The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By David Gordon
 All Comments / By David Gordon
    Russell Kirk: American Conservative. By Bradley J. Birzer. University Press of Kentucky, 2015. 574 pages. When The Conservative Mind was published in 1953, its author, like Lord Byron after the appearance of Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage,awoke to find himself famous. Russell Kirk was a hitherto unknown American academic, but Time magazine, which “devoted its entire July...
  • @Tulip
    Any system of norms is completely arbitrary. All manner of human groups have different and contradictory systems of norms.

    However, any particular system of norms can either promote survival of the group, or undermine the survival of the group. Thus, tradition supplies those norms that have been advantageous to groups over the long-haul. So normative inquiry must start from history, and from within one's own tradition.

    On the other hand, conditions are constantly changing, so there is a constant need for reform, at least at the interface of law and politics. Natural law would be in this sense those group strategies and norms that promote group dominance and survival.

    However, any particular system of norms can either promote survival of the group, or undermine the survival of the group.

    Isn’t defining the group one of the major problems that we currently face? We have a lot of people that want to include everybody as part of the “ingroup”. We don’t have any examples before us where there was no distinction between them and us. The last ideology that came along that tried to define the group in more or less universal form disintegrated into all kinds of communist terror.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art

    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don’t allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.
     
    Everything you say is true - they have their reasons for doing what they do. But what they do does not work in the long term. The problem is we end up with what we have - aberrant big big money in the hands of a few.

    Compounding interest is unworkable - fini - the end - period.

    Poppy cock. For the reality-based set, interest charges in the ancient world reflected custom, and varied across cultures. In the modern world, interest charges reflect the political and market power of financial institutions. Simply look at how the fed operates.

    Risk of capital loss sets the floor, but not the ceiling on interest rates. When finance captures the political system, interest rates reflect the debtor’s capacity to bleed without dying, until finance eventually gets too greedy for even that outcome, and the economy collapses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Any system of norms is completely arbitrary. All manner of human groups have different and contradictory systems of norms.

    However, any particular system of norms can either promote survival of the group, or undermine the survival of the group. Thus, tradition supplies those norms that have been advantageous to groups over the long-haul. So normative inquiry must start from history, and from within one’s own tradition.

    On the other hand, conditions are constantly changing, so there is a constant need for reform, at least at the interface of law and politics. Natural law would be in this sense those group strategies and norms that promote group dominance and survival.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    However, any particular system of norms can either promote survival of the group, or undermine the survival of the group.

    Isn't defining the group one of the major problems that we currently face? We have a lot of people that want to include everybody as part of the "ingroup". We don't have any examples before us where there was no distinction between them and us. The last ideology that came along that tried to define the group in more or less universal form disintegrated into all kinds of communist terror.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @joe webb
    you seem not to understand my reasoning, and I give up on you.

    jw

    I understand your point. I’m not arguing with your racial preferences and views on extending various rights and privileges to people.

    I’m referring to your claim that no natural rights exist. You seem to agree that there is a natural right to self-defense, which would imply that at least one natural right exists, and that the claim that there are no natural rights is false.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art

    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don’t allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.
     
    Everything you say is true - they have their reasons for doing what they do. But what they do does not work in the long term. The problem is we end up with what we have - aberrant big big money in the hands of a few.

    Compounding interest is unworkable - fini - the end - period.

    Well, there is a variant of libertarianism called “mutualism” that is opposed to the idea of interest. Under such a system, say, you could make loan contracts unenforceable if they charge interest. I haven’t really looked into this idea, but I can see such a system emerging in an anarcho-capitalist covenant community, where everybody voluntarily agrees to abide by certain rules. However, I suspect that the systems that allow lenders to charge interest and enforce such contracts will do better economically.

    Forget money and take something like rental. If I rent out a property of mine, the tenant agrees to pay me ON TOP of agreeing to return the property as he found it. It’s still often a better deal for the tenant because the alternative, i.e. buying me out, could be much more expensive. Translate this to money; usury is simply the practice of charging to rent out money to others. For many the alternative, which is not getting any loans, is worse than getting the loan and having to pay it back with interest.

    I understand the moral case behind opposition to usury, but I have a hard time seeing how it can apply to the renting of money but not to the renting of any other good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    you in no way proved your point. To counter my concise argument by claiming that history has been chaotic, etc, first is not true, and second, my biological natural rights argument would substantially reduce the problems and violence of history. Take the cant out of the discussion and get real...biology first, IQ second, tempermental differences, etc..etc.

    First of all there is no dreaming in my view. Enemies are natural. Wars are natural. But with enough good sense, they can be minimized. You stay where you are and we stay where we are.
    Agreed? Mutual self-interest tends to support this kind of agreement.

    Now, inasmuch as most races are nuts, and Whites got aways to go in this regard, reducing war, etc. will be difficult , but it can be done. We did not go to war with the USSR. That was a major accomplishment. MAD mutually assured destruction, worked.

    Now at the non-nuke level, it still can work because the destruction is largely economic. War these days costs a lot of money. Better to work things out over lunch. This is all Reason at work.

    When, someone gets totally out of hand, like N. Korea, or even China, or the jews, war will still come. I propose no cure for the disease called man....But the best of us can have a pretty good time with one-another...that is intra-race, at least whites can. The Others just keep their distance and we still carry the big stick.

    All the Natural Rights discourse tends toward Humanitarianism/Rainbow Human Family, like what happened to ancient Greece when the Polis fell apart...the spread of Epicureanism and Stoicism, and Universal human rights. Lots of crap, but that is part of our, and mine historically, dream-time childishness. Of course, in Greece, the probable major reason for this was the calamity of the Peloponnesian Wars of Greek against Greek. So, lets try cosmopolitanism.

    This also happened after world war two where the UN was dreamed up to UP Humanity.

    So now the next step is to drop universalist dreaming, and get realistic about the different races and civilizations, per Huntington for example, and recognize profound difference which will never be overcome, and getting realistic about these differences. Diversity make us crazy....when practiced in one country, etc. Diversity internationally can be a reminder that we are all NOT alike, and to keep the peace at a pragmatic level, we have to admit it....no rainbows...and construct rules accordingly for international behavior, like first, no emigration. etc.

    The world is genuinely Diverse and should never be expected to become One. That is a dream that only leads to war, etc, etc.

    Drop natural rights dogmas, and just recognize that evolution and genes make us very different and for pragmatic reasons, we just keep our distance from one-another.

    The human rights crowd leads the migrants into Europe. The jews like jewyorktimes champions the human rights of muzzies. This is what is called chutzpah. They urge whites to take arabs while they kill arabs. How jews get away with this is just an example of Whites extending to jews human rights (free speech) that they do not deserve. They never invented one human right, except the jew right to Everything, including the right to exclude anybody they want.

    Who invented liberty? Bill of rights, Magna Carta, ancient liberty? When antiquity of Greco-Roman times struggled over liberty, jews were killing one another over Words, including the Hellenistic Jews who were being murdered by the jew zealots. Jews ARE zealots, like Arabs. Semites are all nuts, and never invented a single liberty, etc. Rabbis are rabid, foam at the mouth today. Free Speech? Even in secular Israel, can you advocate the dissolution of the state of Israel? no free speech there. It is in their genes....despotism.

    Is this that so hard to understand?

    This is science, not philosophy.

    Joe Webb

    This is science, not philosophy.

    Don’t you mean “This is genetics, not philosophy.”

    Wester science is part of Western philosophy – right.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jtgw
    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don't allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.

    The government can't outlaw private debt, but it can refuse to encourage it by underwriting that debt. Banks get away with lending money they don't have because, if their borrowers default or if their depositors withdraw too much, the government or the central bank steps in to pay the difference. This is where the evil lies.

    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don’t allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.

    Everything you say is true – they have their reasons for doing what they do. But what they do does not work in the long term. The problem is we end up with what we have – aberrant big big money in the hands of a few.

    Compounding interest is unworkable – fini – the end – period.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    Well, there is a variant of libertarianism called "mutualism" that is opposed to the idea of interest. Under such a system, say, you could make loan contracts unenforceable if they charge interest. I haven't really looked into this idea, but I can see such a system emerging in an anarcho-capitalist covenant community, where everybody voluntarily agrees to abide by certain rules. However, I suspect that the systems that allow lenders to charge interest and enforce such contracts will do better economically.

    Forget money and take something like rental. If I rent out a property of mine, the tenant agrees to pay me ON TOP of agreeing to return the property as he found it. It's still often a better deal for the tenant because the alternative, i.e. buying me out, could be much more expensive. Translate this to money; usury is simply the practice of charging to rent out money to others. For many the alternative, which is not getting any loans, is worse than getting the loan and having to pay it back with interest.

    I understand the moral case behind opposition to usury, but I have a hard time seeing how it can apply to the renting of money but not to the renting of any other good.
    , @Tulip
    Poppy cock. For the reality-based set, interest charges in the ancient world reflected custom, and varied across cultures. In the modern world, interest charges reflect the political and market power of financial institutions. Simply look at how the fed operates.

    Risk of capital loss sets the floor, but not the ceiling on interest rates. When finance captures the political system, interest rates reflect the debtor's capacity to bleed without dying, until finance eventually gets too greedy for even that outcome, and the economy collapses.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    So you would agree that a right to self-defense exists, irrespective of history, philosophy, biology, laws, what others think or say, etc.? That would imply that at least one natural right exists, and that the claim that there are no natural rights is false.

    you seem not to understand my reasoning, and I give up on you.

    jw

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I understand your point. I'm not arguing with your racial preferences and views on extending various rights and privileges to people.

    I'm referring to your claim that no natural rights exist. You seem to agree that there is a natural right to self-defense, which would imply that at least one natural right exists, and that the claim that there are no natural rights is false.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • by the way, movies? excuse me. Still the Cohen bros have made some very funny movies, particularly satirizing the jews…the general case illustrated by a particular.

    Jew IQ is 110 average. Another brilliant jew is Milch, of Deadwood fame. His brilliance is also on parade in his grotesque treatment of the jew and at the blacks in Deadwood. The jew knows how to screw the goyem, and with the mind control of the Movies…have distinguished themselves.

    however, Trump will deal with the jews, just as we will all deal with them sooner or later, and it will not be the case that they will be able to make more movies about it.

    Joe Webb

    p.s. all semites are crazy for sex, tribe, and fanatic religion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • you are off on an emotional tear. hardly worth responding.

    But, the general argument , not the particular case of Unz or any particular jew or any particular white, is what is important.

    The jews along with every other race never demonstrated in history a concern for liberty or free speech and the various civic, not religious virtues.

