Vox Day was gracious enough to respond to my analysis of his 16 Points of the Alt. Right. I’m pleased to see the conversation moving forward, because I think it is important for us to know where exactly we disagree and where we see eye to eye. I don’t mind a chasm between libertarianism and the Alt. Right, but I insist that our disagreements be accurately conveyed. And the more I read and listen to those on the Alt. Right, the more I find commonalities rather than irreconcilable differences.
VD made a very profound observation we libertarians should consider well:
The core conflict between libertarianism and the Alt-Right is that the Alt-Right is perfectly willing to crush individual liberties if that is necessary to preserve Western civilization and the European nations. And that is something that libertarians are going to have to accept if they are going to remain intellectually relevant in any way, because for all that the nation-state is a necessary evil, it is to be vastly preferred to the multinational state or the global state.
And those are the three options on offer at present.
I expect most libertarians to eventually gravitate to the Alt-Right, simply because the latter is both viable and coherent, while the former is not. I hope you will note that I don’t say that with contempt, but rather, with regret.
I have reached a similar conclusion, with similar regret. However painful this conversation may be for libertarians to have, it’s something that needs to happen. History makes it clear that life choices during times such as these are not simple.
Robert E. Lee fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War despite being anti-secession and anti-slavery, because the alternative was either participating in or passively tolerating the military invasion of his home state, neither of which were morally acceptable options for him.
I have no doubt that libertarians will face a similarly vexing situation in the near future, but the current mindset I see is the equivalent to thinking the North wouldn’t have invaded and slavery would have ended if Robert E. Lee had just stayed home.
Such thinking is how we become irrelevant to those facing the same moral conundrum.
To libertarians horrified at Vox Day’s observations, I would only ask what our actual, real life choices are. To do nothing or to simply discuss these things within the safe confines of social media means we allow men of action to determine our fates.
As Aragon said in The Two Towers: open war is upon you, whether you would risk it or not. So what are we going to do?
Never forget who the enemy is, and that is neo-Babel globalism in which all differences between all forms of identity are erased through the same brutal measures as every totalitarian regime in history has used to enforce their decrees. Men who are willing to fight for the West against this foe deserve support when attacked, not nitpicking or critiquing by people who won’t fight themselves.
A great flaw among libertarian thinking is that we are in total control over the circumstances in which our choices are made. This is the product of too much hypothetical, theoretical thinking. If we don’t like the options before us, we make amendments to the hypothetical until it offers a clear, morally umambigous path without forcing us to compromise our values.
There is not, and never was, a purely libertarian solution to what we face. Sadly, times of great crisis are when nuance and subtleties we strive for are least desired or appreciated.
The best hope for the future of libertarian is to act like Aristotle to whatever Alexander the Great happens to take over by curbing their rashness and tempering their harsh political policies whenever possible.