Wow. The nimrods who complain about the so-called nuttery and racism of the LewRockwell site, should see this. This would make the Lew Rockwell site look good. I've never liked the overtones of the VDare site.The obsession in this piece with these "cultural"/race issues, even if it isn't motivated by racism, it sure smacks of it anyway. Maybe the writers over at this site aren't truly motivated by racism and bigotry for all I know. To be fair, one should of course be open to explore and discuss any and all issues without there being any sacred cows and calling names, but sometimes the manner in which some people talk about certain pet issues that they're really hung up on, sure does raise some red flags and cause suspicion to say the least.I'm just so sick of people of all stripes bickering between each other and splintering each other into groups as we create schisms even when we're fighting for the same fundamental goals and there is so much of it on digg as you really do get quite a cross section of humanity on digg. Maybe we should think about abolishing the idea of governments and government created artificial borders which leads to this irrational nationalism. An anarcho-capitalist voluntary world would be the best way to deal with people who cant get along with each other and don't want to live amongst each other. Having these government borders though just encourages this divisiveness.There was quite an emphasis on immigration in this piece and of course quibbling about the "illegal" variety which is just legalese. I'm not concerned at all about immigration anymore. As far as I'm concerned, the native born Americans are themselves doing a pretty fine job at sending us to hell with their voting and support of big government. Don't blame the immigrants for that. Then there were other references to things like supposed relevancies with regards to differences in intelligence in races and the beating of Rodney King among other things mentioned in that article. Why such a focus on keeping the U.S. "white" and "Anglo-Saxon"? What relevancy and motivation would a person have for such things unless they possibly have a racist, separatist mindset, pitting people into groups, which is so collectivist?Well, maybe given what this article cited, perhaps Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell evolved and matured in their thinking, at least I hope so. I agree these people should be free to bring up these issues without being brow beaten about it, but the overall tone of what they're saying, makes me suspicious of their motives.The human race is a disgrace. We really need to evolve to a point where we can live in a free, voluntary world and won't feel an instinctive need to form authoritarian groups that try to take over and control others outside of that formed group that becomes a state. We need to be more individualistic and less collectivist in our thinking and be more peaceful and non-aggressive. A higher intelligent, far advanced, evolved alien species looking down upon us would think we're such primitive, violent life forms.
Why the focus on diversity and multiculturalism in the msm? Why are minority groups told to be proud of and celebrate their ethno-tribal traditions? Why are we told that diversity is desirable? Are we to assume that something is wrong with a primarily white, primarily european culture and traditions? can be because they hate the white western culture and in their quest for global hegemony are bent on destroying western nationality, religion, values, and civilization?
Where were there praises for the likes of Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore and what were they praising them for? I'd like to see some examples of this. LewRockwell.com and Mises.org criticize the neocons quite a bit.
Interesting article. I have also noticed Reason's Jewish authors taking shots at anyone critical of Israel, Likud, or the IDF's actions, regardless of how disrespecting those are of the central libertarian notions of individual rights and dignity when it comes to the Palestinians and Americans who suffer under the might and influence. Even if LRC and AWC have, at times, provided a stage for European-American bashing and anti-American sentiments, it's important to note that LRC is openly anti-state, and to some extent, the establishment (including the rapidly-diminishing percentage that identifies as being 'white') is xenophobic, classist and tribalist. Since the establishment tends to have a lot pull when the interests of the state are being defined, it makes a certain amount of sense from LRC's viewpoint to identify the establishment with the state and its excess when its trying to reach out to the lower class, whose ranks are currently swelling with Mestizo illegal immigrants. (Not defending that viewpoint, just saying that it's not necessary incongruent for LRC to identify with the lower class instead of the state.)Anyway, libertarianism is inherently anti-racism (no one's individual rights can be more important or superior to anyone else's). Therefore, all libertarian publications, in order to maintain integrity, ought not to purchase into the notion that one race is inherently better than another. To the extent that 'race realism' means 'racism,' libertarian pubs are right to criticize. To the extent that 'race realism' means 'lets save our society before it devolves into a Marxist morass of competing ethnic groups, most of which are openly hateful of European Americans, libertarians are wrong to criticize.