    You are drunk, probably, like so many Irish I have known. Ireland’s IQ is 92, per Lynn

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    you in no way proved your point. To counter my concise argument by claiming that history has been chaotic, etc, first is not true, and second, my biological natural rights argument would substantially reduce the problems and violence of history. Take the cant out of the discussion and get real...biology first, IQ second, tempermental differences, etc..etc.

    First of all there is no dreaming in my view. Enemies are natural. Wars are natural. But with enough good sense, they can be minimized. You stay where you are and we stay where we are.
    Agreed? Mutual self-interest tends to support this kind of agreement.

    Now, inasmuch as most races are nuts, and Whites got aways to go in this regard, reducing war, etc. will be difficult , but it can be done. We did not go to war with the USSR. That was a major accomplishment. MAD mutually assured destruction, worked.

    Now at the non-nuke level, it still can work because the destruction is largely economic. War these days costs a lot of money. Better to work things out over lunch. This is all Reason at work.

    When, someone gets totally out of hand, like N. Korea, or even China, or the jews, war will still come. I propose no cure for the disease called man....But the best of us can have a pretty good time with one-another...that is intra-race, at least whites can. The Others just keep their distance and we still carry the big stick.

    All the Natural Rights discourse tends toward Humanitarianism/Rainbow Human Family, like what happened to ancient Greece when the Polis fell apart...the spread of Epicureanism and Stoicism, and Universal human rights. Lots of crap, but that is part of our, and mine historically, dream-time childishness. Of course, in Greece, the probable major reason for this was the calamity of the Peloponnesian Wars of Greek against Greek. So, lets try cosmopolitanism.

    This also happened after world war two where the UN was dreamed up to UP Humanity.

    So now the next step is to drop universalist dreaming, and get realistic about the different races and civilizations, per Huntington for example, and recognize profound difference which will never be overcome, and getting realistic about these differences. Diversity make us crazy....when practiced in one country, etc. Diversity internationally can be a reminder that we are all NOT alike, and to keep the peace at a pragmatic level, we have to admit it....no rainbows...and construct rules accordingly for international behavior, like first, no emigration. etc.

    The world is genuinely Diverse and should never be expected to become One. That is a dream that only leads to war, etc, etc.

    Drop natural rights dogmas, and just recognize that evolution and genes make us very different and for pragmatic reasons, we just keep our distance from one-another.

    The human rights crowd leads the migrants into Europe. The jews like jewyorktimes champions the human rights of muzzies. This is what is called chutzpah. They urge whites to take arabs while they kill arabs. How jews get away with this is just an example of Whites extending to jews human rights (free speech) that they do not deserve. They never invented one human right, except the jew right to Everything, including the right to exclude anybody they want.

    Who invented liberty? Bill of rights, Magna Carta, ancient liberty? When antiquity of Greco-Roman times struggled over liberty, jews were killing one another over Words, including the Hellenistic Jews who were being murdered by the jew zealots. Jews ARE zealots, like Arabs. Semites are all nuts, and never invented a single liberty, etc. Rabbis are rabid, foam at the mouth today. Free Speech? Even in secular Israel, can you advocate the dissolution of the state of Israel? no free speech there. It is in their genes....despotism.

    Is this that so hard to understand?

    This is science, not philosophy.

    Joe Webb

    Whites extending to Jews rights they don’t deserve? Am I wrong, or is Mr. Unz of Jewish descent? And did he not build this forum where you get to rant unhinged about his rights? Did the Jews not build The New York Times? Did they not build Hollywood? Do they not singlehandedly keep Broadway grand?

    No one likes deceit, especially when you know they know you know its deceit. And yet, that is exactly when you know they respect you. But as I think I’ve said before, though not before Steve more or less made the remark, the United States today is as Jewish as it was ever Wasp. Which means your a fucking zealot. Yet I have no idea what you worship. What would a guy like you find to do after everyone wears their race on their sleaze and we no longer intermingle?

    I mistook you for someone who was somewhat keenly interested in history. But I suppose were the Stoics and Epicureans a lot of crap I would be comprehensively upset as well. Which would suck cause I get mad sometimes. All I hear you saying about natural rights is that its nice to have something of your own, especially when it comes by comprise and understanding.

    But I think you’re too blinkered to really understand Jews. Jews build institutions and that is what they do and that is why they don’t favor other institutions, like when the Cohen brothers receive the honor that recognized their movie as a national treasure, they make a completely graceless joke about what might have meant something to their biggest fans. But I don’t detect a hint of tradition in you that deserves an institution, save for homemade castles-plans that I was riffing about when I was 22 impressed by my ability to convince myself of some hairbrained romance called Tribal Localism.I see others calling it the Benedict option or something these days.

    Can you imagine if a Jewish doctor had saved your life as a newborn when the hospital they had to helicopter you from was content to say sorry its over his heart-beat cannot be stopped, such that when you came into his care he told your mom “I think we got a record breaker here” and then proceeded to save you? Joe Webb there are bad people the world over but only a few matter. Ever consider how meaningfully slight this country might be different had it been Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran this whole time, which is to say, well which is to say if Irving Kristol had pulled rank and said “Norman this beneath you, you are obsessed, he’s a writer not a soldier, and honestly Norman with a mind like that he is one us!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art
    He (Rothbard) followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    The Austrians are pro-interest - pro usury, pro debt. This is a major failure of their thinking. They think about the volume of money - not the distribution of money among its players. In a capitalist society built around usury, the money types (bankers and financiers), end up with the lion’s share of the owned wealth. A share that is much bigger then its actual value to society.

    Usury is the engine of bigness - it creates the unstable situation of too few owning too much in America today.

    Economies will always be unstable as long as debt prevails.

    People that invest in others, should reap some of the benefits and failures of their investment - not risk free interest payments.

    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don’t allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.

    The government can’t outlaw private debt, but it can refuse to encourage it by underwriting that debt. Banks get away with lending money they don’t have because, if their borrowers default or if their depositors withdraw too much, the government or the central bank steps in to pay the difference. This is where the evil lies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don’t allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.
     
    Everything you say is true - they have their reasons for doing what they do. But what they do does not work in the long term. The problem is we end up with what we have - aberrant big big money in the hands of a few.

    Compounding interest is unworkable - fini - the end - period.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    of course you have a right to kill someone trying to kill you. This is Natural in biological terms. No species could survive without it.

    I have tried to show in a very short hand way, that natural rights are the logical or logos (pardon me Christians) of life generally, including human life.

    I long ago left words like "evil" behind. Operationally, what we call evil in a person, certainly not any animal, is that they have ceased to be human, that is , social. Society implies mutuality and mutual recognition. Those who lack this social impulse, are psychopaths. We have always killed psychopaths, until recently, when we Rehabilitate them thru Nice Words. This is liberalism.

    Psychopaths just need to be killed. Problem of Evil is therefore over and done with.

    One can call one's enemy a psychopath but that is stupid. An enemy, assuming that they are an organized force with their own social norms, like the jews for example, are just enemy , not psychopath and not evil. Kill your enemies when you can and otherwise outwit them, etc.

    Natural rights chatter as in philosophy is a waste of time, Christian or otherwise. As a race, it makes sense to get along with other races, particularly now with nukes, etc. This does not mean that one should allow them into one's tribal nation because they will never assimilate.

    War today is very costly, and it is much wiser to trade with other races, etc. but keep them at arm's length. mutual respect , etc. But with an armed self-defense capability. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Natural rights has been eclipsed by biology and Darwin. Now, within one's own group, there is a "natural" kind of imperative to keep the peace generally. This means providing law and orderly forms generally, to achieve what we call fairness. Thus it is Natural to come up with rules for your own group, which maintain stability and relative peace and love. Whites have demanded liberty at the personal level....and we have struggled for it, and largely achieved it. Why give it away to races and groups who don't value it, etc, and only stab us in the back with it?

    To extend any kind of right to the outside race makes no sense. Pragmatic international rules yes, but rights, no. The Greeks allowed non-Greeks residence for trade, etc. they were called metics.

    All people have practiced slavery, which is an extreme form of exclusion largely based on ethnicity, and of course, economics.

    This is a pragmatism based on history or behavior. Treat people , like dogs, per their behaviors. If they can handle a long leash, or no leash, great. If not a short leash is necessary, or banishment, exclusion, or death. get rid of the problems. Psychopaths are just biological mistakes. Extremely hostile people, are poorly evolved to be social, etc. Get rid of them.

    Philosophy is mostly a waste of time once true biological reality and historical reality have provided enough evidence to convict. Out you go. Banishment and exile was universally practiced as a convenient and cheap way to deal with those who did not need to be killed.

    Joe Webb

    So you would agree that a right to self-defense exists, irrespective of history, philosophy, biology, laws, what others think or say, etc.? That would imply that at least one natural right exists, and that the claim that there are no natural rights is false.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joe webb
    you seem not to understand my reasoning, and I give up on you.

    jw
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Pat Casey

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.
     
    I like this point. But only because its philosophic chattering. The original idea behind natural rights can be located in the Ninth Amendment. A government of few and defined powers is on course to become a government of few and defined limits when the law ratifies individual rights by delineating them. And of course the Ninth Amendment has long been a uniquely dead letter. The original idea behind natural rights was far less intelligent than the men who institutionalized them.

    Clearly nothing has been more accidental than the legislative and judicial history of the United States. When there were limits to Caesar there was liberty with God, and the angle of the Bill of Rights is that Natural Rights are prior to Natural Law. Out of that has come a culture where what is obscenely abnormal is yet perfectly "natural."

    Russell Kirk, Michael Oakeshott, Roger Scruton, Kenneth Minogue--these men are Traditionalists, but conservatives speak of their organic holism, because, I guess, it's smart to eschew the fact, none plainer, that organisms decay, less sophisticated to grapple with what these men have all quite specifically explained, that when society lost God it lost Authority, and in so many ways subsequently lost each other.

    To say that human nature and history determines rights and laws satisfies less than nothing. History borders on anarchy, against which Law exists to fortify community. The U.S. tax code is a preposterous monstrosity just because it's history is so essentially organic. And what's truly organic about the social order turns out hard to speak about, except cleverly in kind of a stupid way.

    I know my love for my niece is a function of evolution, but I know I love her, and I feel and act on what I know. There is something deeply quizzical about thinking that thought, because it wants to say that this sentiment of mine is root selfishness. But that is such a subhuman perspective no perfection of its internalization can possibly leave anyone less loving their niece.

    Maybe it makes good sense to say there is less parental investment in Africa because Africans are less selfish. But I suspect "parental investment" is a local term for measurements of love for young that rings politically correct. I don't think Africans love their children very much; I think their least selfish established tradition is gang rape. And that parental investment of African Uncles is more or less a norm strikes me like the more optimal obligation than evidence of inherent selfishness. I mean selflessness. Or I mean selfishness I mean.

    you in no way proved your point. To counter my concise argument by claiming that history has been chaotic, etc, first is not true, and second, my biological natural rights argument would substantially reduce the problems and violence of history. Take the cant out of the discussion and get real…biology first, IQ second, tempermental differences, etc..etc.

