An open letter to lewrockwell on behalf of America

Posted by James Bowery on December 17, 2007, 11:58 AM | #

This is the second time Lew Rockwell’s site has libeled Ron Paul by saying he supports virtually unlimited legal immigration.  I previously blogged here “In the Name of Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell’s Rick Fisk Invites the World”.

The only response from Fisk was a denial that he had libeled Ron Paul—no cites or quotes to back up his claim that the only substantive difference between McCain and Paul on the pivotal Republican Primary issue—especially for Iowa—was amnesty.

Posted by daveg on December 17, 2007, 12:07 PM | #

Ron Paul does not support birth right citizenship, no?  Whether he can change that or not is another question.

But, just having support for that and eliminating the visa lottery would be very welcome.

Posted by James Bowery on December 17, 2007, 12:13 PM | #

Ron Paul does oppose birth-right citizenship for the children of illegals.  But, of course, the issue of birth-right citizenship becomes moot if he allows basically unlimited immigration against the manifest will of the people—hence my assertion that the only substantive difference between McCain’s position and the position Lew Rockwell libelously puts in Paul’s mouth, is amnesty.

Posted by Voice on December 17, 2007, 12:15 PM | #

Ron Paul has to be VERY VERY careful on his immigration stance.  Although intellectually powerful on most subjects, he has a tendency to mumble his way through very difficult subjects like Neocon/Israel and Immigration.

When he talks about immigration, he says the right things like no birthright citizenship and enforcing the immigration laws, BUT he then mumbles on about like LEGAL immigration and if the economy improves welcoming more.

Attention RON PAUL campaign, tell him to stop that talk immediately even though we, as well informed political people, understand as “yes, once we deport the 20-30 million here and retract the citizenship of anchor babies, then we will increase legal immigration from 1 to 1.2 million in 2010” 

Average Joe Sixpack, does not understand that this is what you are saying so stop right now stating that you would increase immigration if our “economy was better”

Trust me when I say , it really pisses you hardcore base off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by James Bowery on December 17, 2007, 12:38 PM | #

Ron Paul’s intellectual confusion comes down to his term “collective rights”.  Does he oppose the existence of unlimited-liability land partnerships?  Of course not—but his failure to understand that a nation is essentially a land partnership—with unlimited liability, is making him far more vulnerable on key issues like immigration.

Posted by Frank McGuckin on December 17, 2007, 01:45 PM | #

Ron Paul=the complete racial cleansing of the Engineering, programming and medical professions of Euro-Americans. Do not vote for Ron Paul.

Racially cleansing these professions of Euro-Americans doesn’t require an open borders immigration policy. Make legal immigration high enough and have a skill-based immigration policy. Asians will have even more control over the policy then they do now which will accelerate the demise of Euro-America.

Noam Chomsky has an interesting take on the Ron Paul candidacy-easily found on the internet-that I agree with. In a nutshell, Paul is a whore for the corporations.

I am not one of these people who would ever say ‘don’t vote for Ron Paul because he can’t win”.

The clock is ticking for Euro-America. We are very close to midnight. Don’t look for “Dear Leaders” to save Euro-America. It has to come from the bottom up.

White Nationalist do need to have a economic policy. Libertarian economic policy:let the corprations and oligarchies rape,pillage and plunder America.

Peter Brimelow, what do you think?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 17, 2007, 02:09 PM | #

Any Ron Paul campaign operatives who may be seeing this thread need to take a good long look at Voice’s and Frank McGuckin’s comments.  You guys HAVE TO MAKE IT CLEAR YOUR MAN IS AGAINST RACE-REPLACEMENT OF WHITE PEOPLE.  No, obviously he doesn’t have to say that in so many words.  In fact, to do so would be political suicide at this stage. BUT THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO GET THE MESSAGE ACROSS AS TO WHOSE SIDE, EXACTLY, HE’S ON:  THE MEXICANS’ OR OURS.  HE CAN’T BE ON BOTH.  IT’S ONE OR THE OTHER. 