jdenigmaMay 20, 2008
Wow. The nimrods who complain about the so-called nuttery and racism of the LewRockwell site, should see this. This would make the Lew Rockwell site look good. I've never liked the overtones of the VDare site.The obsession in this piece with these "cultural"/race issues, even if it isn't motivated by racism, it sure smacks of it anyway. Maybe the writers over at this site aren't truly motivated by racism and bigotry for all I know. To be fair, one should of course be open to explore and discuss any and all issues without there being any sacred cows and calling names, but sometimes the manner in which some people talk about certain pet issues that they're really hung up on, sure does raise some red flags and cause suspicion to say the least.I'm just so sick of people of all stripes bickering between each other and splintering each other into groups as we create schisms even when we're fighting for the same fundamental goals and there is so much of it on digg as you really do get quite a cross section of humanity on digg. Maybe we should think about abolishing the idea of governments and government created artificial borders which leads to this irrational nationalism. An anarcho-capitalist voluntary world would be the best way to deal with people who cant get along with each other and don't want to live amongst each other. Having these government borders though just encourages this divisiveness.There was quite an emphasis on immigration in this piece and of course quibbling about the "illegal" variety which is just legalese. I'm not concerned at all about immigration anymore. As far as I'm concerned, the native born Americans are themselves doing a pretty fine job at sending us to hell with their voting and support of big government. Don't blame the immigrants for that. Then there were other references to things like supposed relevancies with regards to differences in intelligence in races and the beating of Rodney King among other things mentioned in that article. Why such a focus on keeping the U.S. "white" and "Anglo-Saxon"? What relevancy and motivation would a person have for such things unless they possibly have a racist, separatist mindset, pitting people into groups, which is so collectivist?Well, maybe given what this article cited, perhaps Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell evolved and matured in their thinking, at least I hope so. I agree these people should be free to bring up these issues without being brow beaten about it, but the overall tone of what they're saying, makes me suspicious of their motives.The human race is a disgrace. We really need to evolve to a point where we can live in a free, voluntary world and won't feel an instinctive need to form authoritarian groups that try to take over and control others outside of that formed group that becomes a state. We need to be more individualistic and less collectivist in our thinking and be more peaceful and non-aggressive. A higher intelligent, far advanced, evolved alien species looking down upon us would think we're such primitive, violent life forms.
Closed AccountMay 20, 2008
Maybe this article will light a match under Lew's backside! We can only hope.
Closed AccountMay 20, 2008
Why the focus on diversity and multiculturalism in the msm? Why are minority groups told to be proud of and celebrate their ethno-tribal traditions? Why are we told that diversity is desirable? Are we to assume that something is wrong with a primarily white, primarily european culture and traditions? can be because they hate the white western culture and in their quest for global hegemony are bent on destroying western nationality, religion, values, and civilization?
jdenigmaMay 20, 2008
Where were there praises for the likes of Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore and what were they praising them for? I'd like to see some examples of this. LewRockwell.com and Mises.org criticize the neocons quite a bit.
Closed AccountMay 23, 2008
Interesting article. I have also noticed Reason's Jewish authors taking shots at anyone critical of Israel, Likud, or the IDF's actions, regardless of how disrespecting those are of the central libertarian notions of individual rights and dignity when it comes to the Palestinians and Americans who suffer under the might and influence. Even if LRC and AWC have, at times, provided a stage for European-American bashing and anti-American sentiments, it's important to note that LRC is openly anti-state, and to some extent, the establishment (including the rapidly-diminishing percentage that identifies as being 'white') is xenophobic, classist and tribalist. Since the establishment tends to have a lot pull when the interests of the state are being defined, it makes a certain amount of sense from LRC's viewpoint to identify the establishment with the state and its excess when its trying to reach out to the lower class, whose ranks are currently swelling with Mestizo illegal immigrants. (Not defending that viewpoint, just saying that it's not necessary incongruent for LRC to identify with the lower class instead of the state.)Anyway, libertarianism is inherently anti-racism (no one's individual rights can be more important or superior to anyone else's). Therefore, all libertarian publications, in order to maintain integrity, ought not to purchase into the notion that one race is inherently better than another. To the extent that 'race realism' means 'racism,' libertarian pubs are right to criticize. To the extent that 'race realism' means 'lets save our society before it devolves into a Marxist morass of competing ethnic groups, most of which are openly hateful of European Americans, libertarians are wrong to criticize.