    First of all there is no dreaming in my view. Enemies are natural. Wars are natural. But with enough good sense, they can be minimized. You stay where you are and we stay where we are.
    Agreed? Mutual self-interest tends to support this kind of agreement.

    Now, inasmuch as most races are nuts, and Whites got aways to go in this regard, reducing war, etc. will be difficult , but it can be done. We did not go to war with the USSR. That was a major accomplishment. MAD mutually assured destruction, worked.

    Now at the non-nuke level, it still can work because the destruction is largely economic. War these days costs a lot of money. Better to work things out over lunch. This is all Reason at work.

    When, someone gets totally out of hand, like N. Korea, or even China, or the jews, war will still come. I propose no cure for the disease called man….But the best of us can have a pretty good time with one-another…that is intra-race, at least whites can. The Others just keep their distance and we still carry the big stick.

    All the Natural Rights discourse tends toward Humanitarianism/Rainbow Human Family, like what happened to ancient Greece when the Polis fell apart…the spread of Epicureanism and Stoicism, and Universal human rights. Lots of crap, but that is part of our, and mine historically, dream-time childishness. Of course, in Greece, the probable major reason for this was the calamity of the Peloponnesian Wars of Greek against Greek. So, lets try cosmopolitanism.

    This also happened after world war two where the UN was dreamed up to UP Humanity.

    So now the next step is to drop universalist dreaming, and get realistic about the different races and civilizations, per Huntington for example, and recognize profound difference which will never be overcome, and getting realistic about these differences. Diversity make us crazy….when practiced in one country, etc. Diversity internationally can be a reminder that we are all NOT alike, and to keep the peace at a pragmatic level, we have to admit it….no rainbows…and construct rules accordingly for international behavior, like first, no emigration. etc.

    The world is genuinely Diverse and should never be expected to become One. That is a dream that only leads to war, etc, etc.

    Drop natural rights dogmas, and just recognize that evolution and genes make us very different and for pragmatic reasons, we just keep our distance from one-another.

    The human rights crowd leads the migrants into Europe. The jews like jewyorktimes champions the human rights of muzzies. This is what is called chutzpah. They urge whites to take arabs while they kill arabs. How jews get away with this is just an example of Whites extending to jews human rights (free speech) that they do not deserve. They never invented one human right, except the jew right to Everything, including the right to exclude anybody they want.

    Who invented liberty? Bill of rights, Magna Carta, ancient liberty? When antiquity of Greco-Roman times struggled over liberty, jews were killing one another over Words, including the Hellenistic Jews who were being murdered by the jew zealots. Jews ARE zealots, like Arabs. Semites are all nuts, and never invented a single liberty, etc. Rabbis are rabid, foam at the mouth today. Free Speech? Even in secular Israel, can you advocate the dissolution of the state of Israel? no free speech there. It is in their genes….despotism.

    Is this that so hard to understand?

    This is science, not philosophy.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    Whites extending to Jews rights they don't deserve? Am I wrong, or is Mr. Unz of Jewish descent? And did he not build this forum where you get to rant unhinged about his rights? Did the Jews not build The New York Times? Did they not build Hollywood? Do they not singlehandedly keep Broadway grand?

    No one likes deceit, especially when you know they know you know its deceit. And yet, that is exactly when you know they respect you. But as I think I've said before, though not before Steve more or less made the remark, the United States today is as Jewish as it was ever Wasp. Which means your a fucking zealot. Yet I have no idea what you worship. What would a guy like you find to do after everyone wears their race on their sleaze and we no longer intermingle?

    I mistook you for someone who was somewhat keenly interested in history. But I suppose were the Stoics and Epicureans a lot of crap I would be comprehensively upset as well. Which would suck cause I get mad sometimes. All I hear you saying about natural rights is that its nice to have something of your own, especially when it comes by comprise and understanding.

    But I think you're too blinkered to really understand Jews. Jews build institutions and that is what they do and that is why they don't favor other institutions, like when the Cohen brothers receive the honor that recognized their movie as a national treasure, they make a completely graceless joke about what might have meant something to their biggest fans. But I don't detect a hint of tradition in you that deserves an institution, save for homemade castles-plans that I was riffing about when I was 22 impressed by my ability to convince myself of some hairbrained romance called Tribal Localism.I see others calling it the Benedict option or something these days.

    Can you imagine if a Jewish doctor had saved your life as a newborn when the hospital they had to helicopter you from was content to say sorry its over his heart-beat cannot be stopped, such that when you came into his care he told your mom "I think we got a record breaker here" and then proceeded to save you? Joe Webb there are bad people the world over but only a few matter. Ever consider how meaningfully slight this country might be different had it been Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran this whole time, which is to say, well which is to say if Irving Kristol had pulled rank and said "Norman this beneath you, you are obsessed, he's a writer not a soldier, and honestly Norman with a mind like that he is one us!"

    , @Art
    This is science, not philosophy.

    Don't you mean "This is genetics, not philosophy."

    Wester science is part of Western philosophy - right.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tulip
    Keynes' tome was the General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Michael Hudson who gets his work published on this blog is basically post-Keynesian.

    The Right avoids Keynes because his thought legitimates government interference with the economy, but if one starts from an essentially Hegelian Right perspective, a conservatism of order, not an oligarchy run by and for Viking financiers, there is nothing wrong with Keynes.

    More interesting are figures like List, Schmoller and Wagner (as noted by 5371), representing the German 'Historical School of Economics' but most of their works have not been translated into English, although rumor has it that they still have influence in Japan.

    I think a lot of constructive work would be done by translating them into English, and synthesizing their thought with philosophers like Heidegger and Gadamer, as well as the various strands of Anglo-economics.

    Thanks!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    Why do you say there are no natural rights?

    It seems pretty evident that the natural right to self-defense, for example, exists. If someone came to kill you, I don't think you'd deny that such a right exists. You might not survive the encounter, or you might choose to resign yourself to your fate, but I don't think at that moment you'd deny that you had a natural right to self-defense which you could exercise, regardless of the laws or what someone said or did.

    of course you have a right to kill someone trying to kill you. This is Natural in biological terms. No species could survive without it.

    I have tried to show in a very short hand way, that natural rights are the logical or logos (pardon me Christians) of life generally, including human life.

    I long ago left words like “evil” behind. Operationally, what we call evil in a person, certainly not any animal, is that they have ceased to be human, that is , social. Society implies mutuality and mutual recognition. Those who lack this social impulse, are psychopaths. We have always killed psychopaths, until recently, when we Rehabilitate them thru Nice Words. This is liberalism.

    Psychopaths just need to be killed. Problem of Evil is therefore over and done with.

    One can call one’s enemy a psychopath but that is stupid. An enemy, assuming that they are an organized force with their own social norms, like the jews for example, are just enemy , not psychopath and not evil. Kill your enemies when you can and otherwise outwit them, etc.

    Natural rights chatter as in philosophy is a waste of time, Christian or otherwise. As a race, it makes sense to get along with other races, particularly now with nukes, etc. This does not mean that one should allow them into one’s tribal nation because they will never assimilate.

    War today is very costly, and it is much wiser to trade with other races, etc. but keep them at arm’s length. mutual respect , etc. But with an armed self-defense capability. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Natural rights has been eclipsed by biology and Darwin. Now, within one’s own group, there is a “natural” kind of imperative to keep the peace generally. This means providing law and orderly forms generally, to achieve what we call fairness. Thus it is Natural to come up with rules for your own group, which maintain stability and relative peace and love. Whites have demanded liberty at the personal level….and we have struggled for it, and largely achieved it. Why give it away to races and groups who don’t value it, etc, and only stab us in the back with it?

    To extend any kind of right to the outside race makes no sense. Pragmatic international rules yes, but rights, no. The Greeks allowed non-Greeks residence for trade, etc. they were called metics.

    All people have practiced slavery, which is an extreme form of exclusion largely based on ethnicity, and of course, economics.

    This is a pragmatism based on history or behavior. Treat people , like dogs, per their behaviors. If they can handle a long leash, or no leash, great. If not a short leash is necessary, or banishment, exclusion, or death. get rid of the problems. Psychopaths are just biological mistakes. Extremely hostile people, are poorly evolved to be social, etc. Get rid of them.

    Philosophy is mostly a waste of time once true biological reality and historical reality have provided enough evidence to convict. Out you go. Banishment and exile was universally practiced as a convenient and cheap way to deal with those who did not need to be killed.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So you would agree that a right to self-defense exists, irrespective of history, philosophy, biology, laws, what others think or say, etc.? That would imply that at least one natural right exists, and that the claim that there are no natural rights is false.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @joe webb
    it should be resolved....the natural rights dispute. There are no natural rights except as Burke said, what has been established over time and proven to have value.

    To update this conservative Idea with an evolutionary perception (not an idea ) that the genes determine just about everything in conjunction with historical trends, a 'natural right' is something that has been earned historically and biologically determined as well.

    For example, whites love liberty and other races do not. There is no historical evidence that they do, and when we catch up with genetic studies we will discover that their genes contain no traits for liberties, and fair play generally. "Fair" is an English word that I understand does not exist in any other lingo with quite the same meaning.

    Two examples: guns were invented by whites and we have learned Gun Control thru lots of time passing. Free Speech was invented by whites, when we discovered it in our genes....many thousands of years ago.

    No other race invented free speech. The question that then appears is: do other races deserve free speech in our white territory, when demonstrably they abuse it and would bury it if they ever took over. There are even a fair number of whites who are so stupid that they cannot think through the implications of disposing of free speech for girlie reasons of social peace.

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.

    Joe Webb

    Why do you say there are no natural rights?

    It seems pretty evident that the natural right to self-defense, for example, exists. If someone came to kill you, I don’t think you’d deny that such a right exists. You might not survive the encounter, or you might choose to resign yourself to your fate, but I don’t think at that moment you’d deny that you had a natural right to self-defense which you could exercise, regardless of the laws or what someone said or did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joe webb
    of course you have a right to kill someone trying to kill you. This is Natural in biological terms. No species could survive without it.

    I have tried to show in a very short hand way, that natural rights are the logical or logos (pardon me Christians) of life generally, including human life.

    I long ago left words like "evil" behind. Operationally, what we call evil in a person, certainly not any animal, is that they have ceased to be human, that is , social. Society implies mutuality and mutual recognition. Those who lack this social impulse, are psychopaths. We have always killed psychopaths, until recently, when we Rehabilitate them thru Nice Words. This is liberalism.

