Libertarians are being torn apart from within. Two groups are responsible for this: the libertines and the liberal bigots. ‘Liberal bigots’ is a phrase that I have stolen from Peter Hitchens and I am using it to describe a group within the libertarian movement who are more concerned about being politically correct than defending anybody’s right to discriminate. By libertines, I mean simply those who view libertarianism as a rebellion against tradition, hierarchy, morality and authority and who believe that the best way to achieve libertarianism and the libertarian ends of life, prosperity, cooperation and so on, is to live in communes, engage in ‘free love’, and at every opportunity attack conventional wisdom and morality.
By David Davis
Keir very kindly asked me to write something about how libertarians can ensure a future for liberty in a hostile world that’s right now populated by cultural Marxists and other Nazis. Ummm, I have broken Godwin’s Law already: oh well, there you go. I need specifically to talk about Nazis in the Anglosphere nations, which seem to be the places (and why?) most heavily populated by these repulsive smelly fellows. Wonder why? Read on. I almost forgot as I’m now sucked into pretending to work for a living. The trouble with being retired in today’s Britain is that you have to work so hard.
Geurt Marco de Wit is an historian, business executive, founder of the Finnish Libertarian League and a lecturer in the Austrian-anarchist-Rothbardian tradition. The topics discussed in the interview include Hoppe’s Grand System, paleolibertarianism, sociobiology, revisionist history and paleostrategy. Infographics referenced in the interview can be found here.
Libertarians, and especially anarchistic libertarians, are known for their principles and strong ideology. This has often been, but does not have to be, a double-edged sword in the fight for freedom.
To be a libertarian, one must embrace the Non-aggression Principle, or at least come to the same policy conclusions as one would based on the principle. Some libertarians say they don’t like the principle, and yet seem to have the libertarian position on any given political question.
By Eric Field
Hans-Hermann Hoppe is one of the most defining of contemporary libertarian thinkers. A graduate of the Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany and a former Marxist, Hoppe’s is best known for his rigorously logical examination of culture, human action, and the state. Hoppe has at times courted controversy for his belief that natural hierarchies are essential to human liberty. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with much of Hoppe’s statements, he has greatly improved the quality of libertarian discourse. So much so, that “Hoppean” has become a synonym for rigorously supported scholarly support for libertarianism.
I am perfectly aware of the risks of articulating what I am about to. The consensus among modern libertarians seems to be that free immigration is the only stance possible in this debate because of the ‘economic benefits’ and that those who oppose free immigration are just statists who want the government to control who can and can’t move about from here to there. For those swayed by the content of this article, I highly recommend that you look into other ‘paleolibertarian’ stances and you may find yourself agreeing me on more than just immigration. Finally, before I begin, I know that I have previously supported open borders and I fully retract any such support here and now.