Murray Rothbard Was A Racialist And A Nationalist

I see nothing "nationalist" in any of this ... :confused::confused::confused:

It is quite clearly "separationist" and "secessionist." How is that "nationalist?"

And as for it being "racialist" ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

(I mean, damn - he even criticizes immigration restriction, such policy being one of the shibboleths of "racialists" ...)

You see nothing nationalist in proposing national separation along racial lines? Can you not read the words on the screen?
 
Where's the quote for that? I don't agree that this was his viewpoint. That is your own racial absurdity.

But Rothbard did express his racial nationalism in the 80s and 90s. There are many ideological factors that played in to this: Roman Cathloicism, Reconstructionism, racial collectivism, nationalism, etc. Only a keen observer would understand how these ideological currents feed in to their worldview.

My own racial absurdity? Liberty isn't exclusive to whites, but most libertarians are white. I suspect that this trend is related to cultural foundations and family stability.

U-25fX4Xx1Y2KpUSSwBT8kvryVApWfccFyafIDbg-ef_0CfwEcEvsWOcihrLuSQ1cYuoV7gWE1l7pmj5VLOT8N7YMRvv1mDEeyJORDePWfNKoh3e_fpKDyRO8Jzg0nsOEYdWL46A


Rothbard actually outlined when he started to change his mind. He cited the cultural disconnect when discussing the exodus from Russia.

I began to rethink my views on immigration when, as the Soviet Union collapsed, it became clear that ethnic Russians had been encouraged to flood into Estonia and Latvia in order to destroy the cultures and languages of these peoples.
 
Last edited:
My own racial absurdity? Liberty isn't exclusive to whites, but most libertarians are white.

U-25fX4Xx1Y2KpUSSwBT8kvryVApWfccFyafIDbg-ef_0CfwEcEvsWOcihrLuSQ1cYuoV7gWE1l7pmj5VLOT8N7YMRvv1mDEeyJORDePWfNKoh3e_fpKDyRO8Jzg0nsOEYdWL46A


Rothbard actually outlined when he started to change his mind. He cited the cultural disconnect.

Right, so you just regurgitate Murray Rothbards deviations from liberty. Great. There are several more. For as good as Rothbard was in economics, he was horrible in political science. His idea was to join with the southern racists as a political strategy for libertarianism. What a complete joke that is. History will show what a failure that is. Libertarianism is not collectivistic.
 
You see nothing nationalist in proposing national separation along racial lines? Can you not read the words on the screen?

Yes, I can read them just fine.

There is NO proposal for secessionism along racial lines in any of this:

Murray Rothbard Was A Racialist And A Nationalist

Beyond a small quantity, national heterogeneity simply does not work; the “nation” disintegrates into more than one nation, and the need for separation becomes acute.
We are now probably a lot more than two nations, and we had better start giving serious thought to national separation. To those who think that the main problem is restricting the number and types of immigration, the best answer is that such a policy is decades too late. We are already far more than one nation within the borders of the U.S.A., let alone worry about the immigrants. To greet the very raising of such questions with the mindless cry of “racism’ or “chauvinism" misses the entire point.

We might not be able any longer to bring back the Old Republic across the entire land area of the 50 states. But we may be able to bring it back in a substantial part of that land area. We must dare to think the unthinkable.
-Murray Rothbard
http://www.amren.com/ar/1994/06/

[Rothbard] said there should be national separation along racial lines. Read the quotes again.

No he didn't. He said that raising the issue of separationism (i.e., secessionism) would be greeted with the "mindless cry" of "racism." He did not otherwise make any reference to "racism" or "racialism" (whatever that distinction is supposed to mean).

And he was exactly, 100% correct. It is indeed greeted with such cries - just as you are greeting it here, in the form of an accusation of "racialism."
 
Right, so you just regurgitate Murray Rothbards deviations from liberty. Great. There are several more. For as good as Rothbard was in economics, he was horrible in political science. His idea was to join with the southern racists as a political strategy for libertarianism. What a complete joke that is. History will show what a failure that it. Libertarianism is not collectivistic.

Libertarianism is not collectivisitic, but must take a defensive posture at times to protect itself. Hoppe reinforces this belief as well. Hostile numbers are a threat to any libertarian society.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I can read them just fine.

There is NO proposal for secessionism along racial lines in any of this:





No he didn't. He said that raising the issue of separationism (i.e., secessionism) would be greeted with the "mindless cry" of "racism." He did not otherwise make any reference to "racism" or "racialism" (whatever that distinction is supposed to mean).

And he was exactly, 100% correct. It is indeed greeted with such cries - just as you are greeting it here, in the form of an accusation of "racialism."

OB,

What do the first 2 sentences say in the second quote?
 