    Psychopaths just need to be killed. Problem of Evil is therefore over and done with.

    One can call one's enemy a psychopath but that is stupid. An enemy, assuming that they are an organized force with their own social norms, like the jews for example, are just enemy , not psychopath and not evil. Kill your enemies when you can and otherwise outwit them, etc.

    Natural rights chatter as in philosophy is a waste of time, Christian or otherwise. As a race, it makes sense to get along with other races, particularly now with nukes, etc. This does not mean that one should allow them into one's tribal nation because they will never assimilate.

    War today is very costly, and it is much wiser to trade with other races, etc. but keep them at arm's length. mutual respect , etc. But with an armed self-defense capability. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Natural rights has been eclipsed by biology and Darwin. Now, within one's own group, there is a "natural" kind of imperative to keep the peace generally. This means providing law and orderly forms generally, to achieve what we call fairness. Thus it is Natural to come up with rules for your own group, which maintain stability and relative peace and love. Whites have demanded liberty at the personal level....and we have struggled for it, and largely achieved it. Why give it away to races and groups who don't value it, etc, and only stab us in the back with it?

    To extend any kind of right to the outside race makes no sense. Pragmatic international rules yes, but rights, no. The Greeks allowed non-Greeks residence for trade, etc. they were called metics.

    All people have practiced slavery, which is an extreme form of exclusion largely based on ethnicity, and of course, economics.

    This is a pragmatism based on history or behavior. Treat people , like dogs, per their behaviors. If they can handle a long leash, or no leash, great. If not a short leash is necessary, or banishment, exclusion, or death. get rid of the problems. Psychopaths are just biological mistakes. Extremely hostile people, are poorly evolved to be social, etc. Get rid of them.

    Philosophy is mostly a waste of time once true biological reality and historical reality have provided enough evidence to convict. Out you go. Banishment and exile was universally practiced as a convenient and cheap way to deal with those who did not need to be killed.

    Joe Webb
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    it should be resolved....the natural rights dispute. There are no natural rights except as Burke said, what has been established over time and proven to have value.

    To update this conservative Idea with an evolutionary perception (not an idea ) that the genes determine just about everything in conjunction with historical trends, a 'natural right' is something that has been earned historically and biologically determined as well.

    For example, whites love liberty and other races do not. There is no historical evidence that they do, and when we catch up with genetic studies we will discover that their genes contain no traits for liberties, and fair play generally. "Fair" is an English word that I understand does not exist in any other lingo with quite the same meaning.

    Two examples: guns were invented by whites and we have learned Gun Control thru lots of time passing. Free Speech was invented by whites, when we discovered it in our genes....many thousands of years ago.

    No other race invented free speech. The question that then appears is: do other races deserve free speech in our white territory, when demonstrably they abuse it and would bury it if they ever took over. There are even a fair number of whites who are so stupid that they cannot think through the implications of disposing of free speech for girlie reasons of social peace.

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.

    Joe Webb

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.

    I like this point. But only because its philosophic chattering. The original idea behind natural rights can be located in the Ninth Amendment. A government of few and defined powers is on course to become a government of few and defined limits when the law ratifies individual rights by delineating them. And of course the Ninth Amendment has long been a uniquely dead letter. The original idea behind natural rights was far less intelligent than the men who institutionalized them.

    Clearly nothing has been more accidental than the legislative and judicial history of the United States. When there were limits to Caesar there was liberty with God, and the angle of the Bill of Rights is that Natural Rights are prior to Natural Law. Out of that has come a culture where what is obscenely abnormal is yet perfectly “natural.”

    Russell Kirk, Michael Oakeshott, Roger Scruton, Kenneth Minogue–these men are Traditionalists, but conservatives speak of their organic holism, because, I guess, it’s smart to eschew the fact, none plainer, that organisms decay, less sophisticated to grapple with what these men have all quite specifically explained, that when society lost God it lost Authority, and in so many ways subsequently lost each other.

    To say that human nature and history determines rights and laws satisfies less than nothing. History borders on anarchy, against which Law exists to fortify community. The U.S. tax code is a preposterous monstrosity just because it’s history is so essentially organic. And what’s truly organic about the social order turns out hard to speak about, except cleverly in kind of a stupid way.

    I know my love for my niece is a function of evolution, but I know I love her, and I feel and act on what I know. There is something deeply quizzical about thinking that thought, because it wants to say that this sentiment of mine is root selfishness. But that is such a subhuman perspective no perfection of its internalization can possibly leave anyone less loving their niece.

    Maybe it makes good sense to say there is less parental investment in Africa because Africans are less selfish. But I suspect “parental investment” is a local term for measurements of love for young that rings politically correct. I don’t think Africans love their children very much; I think their least selfish established tradition is gang rape. And that parental investment of African Uncles is more or less a norm strikes me like the more optimal obligation than evidence of inherent selfishness. I mean selflessness. Or I mean selfishness I mean.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joe webb
    you in no way proved your point. To counter my concise argument by claiming that history has been chaotic, etc, first is not true, and second, my biological natural rights argument would substantially reduce the problems and violence of history. Take the cant out of the discussion and get real...biology first, IQ second, tempermental differences, etc..etc.

    First of all there is no dreaming in my view. Enemies are natural. Wars are natural. But with enough good sense, they can be minimized. You stay where you are and we stay where we are.
    Agreed? Mutual self-interest tends to support this kind of agreement.

    Now, inasmuch as most races are nuts, and Whites got aways to go in this regard, reducing war, etc. will be difficult , but it can be done. We did not go to war with the USSR. That was a major accomplishment. MAD mutually assured destruction, worked.

    Now at the non-nuke level, it still can work because the destruction is largely economic. War these days costs a lot of money. Better to work things out over lunch. This is all Reason at work.

    When, someone gets totally out of hand, like N. Korea, or even China, or the jews, war will still come. I propose no cure for the disease called man....But the best of us can have a pretty good time with one-another...that is intra-race, at least whites can. The Others just keep their distance and we still carry the big stick.

    All the Natural Rights discourse tends toward Humanitarianism/Rainbow Human Family, like what happened to ancient Greece when the Polis fell apart...the spread of Epicureanism and Stoicism, and Universal human rights. Lots of crap, but that is part of our, and mine historically, dream-time childishness. Of course, in Greece, the probable major reason for this was the calamity of the Peloponnesian Wars of Greek against Greek. So, lets try cosmopolitanism.

    This also happened after world war two where the UN was dreamed up to UP Humanity.

    So now the next step is to drop universalist dreaming, and get realistic about the different races and civilizations, per Huntington for example, and recognize profound difference which will never be overcome, and getting realistic about these differences. Diversity make us crazy....when practiced in one country, etc. Diversity internationally can be a reminder that we are all NOT alike, and to keep the peace at a pragmatic level, we have to admit it....no rainbows...and construct rules accordingly for international behavior, like first, no emigration. etc.

    The world is genuinely Diverse and should never be expected to become One. That is a dream that only leads to war, etc, etc.

    Drop natural rights dogmas, and just recognize that evolution and genes make us very different and for pragmatic reasons, we just keep our distance from one-another.

    The human rights crowd leads the migrants into Europe. The jews like jewyorktimes champions the human rights of muzzies. This is what is called chutzpah. They urge whites to take arabs while they kill arabs. How jews get away with this is just an example of Whites extending to jews human rights (free speech) that they do not deserve. They never invented one human right, except the jew right to Everything, including the right to exclude anybody they want.

    Who invented liberty? Bill of rights, Magna Carta, ancient liberty? When antiquity of Greco-Roman times struggled over liberty, jews were killing one another over Words, including the Hellenistic Jews who were being murdered by the jew zealots. Jews ARE zealots, like Arabs. Semites are all nuts, and never invented a single liberty, etc. Rabbis are rabid, foam at the mouth today. Free Speech? Even in secular Israel, can you advocate the dissolution of the state of Israel? no free speech there. It is in their genes....despotism.

    Is this that so hard to understand?

    This is science, not philosophy.

    Joe Webb
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jtgw
    I think if you took the time to study him, you would find you agree on quite a lot. Take money for instance: he opposed paper money and predicted the same evils that you recognize in our system today. He followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    Honestly, I have a hunch you are thinking of Milton Friedman, not Murray Rothbard.

    He (Rothbard) followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    The Austrians are pro-interest – pro usury, pro debt. This is a major failure of their thinking. They think about the volume of money – not the distribution of money among its players. In a capitalist society built around usury, the money types (bankers and financiers), end up with the lion’s share of the owned wealth. A share that is much bigger then its actual value to society.

    Usury is the engine of bigness – it creates the unstable situation of too few owning too much in America today.

    Economies will always be unstable as long as debt prevails.

    People that invest in others, should reap some of the benefits and failures of their investment – not risk free interest payments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    The only reason lenders charge interest is because of the risk of lending money. If you don't allow lenders to charge interest, very few will be willing to lend money at all.

    The government can't outlaw private debt, but it can refuse to encourage it by underwriting that debt. Banks get away with lending money they don't have because, if their borrowers default or if their depositors withdraw too much, the government or the central bank steps in to pay the difference. This is where the evil lies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art

    Whatever today’s society is, it ain’t Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.
     
    Am not a Rothbard scholar – I see him as an Ann Rand type who promotes untrammeled individualism. He supports the individual over the group. He is as wrong as the communists, who promote the group over the individual. A society needs strong individuals and strong groups in order to function. There is a golden mean. He talks individual freedom, but promotes a situation a where a small number of individuals gain economic control over more and more people. The libertarian model is not working for the vast majority.

    Today’s businesses are getting ever bigger and bigger. These businesses are focused not on providing goods and services, but on monetary profits. In the last thirty years’ free markets and free enterprise has been taken over by the money types. Go up and down main street and you see Wall Street. You see local ownership dissipated. You see a relative few individuals taking control of America’s markets.

    Rothbard makes no distinction between the act of making money and the art of providing goods and services to an economy. Wall Street making ever more money is not good for society. In paper money systems the rich get richer at the expense of their culture – there is no denying that fact. Libertarians do not check this situation.

    I think if you took the time to study him, you would find you agree on quite a lot. Take money for instance: he opposed paper money and predicted the same evils that you recognize in our system today. He followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    Honestly, I have a hunch you are thinking of Milton Friedman, not Murray Rothbard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    He (Rothbard) followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    The Austrians are pro-interest - pro usury, pro debt. This is a major failure of their thinking. They think about the volume of money - not the distribution of money among its players. In a capitalist society built around usury, the money types (bankers and financiers), end up with the lion’s share of the owned wealth. A share that is much bigger then its actual value to society.

    Usury is the engine of bigness - it creates the unstable situation of too few owning too much in America today.

