to various kinds of ‘violations’ of property.

          Online, some of the proponents of P-ism (including Doolittle) can be a bit off-putting in their communication techniques, but I think that’s just (a) the kinds of personalities that have been drawn to P-ism and (b) internet culture in general (Doolittle has more-or-less admitted that his internet persona and IRL behavior are not at all similar).

          The most recent blog post on the P-ism website indicates that P-ism views ‘property’ in behavioral terms, which I find, at the very least, interesting and productive. This is ain’t pappy’s libertarianism.

          • To the extent they are trying to be more wholistic it’s a mark of self-awareness re: libertarianism’s blind spots but that seems to run into its own set of problems. Can you really quantify non-economic services or decisions? The original libertarians would attack that idea with Hayek”s knowledge problem, subjective vs. objective value, etc.

            It still seems like a political version of Asimov”s Foundation “psychohistory.”

            Based on some positive feedback like yours I”ll give it another shot sometime & do a post next year.

        • Oh, spergs especially hate ambiguity. You can’t manipulate what you can’t define. That’s why my more strident professors always disqualified politically incorrect authors based on their (real or imagined) “racism” rather than the merits of their art. No need to tangle with anything that makes your brain hurt. Bad person = no need for rebuttal. God forbid an atom of self-doubt were to enter their minds…

      • Wow. Honestly, thanks for posting your take on propertarianism, because here is the Malbolge programming language:

        I discovered it watching an episode of Elementary (get off my lawn, I’m allowed one crime procedural due to my age) and have been playing with it. Waaaay easier to understand than propertarianism.

        • “(S)pecifically designed to be almost impossible to use” = all llbertarianism, ever. I’m going to.use that quote in the future, muchos gracias.

      • I don’t get the sense that it’s about ‘monetary’ value, it’s about the value of ‘property violations’ within the context of an overarching principle of reciprocity and the notion of ‘property’ as a *behavior*. This seems to me a pretty sound arrangement, whether ‘libertarian’ or not. I don’t claim to understand all the details of P-ism, but I find these innovations intriguing. Supposed John Mark and Curt Doolittle are going to do a series of conversations together going through the Propertarian Constitution and I’m curious about that these communiques will contain.

      • When I watched John Mark’s deep dive on Propertarianism, he made it clear that all disputes would be adjudicated through the court system.

        I thought to myself “is there any particular group of people who are skilled at manipulating the courts to advance their own in-group preference at the expense of the out-group? Anyone at all???”

        At that point so stopped taking John Mark seriously. That and his whole “the cops will side with us when TSHTF” thing.

      • Yes, exactly…

        “Once more: If the society contains a class of adult members, so deficient in virtue and intelligence that they would only abuse the fuller privileges of other citizens to their own and others’ detriment, it is just to withhold so many of these privileges, and to impose so much restraint, as may be necessary for the highest equity to the whole body, inclusive of this subject class.” – Robert Lewis Dabney. “A Defence of Virginia / And Through Her, of the South, in Recent and Pending Contests Against the Sectional Party.”

      • +1 wisdom from the Bitterroot Valley. Semper alba, iustus semper. Always white, always right. The real flaw of libertarians of all stripes is that they worship Mammon with a complete and utter sacrifice of their sanity.

    • Propertarianism is nothing more than a multi-volume love letter from Curt Doolittle to the operational testimonialism of his butt hole.

Comments are closed.