Listen closely to what I’m going to say:  the only way for him to win or to make such a strong showing that he can make demands of the establishment is for him to tap into the seething discontent out here in regard to race-replacement.  If you aren’t familiar with that notion use your imagination — you’ll figure it out.  Your guy needs the votes of the people who are mad as hell about that.  Why?  BECAUSE THE MARIJUANA LEGALIZERS AREN’T NUMEROUS ENOUGH TO PUT HIM OVER THE TOP, DUUUUHHHHHHHH!!!!!  Now, he still has a chance to make a strong showing but time’s running out.  GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER ON IMMIGRATION PLEASE, WHICH MEANS STOP MAKING STATEMENTS THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF YOUR POTENTIAL VOTERS WERE HINDUS, MESTIZOS, OR THE OWNERS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES.  YOUR POTENTIAL VOTERS AREN’T THEM, THEY’RE US.  AND NOT JUST VOTERS OBVIOUSLY, BUT FEET ON THE GROUND, FINGERS AT KEYBOARDS, AND TELEPONES PRESSED TO EARS, WHO ARE GOING TO WORK THEMSELVES HARD TO GET YOUR GUY A VICTORY BUT NOT IF THEY LOSE HEART AT HEARING HIS AIMLESS STATEMENTS ON RACE-REPLACEMENT.  CAPICHE???  LOOK AT TANCREDO ON IMMIGRATION.  EMULATE HIM ON THAT, NOT GIULIANI OR McCAIN OR THE OTHERS.  THANK YOU AND HAVE A NICE DAY.

Posted by Frank McGuckin on December 17, 2007, 03:31 PM | #

Fred

All Ron Paul would have to say is this:“I beleive that Ameria should be a largely labor self -sufficient nation. I am for this because I believe in a high-wage economy. America should develped her youth for carreers in medicine,science technology and programming. There is not a shred of credible evidence that a severe labor scarcity would be harmfull to American workers,-unless you believe a high-wage economy is a bad thing for American workers. You are either for a high wage economy or you aren’t.If you are for a high wage economy you must be in favor of shutting down most skilled legal immigration. What is so bad about paying American workers a high wage and developing the youth of America for careers in science,enginereing,medicine and programming. You don’t see China, India, Korea or Pakistan devoting their scarce resources to the development of other nations youth for careers in science,medicine ,engineeering and computer programming in China, India,Korea and Pakistan”

Ron Paul could have said this in his vdare interview. But he didn’t. Peter Brimelow could have pointed this out to Ron Paul during the vdare.com interview. But he didn’t.

Pat Buchanan could have wrote this in his new book. But he didn’t. Buchannan’s new book is a boring rehash of his previous three books. Buchannan still refuses to take on legal immigration in any serious way.

Ron Paul would never say in public what I wrote above. And he won’t do this because he is a corporate whore. These kinds of America -first labor -policy thoughts aren’t even on his radar screen.

Peter Brimelow and Steve Sailer would never write something like this on vdare.com because it would greatly offend the LEGAL IMMIGRANT ASIANS for whom both Peter Brimelow and Steve Sailer have a soft spot in their heart for.

I will finacially support vdare.com the day vdare.com takes on post-1965 legal immigrant asians and their “American” born gene-line.

Posted by Duncan Tyyne on December 18, 2007, 05:22 PM | #

Ron Paul is obviously not a pro-white candidate; he is simply one of the best options we have in the current political climate.  Hunter and Tancredo are better on immigration, but an aracial oppostion to open borders only goes so far while thousands of whites are sent abroad to fight for the military-complex and a Greater Israel.

Dr. Paul might be a disciple of von Mises, but I wouldn’t call him a whore for corporations.  To be a true neoliberal corporate puppet (the type Noam Chomsky derides), one must favor state protection of powerful corporations, which Dr. Paul certainly does not.  Chomsky has been opposed to libertarianism virtually since its inception, but if he is making unfounded accusations against Ron Paul, I suspect it is because he is disturbed by such wide popular support and interest for a genuinely conservative candidate.  I’ve found that there’s a belief on the hard left that a vast majority of the American population thinks the way they do, and that if people only believed voting made a difference, every office in the country would be occupied by a liberal.  Ron Paul’s popularity is not the only thing that proves this idea to be utterly false, but it is the most immediately irritating to them.  Hence their desire to see that he is ignored, discredited, and/or disgraced.

Posted by Svigor on December 18, 2007, 09:57 PM | #

Am I wrong to have started wondering if indefinite American deployment in ME low intensity conflict might be a good thing for whites in some ways?  Who’s going to fill those military company ranks for six figure salaries?  Blacks?  Mestizos? NE Asians?  Jews?

Is Tancredo even in the race anymore?  Too bad if he dropped out.

Posted by Tommy G on December 18, 2007, 10:12 PM | #

“Is Tancredo even in the race anymore?  Too bad if he dropped out.”

Svigor, do you acually believe Tancredo was ever in the race?

Posted by Steve Edwards on December 19, 2007, 04:52 AM | #

That “Hispanic for Ron Paul” is twisting Dr Paul’s true position. Here is where that 60 million figure comes from:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/

“Pass true immigration reform.  The current system is incoherent and unfair.  But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation.  This is insanity.  Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.”