    Economies will always be unstable as long as debt prevails.

    People that invest in others, should reap some of the benefits and failures of their investment - not risk free interest payments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stogumber
    David Gordon,

    I've read Mises above all as a man who (partly) influenced Popper. And it is obvious that Mises (1) looks at capitalism as a (holistic) "system", (2) looks at economy as a a series of stages which develop inevitably. This is the common ground between Ricardo (whom Mises recommends as THE classical economist) and Marx. (On the other hand, Popper looked at economy as a matter of peacemeal engineering by trial and error, and he criticized the holistic and deterministic character of Marxism as an incitement to ruthlessness - only he didn't see its roots in pre-Marxian liberal economics .)

    That's why Mises is quite merciless in his invectives against labour organizations or Bismarckian welfare policy, but is cautious about Marx: Marxians can be saved if only they see that Capitalism is (for all we know) the final stage (the end of history). And Mises was right, as we see now: A lot of former Marxists have just taken that one step back and turned convinced (and ruthless) capitalists or promoters of capitalism.

    Was Mises a precursor of this development? It s interesting to see that Mises found his place at the (heavily Marxist) New York University. One asks oneself if he found the intellectual climate comfortable and on the other hand if he was really such on outsider that he had no influence on the (later) capitalist turn of Marxists.
    To sum up: There is a common ground which connects Misesians and Marxists and which separates them from Burkean conservatives.

    About ruthlessness: Mises is much occupied with de-legitimizing particular associations (in reverse to particular property!) And that is mirrorred by the modern Marxist-Capitalist movement’s hate against freedom of association.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @David Gordon
    Stogumber says,"At that time, Mises obviously had no problems with the holistic and deterministic structure of Marx's thinking." This remark in Mises's Liberalism is perhaps difficult to reconcile with this claim: "There is scarcely anything so absurd as the fundamental principle of Marx's materialist intepretation of history: 'The hand mill made feudal society; the steam mill, capitalist society.'"

    David Gordon,

    I’ve read Mises above all as a man who (partly) influenced Popper. And it is obvious that Mises (1) looks at capitalism as a (holistic) “system”, (2) looks at economy as a a series of stages which develop inevitably. This is the common ground between Ricardo (whom Mises recommends as THE classical economist) and Marx. (On the other hand, Popper looked at economy as a matter of peacemeal engineering by trial and error, and he criticized the holistic and deterministic character of Marxism as an incitement to ruthlessness – only he didn’t see its roots in pre-Marxian liberal economics .)

    That’s why Mises is quite merciless in his invectives against labour organizations or Bismarckian welfare policy, but is cautious about Marx: Marxians can be saved if only they see that Capitalism is (for all we know) the final stage (the end of history). And Mises was right, as we see now: A lot of former Marxists have just taken that one step back and turned convinced (and ruthless) capitalists or promoters of capitalism.

    Was Mises a precursor of this development? It s interesting to see that Mises found his place at the (heavily Marxist) New York University. One asks oneself if he found the intellectual climate comfortable and on the other hand if he was really such on outsider that he had no influence on the (later) capitalist turn of Marxists.
    To sum up: There is a common ground which connects Misesians and Marxists and which separates them from Burkean conservatives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stogumber
    About ruthlessness: Mises is much occupied with de-legitimizing particular associations (in reverse to particular property!) And that is mirrorred by the modern Marxist-Capitalist movement's hate against freedom of association.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • fractional reserve banking is a redundancy. Banking IS fractional reserve banking. There is no other kind, unless gov’t gets into the game with other people’s money.

    Money is not fiat, it just is. I will tell you where real fiat money was a while back: Cuba.

    Money works because it buys things, has bought things, and has a reputation that it will buy things in the future. Gold has nothing to do with it. Gold produces nothing. Credit produces things, and money is the medium.

    I know the lower ranges of intelligence cannot fathom this, so the fiat money/Fed Reserve spooks can go on and on, like Useless Mullins.

    The US dollar buys anything and is the safest, most predictable, and so on. It does this because of a history of performance, etc.

    A better usage of the word ‘fiat’ would be to describe liberal “rights’ as fiat rights. These fiat rights can be shown to be useless, they buy or convince nobody but boobs and adolescents, and invite in third world savages to ruin the white world.

    There is the fiat Right to Health Care, for example. Say what? Who pays for it? somebody else, usually whites paying for darkie health care, etc.. It is all nonsense and entitlement which is an infantile disorder. What, for example, rights have been Earned by Blacks thru their behaviors?
    Name one. Etc. The whole holy negro discourse is pure fiat, declared by jews in the first place to attack white culture, and then the usual me-tooing white liberals to whom it seemed like a Good Idea. Just about all Ideas are bad, meaning having no tether to reality… Speaking of politics.
    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • it should be resolved….the natural rights dispute. There are no natural rights except as Burke said, what has been established over time and proven to have value.

    To update this conservative Idea with an evolutionary perception (not an idea ) that the genes determine just about everything in conjunction with historical trends, a ‘natural right’ is something that has been earned historically and biologically determined as well.

    For example, whites love liberty and other races do not. There is no historical evidence that they do, and when we catch up with genetic studies we will discover that their genes contain no traits for liberties, and fair play generally. “Fair” is an English word that I understand does not exist in any other lingo with quite the same meaning.

    Two examples: guns were invented by whites and we have learned Gun Control thru lots of time passing. Free Speech was invented by whites, when we discovered it in our genes….many thousands of years ago.

    No other race invented free speech. The question that then appears is: do other races deserve free speech in our white territory, when demonstrably they abuse it and would bury it if they ever took over. There are even a fair number of whites who are so stupid that they cannot think through the implications of disposing of free speech for girlie reasons of social peace.

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey

    Natural rights, in short , are determined by history and genes. All the rest is mere philosophic chattering.
     
    I like this point. But only because its philosophic chattering. The original idea behind natural rights can be located in the Ninth Amendment. A government of few and defined powers is on course to become a government of few and defined limits when the law ratifies individual rights by delineating them. And of course the Ninth Amendment has long been a uniquely dead letter. The original idea behind natural rights was far less intelligent than the men who institutionalized them.

    Clearly nothing has been more accidental than the legislative and judicial history of the United States. When there were limits to Caesar there was liberty with God, and the angle of the Bill of Rights is that Natural Rights are prior to Natural Law. Out of that has come a culture where what is obscenely abnormal is yet perfectly "natural."

    Russell Kirk, Michael Oakeshott, Roger Scruton, Kenneth Minogue--these men are Traditionalists, but conservatives speak of their organic holism, because, I guess, it's smart to eschew the fact, none plainer, that organisms decay, less sophisticated to grapple with what these men have all quite specifically explained, that when society lost God it lost Authority, and in so many ways subsequently lost each other.

    To say that human nature and history determines rights and laws satisfies less than nothing. History borders on anarchy, against which Law exists to fortify community. The U.S. tax code is a preposterous monstrosity just because it's history is so essentially organic. And what's truly organic about the social order turns out hard to speak about, except cleverly in kind of a stupid way.

    I know my love for my niece is a function of evolution, but I know I love her, and I feel and act on what I know. There is something deeply quizzical about thinking that thought, because it wants to say that this sentiment of mine is root selfishness. But that is such a subhuman perspective no perfection of its internalization can possibly leave anyone less loving their niece.

    Maybe it makes good sense to say there is less parental investment in Africa because Africans are less selfish. But I suspect "parental investment" is a local term for measurements of love for young that rings politically correct. I don't think Africans love their children very much; I think their least selfish established tradition is gang rape. And that parental investment of African Uncles is more or less a norm strikes me like the more optimal obligation than evidence of inherent selfishness. I mean selflessness. Or I mean selfishness I mean.

    , @Anonymous
    Why do you say there are no natural rights?

    It seems pretty evident that the natural right to self-defense, for example, exists. If someone came to kill you, I don't think you'd deny that such a right exists. You might not survive the encounter, or you might choose to resign yourself to your fate, but I don't think at that moment you'd deny that you had a natural right to self-defense which you could exercise, regardless of the laws or what someone said or did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jtgw
    Jeez, where to begin...

    Whatever today's society is, it ain't Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.

    Whatever today’s society is, it ain’t Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.

    Am not a Rothbard scholar – I see him as an Ann Rand type who promotes untrammeled individualism. He supports the individual over the group. He is as wrong as the communists, who promote the group over the individual. A society needs strong individuals and strong groups in order to function. There is a golden mean. He talks individual freedom, but promotes a situation a where a small number of individuals gain economic control over more and more people. The libertarian model is not working for the vast majority.

    Today’s businesses are getting ever bigger and bigger. These businesses are focused not on providing goods and services, but on monetary profits. In the last thirty years’ free markets and free enterprise has been taken over by the money types. Go up and down main street and you see Wall Street. You see local ownership dissipated. You see a relative few individuals taking control of America’s markets.

    Rothbard makes no distinction between the act of making money and the art of providing goods and services to an economy. Wall Street making ever more money is not good for society. In paper money systems the rich get richer at the expense of their culture – there is no denying that fact. Libertarians do not check this situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    I think if you took the time to study him, you would find you agree on quite a lot. Take money for instance: he opposed paper money and predicted the same evils that you recognize in our system today. He followed the Austrian school of economics, after all.

    Honestly, I have a hunch you are thinking of Milton Friedman, not Murray Rothbard.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art

    He (Kirk), like Rothbard, claims that “all natural rights are property rights.”
     
    Has anyone ever seen a natural right? Where in the universe do they reside? Isn’t it the truth that there are no natural rights. The truth is that we are biological tribalists. The truth is that the only rights that we enjoy are intellectually granted to us by each other.

    Both these people – Kirk and Rothbard – say natural rights come out of property rights. Who grants property rights – is it not us? Doesn’t the group grant property rights because that is how the group prospers? “We the People” grant each other property rights.

    Both men like something different from “We the People.” They like a top-down pyramid controlled society - one an intellectual elitism – the other the control of money. Today we have a libertarian money society – the 1% have all the liberty. Kirk started ruling America – now Rothbard rules.

    From another article:


    The notion or thought of “social hierarchy” is a bad thing – a hierarchy is a prescription for trouble.

    A visual word describing hierarchy is the vertical pyramid. All human pyramids have rulers and supplicants. This is antithetical to American idealism. “We the People” is antithetical to “social hierarchy.”

    We must think horizontal not vertical. We want to think flat circle not vertical pyramid.

    We want a social order that is horizontal. We want a shared social order that radiates outward from a set of ideals. These ideals can have leaders – they can be seen at the center of the horizontal social order. Those who accept and share these ideals do so volitionally. There is no up or down when all share the same idea or ideal.

     

    Just imagine, the Judge, the Executioner, and the Condemned, all equal under the law.

