I’m a longtime Mises Institute guy and still attend their events with family members. If a right-winger can’t learn from the Mises Institute then they have a personal problem. 🙃 Great stuff on economic of course but also on revisionist history and much else of interest to those on the Right.
Yes, but you have to separate from the Big Gay Disco of the LP. I'm still a libertarian at heart, but it's politically a dead end. The way things are going the best we can hope for is some form of benevolent dictatorship.
The LewRockwell/RonPaul/Mises libertarians are close to paleo-cons and thus friendly to Buchanan, Gottfried ... ... They are good on decentralization and do understand the difference between liberty, (which is to say responsibility and accountability to cost and consequence) and libertinism.
This is all good. They do make good allies on this. The problem is that they see the state as the enemy. They are bad on power. Someone will always wield power. The means to address this isn't to try and dissolve it, but to be the ones who hold and wield it.
There is no utopia and that includes the utopia of a world with no states. Yet another former libertarian here. There is good in this branch of it. However, if they eschew politics and reject anybody who seeks political power, then, well, let's say the powerless can't be of much help can they?
"The answer to any problem is to let "people live their lives", so what if addictive substances end up overriding the health care system. Just let people 'live their lives"!"
Seeing what addictive substances are doing first hand on my drive to work, "just let people live their lives" should be abandon as a serious political goal.
What is this choice between progressive and libertarian? Can we not reject liberalism in all forms?
Look, the Mises guys are all right, but I wouldn't want them in power because they'd not be hard enough on our enemies or other people in power who are not hard enough on our enemies (e.g. their fellow libertarians). It's not enough to socially discriminate against degenerates; you have to politically discriminate against your enemies.
I suppose the worry is libertarians practically by definition have no working answer to the progressive problem. By letting them into the top level discussion, they waste time, corrupt focus, and ultimately will never agree with necessary policies as they continue to try and fail to find a way to save liberalism that won't lead us right back to where liberalism goes.
Short of losing the capability, there is no way of overthrowing technologically induced centralization. There is, however, shaping the form this takes such that it functions with our desired freedoms and restrictions, with our preference, within pragmatic bounds, for how it delegates (decentralizes) its organization and authority. That is, there are multiple ways things can be, but each prefers and propagates a different type of person (culture, civilization) by the way it regulates itself.
I agree those of who you speak are generally not enemies; they can be a client group or part of the non-ruling elite and they do have valuable things to say, but having them in the ruling elite, or taking them wholly at their word, would be a mistake that would help our enemies.
I’m a longtime Mises Institute guy and still attend their events with family members. If a right-winger can’t learn from the Mises Institute then they have a personal problem. 🙃 Great stuff on economic of course but also on revisionist history and much else of interest to those on the Right.
Yes, but you have to separate from the Big Gay Disco of the LP. I'm still a libertarian at heart, but it's politically a dead end. The way things are going the best we can hope for is some form of benevolent dictatorship.
For anybody struggling to move on from the Libertarian ideaology, I always pose the question:
Would you rather live under authoritarian left or right wing rule? Because one or the other is coming and it's time to pick a side.
I love the link to Gary North lol. He's awesome
The LewRockwell/RonPaul/Mises libertarians are close to paleo-cons and thus friendly to Buchanan, Gottfried ... ... They are good on decentralization and do understand the difference between liberty, (which is to say responsibility and accountability to cost and consequence) and libertinism.
This is all good. They do make good allies on this. The problem is that they see the state as the enemy. They are bad on power. Someone will always wield power. The means to address this isn't to try and dissolve it, but to be the ones who hold and wield it.
There is no utopia and that includes the utopia of a world with no states. Yet another former libertarian here. There is good in this branch of it. However, if they eschew politics and reject anybody who seeks political power, then, well, let's say the powerless can't be of much help can they?
Human
Ontological
Moral
Innocence
"The answer to any problem is to let "people live their lives", so what if addictive substances end up overriding the health care system. Just let people 'live their lives"!"
Seeing what addictive substances are doing first hand on my drive to work, "just let people live their lives" should be abandon as a serious political goal.
Great article. We must adapt to a decentralized world. Check out this analysis of agriculture on Tom Swift:
https://swiftenterprises.substack.com/p/american-latifundia
Not real libertarianism™️
What is this choice between progressive and libertarian? Can we not reject liberalism in all forms?
Look, the Mises guys are all right, but I wouldn't want them in power because they'd not be hard enough on our enemies or other people in power who are not hard enough on our enemies (e.g. their fellow libertarians). It's not enough to socially discriminate against degenerates; you have to politically discriminate against your enemies.
I suppose the worry is libertarians practically by definition have no working answer to the progressive problem. By letting them into the top level discussion, they waste time, corrupt focus, and ultimately will never agree with necessary policies as they continue to try and fail to find a way to save liberalism that won't lead us right back to where liberalism goes.
Short of losing the capability, there is no way of overthrowing technologically induced centralization. There is, however, shaping the form this takes such that it functions with our desired freedoms and restrictions, with our preference, within pragmatic bounds, for how it delegates (decentralizes) its organization and authority. That is, there are multiple ways things can be, but each prefers and propagates a different type of person (culture, civilization) by the way it regulates itself.
I agree those of who you speak are generally not enemies; they can be a client group or part of the non-ruling elite and they do have valuable things to say, but having them in the ruling elite, or taking them wholly at their word, would be a mistake that would help our enemies.
This is a good reaction to the Old Glory Club election livestream lol
Wow this comment is glitching like crazy