You now understand that this mendacious little s*** is stating the precise OPPOSITE of Dr Paul’s actual policy over at Lew Rockwell. And for some reason, Lew Rockwell acquiesces to this dishonesty. Dr Paul’s campaign should state firmly and clearly that they completely renounce any notion of importing 60 million people into the United States.

Do note that this “Hispanic for Ron Paul” EXPLICITLY highlights the racial interests of Hispanics as a legitimate cause for supporting a policy that is falsely attributed to Ron Paul. Does Lew Rockwell endorse collective ethnic interests as an acceptable basis for political activism or not? Or is he a “libertarian” for Europeans and “something else” for the rest?

As for Noam Chomsky - HE is the dishonest shill in this case. Right there in front of Chomsky - the so-called “anti-war” activist - there is a candidate who opposes EVERY SINGLE war that the Government has gotten the people embroiled in, back to World War I and even BEFORE. But what does Chomsky, the so-called “anarchist”, do? He attacks Ron Paul on the ridiculous grounds that a few federal health regulations will go by the wayside (never mind that Dr Paul aims to bring down the entire edifice of State Crony Capitalism - particularly in destroying the Federal Reserve), and shills for Hillary, a DLC warmonger.

Chomsky, given the choice of joining a mass force that could potentially seal the grave of US imperialism PERMANENTLY, openly sides with Big Oil, Halliburton, the Rand Corporation, the Carlysle Group, etc. Why? So he can keep his UN, his World Bank and his IMF and the rest of his precious globalist edifice (which Paul wants to tear down) which has ruthlessly ripped off a long-list of developing, and developed nations, as documented by Chomsky himself. Now THAT’S what I call whoring for the corporations.

Chomsky is a dishonest global-government hack, a Leftist gatekeeper. He happily supports the demise of America - not, please note, in that he is a genuine opponent of the Empire, but in seeking to bury the sovereignty of the US itself. That, to him, is much more important than stopping the endless warmongering (which themselves are crucial to destroying national sovereignty).

Posted by Frank McGuckin on December 19, 2007, 08:59 AM | #

On the other hand, voting for Ron Paul because of his isolationist foreign policy is morally decent thing to do.

Chomsky refers to Ron Paul as a hyper-nationalist. I thought this was a bizarre claim. I believe in Chiosky mind, that an America first isoloationist foriegn policy=hypernationalism. This doesn’t make any sense to me. Also, Chomsky is very likley opposed to Ron Paul anti-illegal immigration policy. Chomsky has said and written in many places that the border between the US and Mexico is a fiction.

His daughter Aviva a proessor of Latin America history is married to a Basque.

Without a doubt, Noam Chomsky would like to see the majority Euro-American population reduced to a racial minority-as small as possible.

As far as Ron Paul goes. What are his views on unions? This is the acid test if he is a corprate whore or not. And please don’t give me a lecture on the bad unions and how they are doing their part to promote open borders. I have in mind a future where the unions are pro-white. So it is the principle at issue.

Corporations should stripped of massive amounts of legal and political power. I doubt that Ron Paul is in favor of this. Stripping Corporations of legal and political power is a prerequisite for the survival of Euro-America.

The power of Corporations is the fundamental causal factor in the racial annhilation of Euro-Americans in America.

Ron Pauls views on legal immigration are unacceptable. He would provide the corporations with a massie supply of skilled hindu and chinese scab labor.

Don’t try and pass off Ron Paul as an enemy of the corporation. It’s just not true.

What you wrote about leftist is also true of Libertarians. There is a large population of Euro-Americans who don’t accept the full blown Libertarian agenda of completely wiping out worker safety laws, laws that undermine unionization, and privatized health care.

Posted by Maguire on December 19, 2007, 09:45 AM | #

“Ron Pauls views on legal immigration are unacceptable. He would provide the corporations with a massie supply of skilled hindu and chinese scab labor.”

There’s no evidence this credentialed ‘labor’ is especially skilled, and particularly more skilled than white engineers.  A fast growing percentage are merely products of Third World diploma mills, which include many bricks ‘n mortar Institutions located in North America.  And a growing number of white executives are awakening to the fact their productivity and expertise has very serious limits. 

Low apparent cost is their only advantage.  A primary reason for this apparent low cost is they don’t come equipped with 60k to 120k of usury interest student loans.  But there is also no reason for any white student to incur this sort of servitude any longer just to provide mutants like Shakti Butler six-figure incomes. 