    It doesn’t get more horizontal than that, does it? And who has ever heard of the birth of social order without the Executioner?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art

    He (Kirk), like Rothbard, claims that “all natural rights are property rights.”
     
    Has anyone ever seen a natural right? Where in the universe do they reside? Isn’t it the truth that there are no natural rights. The truth is that we are biological tribalists. The truth is that the only rights that we enjoy are intellectually granted to us by each other.

    Both these people – Kirk and Rothbard – say natural rights come out of property rights. Who grants property rights – is it not us? Doesn’t the group grant property rights because that is how the group prospers? “We the People” grant each other property rights.

    Both men like something different from “We the People.” They like a top-down pyramid controlled society - one an intellectual elitism – the other the control of money. Today we have a libertarian money society – the 1% have all the liberty. Kirk started ruling America – now Rothbard rules.

    From another article:


    The notion or thought of “social hierarchy” is a bad thing – a hierarchy is a prescription for trouble.

    A visual word describing hierarchy is the vertical pyramid. All human pyramids have rulers and supplicants. This is antithetical to American idealism. “We the People” is antithetical to “social hierarchy.”

    We must think horizontal not vertical. We want to think flat circle not vertical pyramid.

    We want a social order that is horizontal. We want a shared social order that radiates outward from a set of ideals. These ideals can have leaders – they can be seen at the center of the horizontal social order. Those who accept and share these ideals do so volitionally. There is no up or down when all share the same idea or ideal.

     

    Jeez, where to begin…

    Whatever today’s society is, it ain’t Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    Whatever today’s society is, it ain’t Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.
     
    Am not a Rothbard scholar – I see him as an Ann Rand type who promotes untrammeled individualism. He supports the individual over the group. He is as wrong as the communists, who promote the group over the individual. A society needs strong individuals and strong groups in order to function. There is a golden mean. He talks individual freedom, but promotes a situation a where a small number of individuals gain economic control over more and more people. The libertarian model is not working for the vast majority.

    Today’s businesses are getting ever bigger and bigger. These businesses are focused not on providing goods and services, but on monetary profits. In the last thirty years’ free markets and free enterprise has been taken over by the money types. Go up and down main street and you see Wall Street. You see local ownership dissipated. You see a relative few individuals taking control of America’s markets.

    Rothbard makes no distinction between the act of making money and the art of providing goods and services to an economy. Wall Street making ever more money is not good for society. In paper money systems the rich get richer at the expense of their culture – there is no denying that fact. Libertarians do not check this situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • He (Kirk), like Rothbard, claims that “all natural rights are property rights.”

    Has anyone ever seen a natural right? Where in the universe do they reside? Isn’t it the truth that there are no natural rights. The truth is that we are biological tribalists. The truth is that the only rights that we enjoy are intellectually granted to us by each other.

    Both these people – Kirk and Rothbard – say natural rights come out of property rights. Who grants property rights – is it not us? Doesn’t the group grant property rights because that is how the group prospers? “We the People” grant each other property rights.

    Both men like something different from “We the People.” They like a top-down pyramid controlled society – one an intellectual elitism – the other the control of money. Today we have a libertarian money society – the 1% have all the liberty. Kirk started ruling America – now Rothbard rules.

    From another article:

    The notion or thought of “social hierarchy” is a bad thing – a hierarchy is a prescription for trouble.

    A visual word describing hierarchy is the vertical pyramid. All human pyramids have rulers and supplicants. This is antithetical to American idealism. “We the People” is antithetical to “social hierarchy.”

    We must think horizontal not vertical. We want to think flat circle not vertical pyramid.

    We want a social order that is horizontal. We want a shared social order that radiates outward from a set of ideals. These ideals can have leaders – they can be seen at the center of the horizontal social order. Those who accept and share these ideals do so volitionally. There is no up or down when all share the same idea or ideal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    Jeez, where to begin...

    Whatever today's society is, it ain't Rothbardian. Rothbard opposed fiat money and fractional-reserve banking. Much of current financial shenanigans would not be possible in a libertarian society.
    , @Harshmellow
    Just imagine, the Judge, the Executioner, and the Condemned, all equal under the law.

    It doesn't get more horizontal than that, does it? And who has ever heard of the birth of social order without the Executioner?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @nickels
    Best intro work for Keynes? Especially come from the Austrian school?

    Keynes’ tome was the General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Michael Hudson who gets his work published on this blog is basically post-Keynesian.

    The Right avoids Keynes because his thought legitimates government interference with the economy, but if one starts from an essentially Hegelian Right perspective, a conservatism of order, not an oligarchy run by and for Viking financiers, there is nothing wrong with Keynes.

    More interesting are figures like List, Schmoller and Wagner (as noted by 5371), representing the German ‘Historical School of Economics’ but most of their works have not been translated into English, although rumor has it that they still have influence in Japan.

    I think a lot of constructive work would be done by translating them into English, and synthesizing their thought with philosophers like Heidegger and Gadamer, as well as the various strands of Anglo-economics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nickels
    Thanks!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • clarification: my syntax above with regard to The Chief leaves something to be desired.

    George did not leave The Chief behind, he just left libertarianism behind.

    Fact is, George was a kind of groupie for AH. I say this for clarification, and note that if push came to shove, that George would only be a fellow traveler, and not a card carrying nazi.

    However, push is coming to shove, and while George is dead, WN is alive and kicking ass big time and , yes there are nazis in WN, something I do not approve of, but as comrade Marx
    said, Man makes his own history, but he does not make it just as he pleases.

    Which gets me back to the problem of one-dimensional intellectual obsessions like libertarianism, or marxism, or economism generally, or Liberalist Creeds…just say the Magic Words…Freedom, Racial Equality, etc. White Nationalism has to get more pluralistic than it is, and HItlerism has to be reduced to just one of several approaches to a restoration of White civilization. In other words, there must be a debate. Dictatorship is not White, not in our history, and not in our genes.

    White history going all the way back to ancient times, always included a refusal to be subject to dictators. We elected our chiefs. Of course, we also often lost this relative democratic practice from time to time, but the trait is true enough. Hitler was a tyrant, tyrant as in ancient Greek definition, not a mad dog like the Asian and Black and Arab tyrants. We have always refused despotism.

    Jews have lived always under the absolute tyranny of kings and rabbis. It took Napoleon to liberate them from their self-imposed ghettos. Genetics was not well understood then, but it is pretty well understood now and will get better and better….and will reveal that all semites are totalitarian/despotic genetically. (all meaning there are always individual exceptions)

    Jehovah is a warrior God, a real killer. Christ is Christ. Jews ache for the Messiah to kill their enemies. And now, except for the Orthodox, secular jews think that they themselves are the Messiah. Pride goes before disaster.

    Disaster is grinning at the jews.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This was a very interesting review. I know Kirk is often portrayed among paleo-conservatives as Mr. Conservative, but it’s worth knowing how in certain respects he betrayed some of that conservative heritage with his support of Cold War militarism. Of course, that shouldn’t take away from the good that he did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @nickels
    Let's face it. The Libertarians are exactly correct.
    In a world filled with only Nordic and Anglo Saxon peoples.

    Mises is an interesting figure. Definitely one of the most powerful anti-socialist writers. But also somewhat utopian in his thought about global politics. I don't know that one can fault him, necessarily. We have the benefit of hindsight, and can now understand how ethnicity and tribalism really trumps everything. Mises didn't have that history. Mises didn't get to see Bounce doing her black panther thing, affirmative action being a never ending, escalating drudge, South Africa turning to a hellhole.
    On the other hand, writer like Gustave Le Bon saw the problems long before Mises.

    Yet I think there may have been reason to have the Libertarian hope at that time; technology and globalization were new and had not proved their futility yet.

    At any rate, Kirk is on my reading list at some point...

    If you think apartheid South Africa was libertarian, I have several bridges to sell you…

    Even Anglo-Saxons and Nordics were never that libertarian. Perhaps the libertarian apogee was the 19th century, but you can pull many examples from that era of deficiencies in that regard, e.g. slavery and high tariffs. The quite un-libertarian practice of fractional-reserve banking, i.e. legalized counterfeiting, arose in the 17th century among these northern Germanic peoples.

    To me, libertarianism is simply the recognition of precisely what it is that generates prosperity in a society: freedom, defined negatively as freedom from assault on one’s person and property. That allows us to discern more exactly what it is that allowed Anglo-Saxon countries to develop so fast. It wasn’t skin or hair color or the English language or other irrelevant racial or cultural traits, but their respect for freedom. It wasn’t even certain cognitive qualities, like intelligence, since many highly intelligent countries stagnated and fell behind, like China.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    "David Gordon (/ˈɡɔːrdən/; born April 7, 1948) is an American libertarian philosopher and intellectual historian influenced by Rothbardian views of economics.[1] Peter J. Boettke, in his Reason Foundation "Reason Papers," Issue No. 19, Fall 1994,[2] describes Gordon as "a philosopher and intellectual historian who is deeply influenced by the Rothbardian strand of economics." He is a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and editor of The Mises Review.[3]"

    As I recall, Gordon is Jewish as were/are so many of the libertarian intellectuals, like Rothbard.

    Here is a personal note.

    The Wilmoore Kendall ( mentioned in the article) showed up to lecture at Berkeley (Cal) about 1963. As an earnest young leftish guy, and "fair minded" as many of us were until the commies took over in the 1970s, mostly jews, I wanted to hear from a Genuine Conservative. It turned out that Kendall was drunk at the lectern. ( He was part of the National Review crowd. Bill Buckely as a CIA agent is important)

    I spoke up and told Kendell he was drunk. He approached me and said: "Them's fighting words boy!"...end of story, but that and with Bill Buckley on the TV screen...I was disgusted by these guys, particularly their manner. That was psychologically more important for me than the politics...and I am sure many others felt the same way.

    My regret is that at the time I did not discover guys like Wilmot Robertson, Pat Buchanan, and so on, who were all savaged by the shabbas goy Bill Buckley.

    George Resch, "late great" George Resch: I met George Resch about a dozen years ago as he held court on the "bench" outside of Peets Coffee house in Menlo Park, CA. George was a Conservative and I liked to get in on the conversations. We became somewhere between friends and acquaintances. George was formal, German, and sociable up to a point. He had a reputation amongst libertarians, and had worked for various conservative outfits for years, and had finally gone to work locally at a coin shop owned by another jewish libertarian, and worked there to the day he died, carefully Saving his money and stinting on everything, including his teeth, but classic cars.

    I was no longer leftish, not liberal either, and just coasting I guess after getting free of a job and kids out of the nest, etc. George introduced me to Kevin MacDonald's work, particularly Culture of Critique, which is the most important of his 3 books on the jews. I was nervous about "anti-semitism", etc. but Began To Read from the other shore.