Right, so you just regurgitate Murray Rothbards deviations from liberty. Great. There are several more. For as good as Rothbard was in economics, he was horrible in political science. His idea was to join with the southern racists as a political strategy for libertarianism. What a complete joke that is. History will show what a failure that is. Libertarianism is not collectivistic.

I respect your opinion, But I disagree. I've already voiced my concerns with white nationalism.
 
Last edited:
Libertarianism is not collectivisitic, but must take a defensive posture at times to protect itself. Hoppe reinforces this belief as well. Hostile numbers are a threat to any libertarian society.

Yep. Hoppe, Block, Rockwell, North, all the culture warrior Roman Catholics and Reconstructionists, all of them. Now I know why Ron and Rand distanced themselves from these idiots.
 
OB,

What do the first 2 sentences say in the second quote?

First sentence:
We are now probably a lot more than two nations, and we had better start giving serious thought to national separation.

IOW: "The USA is too big for a single nation, so let's think about secession."

Second sentence:
To those who think that the main problem is restricting the number and types of immigration, the best answer is that such a policy is decades too late.

IOW: "Some people think that the problem of the USA being too big [referenced in the first sentence] can be addressed by a policy of imposing restrictions on immigration, but it is too late for that."

Again, I ask: Where in any of this does Rothbard call for separationism "along racial lines" ... ???
 
More on Rothbard and David Duke:

http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter
The most detailed description of the strategy came in an essay Rothbard wrote for the January 1992Rothbard-Rockwell Report, titled "Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement." Lamenting that mainstream intellectuals and opinion leaders were too invested in the status quo to be brought around to a libertarian view, Rothbard pointed to David Duke and Joseph McCarthy as models for an "Outreach to the Rednecks," which would fashion a broad libertarian/paleoconservative coalition by targeting the disaffected working and middle classes. (Duke, a former Klansman, was discussed in strikingly similar terms in a*1990*Ron Paul Political Report.) These groups could be mobilized to oppose an expansive state, Rothbard posited, by exposing an "unholy alliance of 'corporate liberal' Big Business and media elites, who, through big government, have privileged and caused to rise up a parasitic Underclass, who, among them all, are looting and oppressing the bulk of the middle and working classes in America."

Anyone with doubts about the composition of the "parasitic Underclass" could look to the regular "PC Watch" feature of the*Report, in which Rockwell compiled tale after tale of thuggish black men terrifying petite white and Asian women. (Think*Birth of a Nation*crossed with*News of the Weird.) The list of PC outrages in the February 1993 issue, for example, cited a*Washington Post*column on films that feature "plenty of interracial sex, and nobody noticing," a news article about black members of the Southern Methodist University marching band "engaged in mass shoplifting while in Japan," and a sob story about a Korean shop-owner who shot a black shoplifter and assailant in the head: The travesty is that Mrs. Du got five years probation, and must cancel a trip to Korea.

The populist outreach program centered on tax reduction, abolition of welfare, elimination of "the entire 'civil rights' structure, which tramples on the property rights of every American," and a police crackdown on "street criminals." "Cops must be unleashed," Rothbard wrote, "and allowed to administer instant punishment, subject of course to liability when they are in error." While they're at it, they should "clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares?" To seal the deal with social conservatives, Rothbard urged a federalist compromise in their direction on "pornography, prostitution, or abortion." And because grassroots organizing is "plodding and boring," this new paleo coalition would need to be kick-started by "high-level, preferably presidential, political campaigns."
 
See, I have no problem with people wishing to associate along ethnic or cultural lines with people of their own kind.

In fact, I think it is good thing, I think it tends to reduce strife and tension, especially when forced to otherwise by government mandate.

Obviously some people have a problem with that...not quite sure why though.
 
I love that David Duke was still irrelevant in the Louisiana jungle primary this year with over a dozen candidates.
 
Yep. Hoppe, Block, Rockwell, North, all the culture warrior Roman Catholics and Reconstructionists, all of them. Now I know why Ron and Rand distanced themselves from these idiots.
this is false. most of those people went to Ron's barbecue, and Block still tells recent stories about Ron. he hasn't distanced himself.
 
See, I have no problem with people wishing to associate along ethnic or cultural lines with people of their own kind.

In fact, I think it is good thing, I think it tends to reduce strife and tension, especially when forced to otherwise by government mandate.

Obviously some people have a problem with that...not quite sure why though.

Freedom of association is a libertarian stance. 'Why' someone chooses associations is no ones' goddamn business.
 
Oh for crying out loud. This crap was leveled at Reagan, Ron Paul and anyone the the SJWs could not take head on in a debate. That worked in the last 30 years. Thank God it seems to have finally come to an end!
 
Back
Top