The bricks ‘n mortar Academy is already as obsolete as the bricks ‘n mortar shopping mall.  The actual cost of the educational content of most ‘four year degrees’ has dropped to around $2k to $3k.  The remaining 90% goes to fund Federal Reserve related entities.

Truly pro-committed white academics will get in the forefront of accelerating and developing distance learning delivery.  Oh, I know there are many faux pro-white Academics whose real agendas are their own potty little rice bowls and their precious Niggerball Homecoming weekends.  This strain is just another manifestation of Buchananism.

Posted by Frank McGuckin on December 19, 2007, 10:20 AM | #

Maguire

I’m just attacking the strongest point-what they percieve as their strongest debating point- of the enemies argument. Assume for the sake of argument that the hindus,pakis and chinese H-1B visa and L-1 B visa thieves were actually highly skilled. Which is a better labor policy:importing the asians or developing Native Born White talent across the nation in places such as Appalachia.

I want the enemy to publicly admit that they hate the majority Native Born White population(Bill Gates has already done this.) Force them to admit that they think Native Born White Ameicans are less intelligent than Asian legal immigrants and their offspring born in America.

Why hasn’t vdare.com gone after the asians on the same scale and intensity as it has gone after the hispanics. It would really help move things forward.

The legal immigrant asians and their spawn are the mortal enemy of Native Born White Americans. And it is for this reason that I will not vote for Ron Paul. No one else should vote for Ron Paul for this reason also-unless you are voting against the Iraq/Iran massacre.

Posted by Matra on December 19, 2007, 01:22 PM | #

Chomsky, given the choice of joining a mass force that could potentially seal the grave of US imperialism PERMANENTLY, openly sides with Big Oil, Halliburton, the Rand Corporation, the Carlysle Group, etc. Why? So he can keep his UN, his World Bank and his IMF and the rest of his precious globalist edifice

Chomsky’s a closet Jewish ethnocentrist. He undermines anti-Israel movements from within and blames all Israel’s crimes on white America. He claims the Israel lobby has no more power than other special interest groups despite AIPAC being alone in getting across the political spectrum blind allegiance from the major leaders in Congress and Cabinet members many of whom attend AIPAC’s annual meeting. Does the NRA get significant liberal Democrat support? Do labour unions and manufacturing associations get across the board support like AIPAC? Of course not. He can’t possibly believe that the “oilmen” and military industrial complex love Israel. He’s making excuses for his own ethnic group.

Why hasn’t vdare.com gone after the asians on the same scale and intensity as it has gone after the hispanics.

For the obvious reason that Hispanics are the greater demographic threat to white America. Middle class skilled workers don’t seem to give a damn about the plight of decling lower middle class and working class whites forced to live in non-white areas where their children wear targets on their backs every day at school. Perhaps if Asians were to displace more skilled middle class whites we’d start to see more urgency from those who are sheltered in white suburban and exurban areas.

Posted by Matra on December 19, 2007, 01:29 PM | #

Incidentally, RP was on Glenn Beck’s programme for a full hour last night. I understand that politicians must say things that appeal to the particular audience they are addressing but he went a bit overboard claiming the US mistreats Israel by holding it back from taking actions to preserve its interests. It probably went down well with the rabid Zionists who watch Beck. I also cringed when he talked about peaceful change by invoking the names Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. He was pretty good though on globalisation (despite his support for free trade), the importance of national sovereignty, and the threat of a North American Union.

Posted by VLC on December 19, 2007, 02:50 PM | #

Steve Edwards:
“Or is he a “libertarian” for Europeans and “something else” for the rest?”

Lew Rockwell is an intellectual and moral worm just like most libertarians

Frank McGuckin:
“Corporations should stripped of massive amounts of legal and political power.”

their power only lies in their ability to corrupt the government. A small government = little opportunities for corruption because the government spends only a limited amount of funds. Don’t forget that the president isn’t all powerful. Just because Ron Paul would be in the WH doesn’t mean you won’t have to harass your congressman over crucial votes anymore. But if he succeeds in abolishing the income tax average americans will have plenty of money to fund the right causes such as immigration reform

Posted by VLC on December 19, 2007, 03:18 PM | #

Matra: “He undermines anti-Israel movements from within and blames all Israel’s crimes on white America.”

Jeffrey Blankfort writes on Chomsky, Zunes and the clique of “anti-Israel” leftist jews:

http://www.doublestandards.org/blankfort1.html

What about Chomsky’s assertion that Israel is America’s cop-on-the-beat in the Middle East? There is, as yet, no record of a single Israeli soldier shedding a drop of blood in behalf of US interests, and there is little likelihood one will be asked to do so in the future. When US presidents have believed that a cop was necessary in the region, US troops were ordered to do the job.