    The rest is history for me, Israel, to jews, to race, to intelligence testing, to White Nationalism.

    When George died about 3 years ago, he left about 8 to 9 hundred thousand dollars behind, most of it in gold coins. George was a White Nationalist, member of a couple boards of directors, and so on in WN groups. He left Zero to the WN movement, even the cleanest one, American Renaissance, in terms of any taint of AH. His money went to a half-wit brother and a couple nitwit nieces apparently.

    George, for the record, told me several times that he had left libertarianism behind several years ago and regretted having spent so much time on it. George also had a kind of fondness for "The Chief."

    He allowed people to think he was still a libertarian cuz that ( and certainly not WN, and his anti-semitism) was the basis of his social life. After he died, there was a large gathering at a local classic cars joint. The predominant theme was his libertarianism...I raised my hand to say a few things but was not recognized as a safe libertarian. So The Truth remains hidden about George Resch.

    LIbertarianism is a product of a certain mind set, probably genetic, of jews and lots of whites. Greed is one thing, but more importantly, the tendency of one-dimensionality both intellectually and emotionally is a common human failing.

    Libertarianism certainly does not start At The Beginning, which is that Man is a Social Animal, not an Individual, like many animals that live solitary lives for the most part.

    The somewhat contradictory jewish behavior of Money/Greed linked to their extreme ethnic chauvinism is a riddle only to be comprehended by the insight that Jewish Money is not for the jewish Individual, but for the jewish Tribe. Money is power for their race.

    Whites who stumble into the jewish trap...betray their folk. Jews do not betray their folks.

    George Resch, did not necessarily betray his folk, because he was a WN to the end, but he could have foreseen, with his lousy health, his death, and written a will, but he did not. Like most of us, George thought he would live on and on...no need to provide for the inevitable.

    Joe Webb

    Mr. Gordon, I have no opinion about you and George always spoke highly of you and your Righteous Jew status, which I respected.

    I did mention but you overlooked, that George left no will.

    My words: “but he could have foreseen, with his lousy health, his death, and written a will, but he did not. ” I thought later that I should have been more emphatic about his not leaving a will.

    As for “Joe Webb is entitled to his opinions about jew, George Resch…: …etc. probably qualifies in rhetoric discussion and definitions, as some kind of attack on a writer without coming right out and calling him “vile, noxious, cretin, nazi,” etc. as jews are wont to do. Of course, white folks and others do that as well. It is just that jews are better at it, fueled at they are by hatreds and contempt.

    I knew George Resch as well or better than anybody else, including private life , which is not germane to this topic.

    Maybe George kept from Mr. Gordon the fact that he had left Libertarianism behind, as well as his high regard for The Chief. George was always very concerned about his friends and acquaintances, and got pretty pissed-off at me for savaging one of the bench liberals whom he wanted to keep as a friendly bench-mate at Peets Coffee.

    Myself, I just savage anybody who is a liberal, etc. as long as it does not threaten me in some larger social context. Fuck the liberals and do not hate the jews more than is necessary. In other words, our central concern is to hate the liberals far more than hating the jews. Enemies you do not hate, you just defeat them. Liberals are subverters of Our Side, white people. They are traitors. Jews are not traitors, they are Enemy only, but worthy of some kind of contempt and lower case “hatred.” for their war against Whites.

    By the way, one of the little tidbits from George Resch follows, which of course I am ‘entitled’ to report. (Thank you Mr. Gordon, arbiter of free speech)

    Michael Levin, the jewish jew york city professor (and his book, Why Race Matters, which is a very good book on blacks) told George and a few others at some gathering that “you Whites have every justification to expel us Jews”.

    Now Mr. Gordon , please just call me a liar, and stop beating around the burning bush. Also, I seem to recall that George said you were Orthodox. Again, I ‘seem to recall’ that. Are you Orthodox?

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I apologize to Mr. Webb, in that I failed to note his last paragraph, in which he correctly states that George left no will.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @joe webb
    "David Gordon (/ˈɡɔːrdən/; born April 7, 1948) is an American libertarian philosopher and intellectual historian influenced by Rothbardian views of economics.[1] Peter J. Boettke, in his Reason Foundation "Reason Papers," Issue No. 19, Fall 1994,[2] describes Gordon as "a philosopher and intellectual historian who is deeply influenced by the Rothbardian strand of economics." He is a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and editor of The Mises Review.[3]"

    As I recall, Gordon is Jewish as were/are so many of the libertarian intellectuals, like Rothbard.

    Here is a personal note.

    The Wilmoore Kendall ( mentioned in the article) showed up to lecture at Berkeley (Cal) about 1963. As an earnest young leftish guy, and "fair minded" as many of us were until the commies took over in the 1970s, mostly jews, I wanted to hear from a Genuine Conservative. It turned out that Kendall was drunk at the lectern. ( He was part of the National Review crowd. Bill Buckely as a CIA agent is important)

    I spoke up and told Kendell he was drunk. He approached me and said: "Them's fighting words boy!"...end of story, but that and with Bill Buckley on the TV screen...I was disgusted by these guys, particularly their manner. That was psychologically more important for me than the politics...and I am sure many others felt the same way.

    My regret is that at the time I did not discover guys like Wilmot Robertson, Pat Buchanan, and so on, who were all savaged by the shabbas goy Bill Buckley.

    George Resch, "late great" George Resch: I met George Resch about a dozen years ago as he held court on the "bench" outside of Peets Coffee house in Menlo Park, CA. George was a Conservative and I liked to get in on the conversations. We became somewhere between friends and acquaintances. George was formal, German, and sociable up to a point. He had a reputation amongst libertarians, and had worked for various conservative outfits for years, and had finally gone to work locally at a coin shop owned by another jewish libertarian, and worked there to the day he died, carefully Saving his money and stinting on everything, including his teeth, but classic cars.

    I was no longer leftish, not liberal either, and just coasting I guess after getting free of a job and kids out of the nest, etc. George introduced me to Kevin MacDonald's work, particularly Culture of Critique, which is the most important of his 3 books on the jews. I was nervous about "anti-semitism", etc. but Began To Read from the other shore.

    The rest is history for me, Israel, to jews, to race, to intelligence testing, to White Nationalism.

    When George died about 3 years ago, he left about 8 to 9 hundred thousand dollars behind, most of it in gold coins. George was a White Nationalist, member of a couple boards of directors, and so on in WN groups. He left Zero to the WN movement, even the cleanest one, American Renaissance, in terms of any taint of AH. His money went to a half-wit brother and a couple nitwit nieces apparently.

    George, for the record, told me several times that he had left libertarianism behind several years ago and regretted having spent so much time on it. George also had a kind of fondness for "The Chief."

    He allowed people to think he was still a libertarian cuz that ( and certainly not WN, and his anti-semitism) was the basis of his social life. After he died, there was a large gathering at a local classic cars joint. The predominant theme was his libertarianism...I raised my hand to say a few things but was not recognized as a safe libertarian. So The Truth remains hidden about George Resch.

    LIbertarianism is a product of a certain mind set, probably genetic, of jews and lots of whites. Greed is one thing, but more importantly, the tendency of one-dimensionality both intellectually and emotionally is a common human failing.

    Libertarianism certainly does not start At The Beginning, which is that Man is a Social Animal, not an Individual, like many animals that live solitary lives for the most part.

    The somewhat contradictory jewish behavior of Money/Greed linked to their extreme ethnic chauvinism is a riddle only to be comprehended by the insight that Jewish Money is not for the jewish Individual, but for the jewish Tribe. Money is power for their race.

    Whites who stumble into the jewish trap...betray their folk. Jews do not betray their folks.

    George Resch, did not necessarily betray his folk, because he was a WN to the end, but he could have foreseen, with his lousy health, his death, and written a will, but he did not. Like most of us, George thought he would live on and on...no need to provide for the inevitable.

    Joe Webb

    Mr. Joe Webb is entitled to his opinions about Jews, George Resch, libertarianism, and me. His suggestion though, that George left no money to various groups is misleading in that it suggests, without directly stating, that he excluded these groups. In fact, he left no will at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “David Gordon (/ˈɡɔːrdən/; born April 7, 1948) is an American libertarian philosopher and intellectual historian influenced by Rothbardian views of economics.[1] Peter J. Boettke, in his Reason Foundation “Reason Papers,” Issue No. 19, Fall 1994,[2] describes Gordon as “a philosopher and intellectual historian who is deeply influenced by the Rothbardian strand of economics.” He is a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and editor of The Mises Review.[3]”

    As I recall, Gordon is Jewish as were/are so many of the libertarian intellectuals, like Rothbard.

    Here is a personal note.

    The Wilmoore Kendall ( mentioned in the article) showed up to lecture at Berkeley (Cal) about 1963. As an earnest young leftish guy, and “fair minded” as many of us were until the commies took over in the 1970s, mostly jews, I wanted to hear from a Genuine Conservative. It turned out that Kendall was drunk at the lectern. ( He was part of the National Review crowd. Bill Buckely as a CIA agent is important)

    I spoke up and told Kendell he was drunk. He approached me and said: “Them’s fighting words boy!”…end of story, but that and with Bill Buckley on the TV screen…I was disgusted by these guys, particularly their manner. That was psychologically more important for me than the politics…and I am sure many others felt the same way.

    My regret is that at the time I did not discover guys like Wilmot Robertson, Pat Buchanan, and so on, who were all savaged by the shabbas goy Bill Buckley.

    George Resch, “late great” George Resch: I met George Resch about a dozen years ago as he held court on the “bench” outside of Peets Coffee house in Menlo Park, CA. George was a Conservative and I liked to get in on the conversations. We became somewhere between friends and acquaintances. George was formal, German, and sociable up to a point. He had a reputation amongst libertarians, and had worked for various conservative outfits for years, and had finally gone to work locally at a coin shop owned by another jewish libertarian, and worked there to the day he died, carefully Saving his money and stinting on everything, including his teeth, but classic cars.

    I was no longer leftish, not liberal either, and just coasting I guess after getting free of a job and kids out of the nest, etc. George introduced me to Kevin MacDonald’s work, particularly Culture of Critique, which is the most important of his 3 books on the jews. I was nervous about “anti-semitism”, etc. but Began To Read from the other shore.

    The rest is history for me, Israel, to jews, to race, to intelligence testing, to White Nationalism.

    When George died about 3 years ago, he left about 8 to 9 hundred thousand dollars behind, most of it in gold coins. George was a White Nationalist, member of a couple boards of directors, and so on in WN groups. He left Zero to the WN movement, even the cleanest one, American Renaissance, in terms of any taint of AH. His money went to a half-wit brother and a couple nitwit nieces apparently.