Posted by VLC on December 19, 2007, 05:35 PM | #

that 60 million part is no longer in the text

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 19, 2007, 06:11 PM | #

“that 60 million part is no longer in the text”  (—VLC)

Chalk one up for MR.com!  (Let no one doubt this site exerts influence and lots of “important” sites are looking in on us.)

Posted by Scimitar on December 19, 2007, 07:51 PM | #

their power only lies in their ability to corrupt the government. A small government = little opportunities for corruption because the government spends only a limited amount of funds

Dismantling government will do nothing more than further empower the out of control private oligarchs who are destroying this country. It would be more sensible to capture control of the government, expand its power, and then use it as a weapon against subversive elements.

Posted by Old Raven on December 19, 2007, 09:29 PM | #

Scrimtar—your suggestion sounds a lot like ‘33!  BTW:  I agree.

Posted by Scimitar on December 19, 2007, 10:17 PM | #

I have become increasingly fascinated lately with the last days of the Roman Republic. A strong hand is often necessary to clean up degenerate republics.

Posted by Steve Edwards on December 20, 2007, 01:55 AM | #

“A strong hand is often necessary to clean up degenerate republics.”

Maybe, maybe not. That “strong hand” might be tempted to reach elsewhere (as it has already), thus rendering the “republic” part irrelevant. The strongest imperative right now - for the sake of the world - is the destruction of the US government. It must be utterly wiped off the map, reduced to a smoking ruin, and the soil of Washington DC must be contaminated to the point of being uninhabitable for the next thousand years.

Posted by Steve Edwards on December 20, 2007, 02:06 AM | #

More from that despicable “open letter”:

“Ron Paul represents the 14th Congressional District of Texas, a border state with many problems. As a result of these problems we have seen overt racism from people like the Minutemen and other self-armed vigilantes who patrol the border.”

What pure mendacity! The Minutemen are not “self-armed” vigilantes. They are private citizens who radio information on illegal aliens to the authorities from the same front-line that the authorities refuse to patrol adequately. Speaking of “overt racism”, what other phrase would be equal to the task of describing a mass movement of irredentist Hispanics that calls itself “The Race”? Or is racism perfectly acceptable once the victim is identified as a “gringo”?

That “Hispanic for Ron Paul” is a lying thug (notice how they had to delete that 60 million paragraph after we drew attention to it) who is using “libertarianism” to advance racial irredentism. That should be enough to raise suspicions regarding the libertarian movement - not only is it unable to defend a concrete society, it cannot even defend itself on its own terms. That is to say, libertarianism (or at least the manner in which it is understood by about 99% of people who identify themselves so) is simply a fast-track to the complete destruction of liberty.

Posted by Scimitar on December 20, 2007, 02:25 AM | #

Steve,

I recently escaped that hellhole myself (finally). I can assure you that is worse than you ever thought. Of course reducing Washington, D.C. to Carthage 2.0 would require, uh, the initiation of force. That’s often necessary from time to time.

Posted by Steve Edwards on December 20, 2007, 02:37 AM | #

I like to think of the appropriate word as “retaliation”. If somebody attacks your person, steals your wealth, defiles your property, ruins the future of your own kin, I think there is a strong case for PAYBACK. Not only must DC be incinerated, every existing history book, journal, newspaper and webpage should be forcibly censored and re-written, and every photograph re-touched, to erase the entire collective memory of such a place as Washington DC having ever existed. It will in fact be much worse than Carthage.

Posted by Matra on December 20, 2007, 03:50 PM | #

Tom Tancredo, who is dropping out of the race, has asked Ron Paul about the open letter from lewrockwell.com that is the subject of this thread. Lew Rockwell responds :

Tom Tancredo, the Tommy Thompson of immigration restrictionism, apparently wants some traffic for his website, so he attacks one of the open letters for Ron in Walter Block’s great series. Mr. Arias’s views are not mine, nor are they Ron’s, but—unlike Mr. Tancredo’s totalitarian tv ads or calls to nuke Muslim holy sites—they are worth taking seriously. And they demonstrate the big tent that is the Ron Paul Revolution. Need I add that Ron bears zero responsibility for the articles I publish on this independent site?

So to Lew Rockwell it is worth considering amnesty and the importation of tens of millions of people whose political inclinations are as far from libertarianism as it is possible to be. Are libertarians aware that their anti-statist ideology is virtually unheard of outside of the US? In fact most foreigners believe one of America’s biggest problems is lack of big government! Immigrants to the US have zero interest in anti-statism as they will be more likely than whites to depend on the state and thus will vote against libertarian candidates and policies at almost every opportunity. Given that libertarians like Rockwell cannot be ignorant of all this (or are they?) one has to wonder what it is that they actually wish to achieve in the long term.

Posted by TmG on December 20, 2007, 04:06 PM | #

UH-OH!!! Ron Paul and the others better fold-up their tents and go home.

The venerable Cynthia McKinney has just announced she’s running for President.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2508693105235438933

note: Cynthia was introduced by the lovely and gracious Lynne Stewart.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart

Posted by Desmond Joes on December 20, 2007, 04:16 PM | #

Given that libertarians like Rockwell cannot be ignorant of all this (or are they?) one has to wonder what it is that they actually wish to achieve in the long term.

More money.

Brimelow;

The stark fact is that current immigration policy lends itself to explanation in the crudest Marxist terms. Quite simply, it is a savage attack by the American rich on the American poor (and middle class), by American capitalists on the living standards of the American working class.

Posted by Matra on December 20, 2007, 05:20 PM | #

Money isn’t motivating the arch ideologues who could make more being apologists for mainstream parties or corporate welfare. Without giving it a great deal of thought I’m going to guess that their ideas are derived from a mishmash of traditional American anti-government activism, deracinated anti-social nihilism, and the desire of a certain over represented ethnic group (hmm?) within libertarianism to promote extreme individualism within the ethnically European majority culture.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 20, 2007, 05:33 PM | #

This actually sounds like a pretty goddamned good idea from Steve Edwards:

“The strongest imperative right now - for the sake of the world - is the destruction of the US government. It must be utterly wiped off the map, reduced to a smoking ruin, and the soil of Washington DC must be contaminated to the point of being uninhabitable for the next thousand years. [...]  I like to think of the appropriate word as ‘retaliation.’  If somebody attacks your person, steals your wealth, defiles your property, ruins the future of your own kin, I think there is a strong case for PAYBACK.  Not only must DC be incinerated, every existing history book, journal, newspaper and webpage should be forcibly censored and re-written, and every photograph re-touched, to erase the entire collective memory of such a place as Washington DC having ever existed. It will in fact be much worse than Carthage.”

I could go for that.

Posted by James Bowery on December 20, 2007, 05:41 PM | #

It would be much better to retain all those cultural artifacts for future anthropologists to study the nature of the human ecological disasters represented by phenomenon like 20th century US.  I think there is far less danger from such artifacts than there is from preserving small pox cultures.

Posted by Desmond Jones on December 20, 2007, 06:13 PM | #

Money isn’t motivating the arch ideologues who could make more being apologists for mainstream parties or corporate welfare. Without giving it a great deal of thought I’m going to guess that their ideas are derived from a mishmash of traditional American anti-government activism, deracinated anti-social nihilism, and the desire of a certain over represented ethnic group (hmm?) within libertarianism to promote extreme individualism within the ethnically European majority culture.

All of which works well as part of an effort to concentrate wealth into fewer hands. And it provides great advantages.

More members of this year’s freshman class at the University of Michigan have parents making at least $200,000 a year than have parents making less than the national median of about $53,000, according to a survey of Michigan students. At the most selective private universities across the country, more fathers of freshmen are doctors than are hourly workers, teachers, clergy members, farmers or members of the military—combined.

Experts say the change in the student population is a result of both steep tuition increases and the phenomenal efforts many wealthy parents put into preparing their children to apply to the best schools. It is easy to see here, where BMW 3-series sedans are everywhere and students pay up to $800 a month to live off campus, enough to rent an entire house in parts of Michigan.

They live longer,

...a British medical survey of civil servants called the Whitehall Study. All of the people in the study had access to universal medical care and none were impoverished. Still, there was a substantial difference between the life spans of junior and senior employees. Those who made more money, or who had attained higher rank, lived substantially longer.

And even Adam Smith noted they had more children…that survived.

Poverty, though it no doubt discourages, does not always prevent marriage. It seems even to be favourable to generation. A half-starved Highland woman frequently bears more than twenty children, while a pampered fine lady is often incapable of bearing any, and is generally exhausted by two or three. Barrenness, so frequent among women of fashion, is very rare among those of inferior station. Luxury in the fair sex, while it inflames perhaps the passion for enjoyment, seems always to weaken, and frequently to destroy altogether, the powers of generation.

But poverty, though it does not prevent the generation, is extremely unfavourable to the rearing of children. The tender plant is produced, but in so cold a soil, and so severe a climate, soon withers and dies. It is not uncommon, I have been frequently told, in the Highlands of Scotland for a mother who has borne twenty children not to have two alive.