    George, for the record, told me several times that he had left libertarianism behind several years ago and regretted having spent so much time on it. George also had a kind of fondness for “The Chief.”

    He allowed people to think he was still a libertarian cuz that ( and certainly not WN, and his anti-semitism) was the basis of his social life. After he died, there was a large gathering at a local classic cars joint. The predominant theme was his libertarianism…I raised my hand to say a few things but was not recognized as a safe libertarian. So The Truth remains hidden about George Resch.

    LIbertarianism is a product of a certain mind set, probably genetic, of jews and lots of whites. Greed is one thing, but more importantly, the tendency of one-dimensionality both intellectually and emotionally is a common human failing.

    Libertarianism certainly does not start At The Beginning, which is that Man is a Social Animal, not an Individual, like many animals that live solitary lives for the most part.

    The somewhat contradictory jewish behavior of Money/Greed linked to their extreme ethnic chauvinism is a riddle only to be comprehended by the insight that Jewish Money is not for the jewish Individual, but for the jewish Tribe. Money is power for their race.

    Whites who stumble into the jewish trap…betray their folk. Jews do not betray their folks.

    George Resch, did not necessarily betray his folk, because he was a WN to the end, but he could have foreseen, with his lousy health, his death, and written a will, but he did not. Like most of us, George thought he would live on and on…no need to provide for the inevitable.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    • Replies: @David Gordon
    Mr. Joe Webb is entitled to his opinions about Jews, George Resch, libertarianism, and me. His suggestion though, that George left no money to various groups is misleading in that it suggests, without directly stating, that he excluded these groups. In fact, he left no will at all.
    , @joe webb
    Mr. Gordon, I have no opinion about you and George always spoke highly of you and your Righteous Jew status, which I respected.

    I did mention but you overlooked, that George left no will.

    My words: "but he could have foreseen, with his lousy health, his death, and written a will, but he did not. " I thought later that I should have been more emphatic about his not leaving a will.

    As for "Joe Webb is entitled to his opinions about jew, George Resch...: ...etc. probably qualifies in rhetoric discussion and definitions, as some kind of attack on a writer without coming right out and calling him "vile, noxious, cretin, nazi," etc. as jews are wont to do. Of course, white folks and others do that as well. It is just that jews are better at it, fueled at they are by hatreds and contempt.

    I knew George Resch as well or better than anybody else, including private life , which is not germane to this topic.

    Maybe George kept from Mr. Gordon the fact that he had left Libertarianism behind, as well as his high regard for The Chief. George was always very concerned about his friends and acquaintances, and got pretty pissed-off at me for savaging one of the bench liberals whom he wanted to keep as a friendly bench-mate at Peets Coffee.

    Myself, I just savage anybody who is a liberal, etc. as long as it does not threaten me in some larger social context. Fuck the liberals and do not hate the jews more than is necessary. In other words, our central concern is to hate the liberals far more than hating the jews. Enemies you do not hate, you just defeat them. Liberals are subverters of Our Side, white people. They are traitors. Jews are not traitors, they are Enemy only, but worthy of some kind of contempt and lower case "hatred." for their war against Whites.

    By the way, one of the little tidbits from George Resch follows, which of course I am 'entitled' to report. (Thank you Mr. Gordon, arbiter of free speech)


    Michael Levin, the jewish jew york city professor (and his book, Why Race Matters, which is a very good book on blacks) told George and a few others at some gathering that "you Whites have every justification to expel us Jews".

    Now Mr. Gordon , please just call me a liar, and stop beating around the burning bush. Also, I seem to recall that George said you were Orthodox. Again, I 'seem to recall' that. Are you Orthodox?

    Joe Webb
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tulip
    A huge failing of the American Right is its hostility to Keynesian economics. This is in part historical, in the sense that the Old Right was rooted in laissez faire ideology, and sought a return to conditions before FDR. But the past is gone, and a political movement has to adapt to changing conditions or die off.

    More importantly, a true Burkean conservatism based on an organic conception of society would do much better with an economist like Gustav von Schmoller than it will with the Austrians (or the Chicago School of Economics).

    Best intro work for Keynes? Especially come from the Austrian school?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tulip
    Keynes' tome was the General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Michael Hudson who gets his work published on this blog is basically post-Keynesian.

    The Right avoids Keynes because his thought legitimates government interference with the economy, but if one starts from an essentially Hegelian Right perspective, a conservatism of order, not an oligarchy run by and for Viking financiers, there is nothing wrong with Keynes.

    More interesting are figures like List, Schmoller and Wagner (as noted by 5371), representing the German 'Historical School of Economics' but most of their works have not been translated into English, although rumor has it that they still have influence in Japan.

    I think a lot of constructive work would be done by translating them into English, and synthesizing their thought with philosophers like Heidegger and Gadamer, as well as the various strands of Anglo-economics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tulip
    A huge failing of the American Right is its hostility to Keynesian economics. This is in part historical, in the sense that the Old Right was rooted in laissez faire ideology, and sought a return to conditions before FDR. But the past is gone, and a political movement has to adapt to changing conditions or die off.

    More importantly, a true Burkean conservatism based on an organic conception of society would do much better with an economist like Gustav von Schmoller than it will with the Austrians (or the Chicago School of Economics).

    Agreed. Also Friedrich List, Werner Sombart or Adolph Wagner (the rare exception who actually did spell his name Adolph).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is no inconsistency in being a cold warier then and returning to traditional US anti-war isolationism after the fall of the USSR.

    J E Pournelle:
    “I was with Kirk during many debates with Meyer and his Fusionists, and we managed to work together. But that was long ago.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A huge failing of the American Right is its hostility to Keynesian economics. This is in part historical, in the sense that the Old Right was rooted in laissez faire ideology, and sought a return to conditions before FDR. But the past is gone, and a political movement has to adapt to changing conditions or die off.

    More importantly, a true Burkean conservatism based on an organic conception of society would do much better with an economist like Gustav von Schmoller than it will with the Austrians (or the Chicago School of Economics).

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Agreed. Also Friedrich List, Werner Sombart or Adolph Wagner (the rare exception who actually did spell his name Adolph).
    , @nickels
    Best intro work for Keynes? Especially come from the Austrian school?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Let’s face it. The Libertarians are exactly correct.
    In a world filled with only Nordic and Anglo Saxon peoples.

    Mises is an interesting figure. Definitely one of the most powerful anti-socialist writers. But also somewhat utopian in his thought about global politics. I don’t know that one can fault him, necessarily. We have the benefit of hindsight, and can now understand how ethnicity and tribalism really trumps everything. Mises didn’t have that history. Mises didn’t get to see Bounce doing her black panther thing, affirmative action being a never ending, escalating drudge, South Africa turning to a hellhole.
    On the other hand, writer like Gustave Le Bon saw the problems long before Mises.

    Yet I think there may have been reason to have the Libertarian hope at that time; technology and globalization were new and had not proved their futility yet.

    At any rate, Kirk is on my reading list at some point…

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    If you think apartheid South Africa was libertarian, I have several bridges to sell you...

    Even Anglo-Saxons and Nordics were never that libertarian. Perhaps the libertarian apogee was the 19th century, but you can pull many examples from that era of deficiencies in that regard, e.g. slavery and high tariffs. The quite un-libertarian practice of fractional-reserve banking, i.e. legalized counterfeiting, arose in the 17th century among these northern Germanic peoples.

    To me, libertarianism is simply the recognition of precisely what it is that generates prosperity in a society: freedom, defined negatively as freedom from assault on one's person and property. That allows us to discern more exactly what it is that allowed Anglo-Saxon countries to develop so fast. It wasn't skin or hair color or the English language or other irrelevant racial or cultural traits, but their respect for freedom. It wasn't even certain cognitive qualities, like intelligence, since many highly intelligent countries stagnated and fell behind, like China.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Quartermaster
    One can argue about the necessity of certain wars. The War of Northern Aggression, AKA "Civil War" and WW 1 were certainly not necessary. When the cold war went hot, as it did in Korea and Vietnam, I see no way to avoid them, unless you are willing to allow the wars the Soviet Union was going to foment and support to pay in the long term. Both Korea and Vietnam prevented war from paying and led directly to the fall of the Soviet Union.

    You have a shaky grasp on history and a remarkably elastic usage of the word “directly”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • One can argue about the necessity of certain wars. The War of Northern Aggression, AKA “Civil War” and WW 1 were certainly not necessary. When the cold war went hot, as it did in Korea and Vietnam, I see no way to avoid them, unless you are willing to allow the wars the Soviet Union was going to foment and support to pay in the long term. Both Korea and Vietnam prevented war from paying and led directly to the fall of the Soviet Union.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    You have a shaky grasp on history and a remarkably elastic usage of the word "directly".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Stogumber says,”At that time, Mises obviously had no problems with the holistic and deterministic structure of Marx’s thinking.” This remark in Mises’s Liberalism is perhaps difficult to reconcile with this claim: “There is scarcely anything so absurd as the fundamental principle of Marx’s materialist intepretation of history: ‘The hand mill made feudal society; the steam mill, capitalist society.’”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stogumber
    David Gordon,

    I've read Mises above all as a man who (partly) influenced Popper. And it is obvious that Mises (1) looks at capitalism as a (holistic) "system", (2) looks at economy as a a series of stages which develop inevitably. This is the common ground between Ricardo (whom Mises recommends as THE classical economist) and Marx. (On the other hand, Popper looked at economy as a matter of peacemeal engineering by trial and error, and he criticized the holistic and deterministic character of Marxism as an incitement to ruthlessness - only he didn't see its roots in pre-Marxian liberal economics .)

    That's why Mises is quite merciless in his invectives against labour organizations or Bismarckian welfare policy, but is cautious about Marx: Marxians can be saved if only they see that Capitalism is (for all we know) the final stage (the end of history). And Mises was right, as we see now: A lot of former Marxists have just taken that one step back and turned convinced (and ruthless) capitalists or promoters of capitalism.

    Was Mises a precursor of this development? It s interesting to see that Mises found his place at the (heavily Marxist) New York University. One asks oneself if he found the intellectual climate comfortable and on the other hand if he was really such on outsider that he had no influence on the (later) capitalist turn of Marxists.
    To sum up: There is a common ground which connects Misesians and Marxists and which separates them from Burkean conservatives.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Mises, in his German book about “Liberalismus”, took definitely a positive stand w.r.t. Marx. He seems to have understood that Marx in fact defended the whole development to capitalism (he only was more cynical than the traditional apologists and despised their moralizing attitude), and that he did no more than to add as an afterthought that capitalism in its time would be replaced by something even better.
    At that time, Mises obviously had no problems with the holistic and deterministic structure of Marx’ thinking. This may or may not have changed afterwards.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.