Posted by Desmond Jones on December 20, 2007, 06:34 PM | #

PORTRAIT OF A (US) MILLIONAIRE:

I am a fifty-seven-year-old male, married with three children.

Average white in the US has 1.8 children?

Those designating “English” as their ethnic origin accounted for 21.1 percent of the millionaire population. People of English origin account for 10.3 percent of the United States household population in general. The Scottish ancestry group makes up only 1.7 percent of all households. But it accounts for 9.3 percent of the millionaire households in America. ...the German ancestry group, which accounts for nearly one in five households (19.5 percent) in this country. 17.3 percent of all millionaire households are headed by persons of German ancestry…

Those identifying as of Germans, Scots or English ancestry account for ~31.5% of the population but ~47.7% of those with assets over a million, not including their principle residence.

Posted by VLC on December 25, 2007, 02:40 AM | #

Scimitar:
“Dismantling government will do nothing more than further empower the out of control private oligarchs who are destroying this country.”

if they’re destroying anything they’re doing it through the federal government. Put them against hundreds of governments, state and cities, and they’ll have so many headaches they won’t be able to exert as much power as they do right now. But I’d like to know how corporations as such are destroying America. The case against the jewish media is clear but the case against say the biotech industry is another story. I mean who’s pushing for Ritalin for boys? The drug companies or the government’s school teachers and psychologists ? Or is it the drug companies through the government’s schools with the collaboration of the teachers and psychologists ?

Jews are opposed to states rights, local governance, national sovereignty, etc. because it’s easier for them to corrupt centralized power than to convince every locality or every school board that their programs should be implemented. It’s the same for big corporations

Scimitar:
“It would be more sensible to capture control of the government, expand its power, and then use it as a weapon against subversive elements.”

yeah great idea, I eagerly await your plan.

If we didn’t have big centralized governments to begin with they would not have been able to impose us their agenda as easily as they did. That’s a strong argument against big governments especially in times of cultural decadence. How many state anti-miscegenation laws were still there in the 1960s ? I’m pretty sure Alabama would still have it today if the federal government wasn’t there to force ‘integration’ at gunpoint.

In Switzerland nation-wide political changes are not easy to do because the divided government acts as a de facto conservative institution which limits the impact an election or a government can have. In France it’s the reverse everything is concentrated at the national level, almost nothing is local or regional and that country has one of the worst case of cultural and political gangrene in Europe so if you’re unfortunate enough to live in France these days you can’t escape the bad policies of the government, you can’t move to another province which could be less bad, you can’t move to a state where at least you would pay a lot less taxes to the central state, etc. You’re fcked. Switzerland has political dams, France hasn’t.

Think of the EU and how it concentrates power in Brussels to be able to erase sovereignty and impose its will on all Europeans. How could nationalist forces possibly take over the EU? Votes are already diluted at the national level in Europe so imagine trying to win supra-national elections.

If there was a chance of a military coup or an armed revolution I would be more inclined to be an idealist but as things are at the moment the best we can hope is to be able to withdraw ourselves from our ZOGs.

Steve wrote:

“That should be enough to raise suspicions regarding the libertarian movement - not only is it unable to defend a concrete society, it cannot even defend itself on its own terms. That is to say, libertarianism (or at least the manner in which it is understood by about 99% of people who identify themselves so) is simply a fast-track to the complete destruction of liberty.”

exactly. Libertarianism is a self-destructive ideology. It attracts white people with psychological weaknesses like some religious cult.

Posted by Matra on December 31, 2007, 03:09 AM | #

I wonder how the Hispanics and Arabs reading Lew Rockwell.com’s open letters to them will react to RP’s latest ad. “Justin” thinks it is disgraceful.

This is pandering to the worst, Tom Tancredo-esque paranoia and outright ignorance (or do I repeat myself?) and is not worthy of Dr. Paul…Thousands of students from the Middle East, North Africa, and the Muslim countries of Indonesia, Malaysia, and elsewhere come to this country and bring home with them the ideas of liberty, tolerance, and fair play that are the predominant themes of our culture.

So that’s what America’s all about - “ideas of liberty, tolerance, and fair play.” And here I thought it was an actual nation with its own interests, like, survival! You’ll notice some good responses belows JR’s emotional tirade (maybe he had a bad weekend at the clubs). But others sum up libertarianism:

Hatred and intolerance toward people you stigmatize as “illegal” who come from a predominantly different race/culture from the one you are so dearly trying to protect is to me a form of racism not too well disguised. This whole ad is disgusting.

I live in massachusets. if students from terrorist countries were not allowed to BU, MIT, Harvard and the like we would cease to exist

JR himself opines (2007-12-29 23:03:52) :

A total moratorium on student visas would have a huge economic impact, dry up a valuable source of foreign labor, and kill the computer industry. So much for free trade.

Ah, free trade. Something that really matters to the masses.

If RP airs this ad surely it will win him more votes than he will lose from offended libertarian ideologues.

Posted by Alex Zeka on December 31, 2007, 06:10 AM | #

re: JR’s invocation of free trade.

The whole point of the libertarian defence of free trade is that it allows us to benefit materially from mutually beneficial trades with the outside world, without necessarely having to associate with it. It’s known as freedom of association, and some people tell me it used to be quite important to the “libertarian” “movement”.

Posted by VLC on December 31, 2007, 06:13 PM | #

the ad is simply the video version of RP’s position as posted on the official website:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/132/sane-and-sensible-immigration-policies-after-september-11/

There were many fine German-Americans in the U.S. during World War II, but we certainly did not allow open immigration from Germany until hostilities had ceased and loyalties could be determined. While we generally should welcome people from around the world whenever possible, we cannot allow potential enemies or terrorists to enter the country now under any circumstances. Legislation I introduced in the fall [SOON AFTER 9/11] would restrict immigration, including the granting of heavily abused student visas, by individuals from nations listed as terrorist threats by the State department.

If we do not want to move in the direction of a police state at home, we must prevent terrorists from entering the country in the first place.

so Reamondo is kind of late to be disappointed by Paul position on student visas

Posted by VLC on December 31, 2007, 06:19 PM | #

Raimondo wrote:

...and bring home with them the ideas of liberty, tolerance, and fair play that are the predominant themes of our culture.

bullsht. The United States was an ethnocentric racist country from the beginning up to 50 years ago. It was a country for free white men, not a country for everyone who says “I’m en amewiqan”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_5XIOn68Hk

Posted by VLC on December 31, 2007, 06:36 PM | #

speaking of Gaimondo, here he is talking about his position on immigration:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j122002.html

I have long been an immigration restrictionist on the grounds that an influx of foreigners is bound to increase the power and weight of pressure groups that lobby for U.S. intervention on behalf of the “mother country.” Furthermore, I remain unconvinced that, in a free society, there wouldn’t be any restrictions on travel to and through private property. In such a society, all property would be private, by definition, and therefore the right to “free immigration” advocated by some libertarians is, at best, a misnomer, since no such “right” can be derived that is consistent with the idea of private property rights.

However, in this case, the U.S government is not treating all illegals alike. Some illegals (or former illegals), namely those of Mexican descent, are to be welcomed with open arms (i.e. government subsidies), thanks to the delusions of Republican strategists who believe they can convert “Hispanics” into another Republican constituency, like Cuban-Americans only more numerous. Other illegals are treated like – well, like Palestinians held captive in their own land.

and here’s a recent column of his in which he recommends the readers to check out the Camp of the Saints:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11246

On the narrower question of recruiting fresh bodies for our overseas military operations by offering citizenship – did you ever read The Camp of the Saints? It’s a novel about what happens when a massive flotilla of immigrants arrives on European shores, and some less extreme version of this scenario is easily imaginable in the context of our military recruiting efforts among the “undocumented.” It’s not inconceivable that U.S. military recruiters will soon be setting up shop overseas, bribing potential GIs with green cards and the promise of a bright future in America, where the streets are paved with gold. Every ambitious thug, every upwardly mobile Mexican mafia “enforcer,” every Russian skinhead with his eyes on the prize will flock to these recruiting centers, like ants to a honey pot left out in the yard. The world will soon be swarming with them: armed, unassimilated, and dangerous in more ways than one.

This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. Where, oh, where are our anti-open borders Republican members of Congress on this? They scream about the outrage of “amnesty,” as embodied in Bush’s proposed legislation, and yet they are silent on the biggest immigration loophole of them all.

Jean Raspail’s the Camp of the Saints describes where libertardianism and liberalism leads to

http://bloodyscott.blogspot.com/2007/12/camp-of-saints-by-jean-raspail.html

Raspail calls the work a novel: I would prefer to call it a parable. As a novel, it is flawed: the characterisation is rather weak and the dialogue often limp. Yet, as a parable, it is prescient and powerful: it is a thought experiment—How would the ‘multi-cultural’, morally relativist, Third-Worldist, left-liberal West react to a mass migration from the Third World?