Why Neutrality Is Impossible

Jeffrey Tucker recently wrote what was a surprisingly thoughtful, nuanced piece on how Fight Club foreshadowed much of the Alt. Right and the circumstances that gave rise to it. It gives me hope that eventually he will acknowledge that the movement is a reaction – regardless of one’s thoughts on its merits – to legitimate grievances. Therefore, those grievances must be addressed if the problems he sees with the Alt. Right are to be resolved. They did not appear without context.

If libertarians can do this, then they regain relevance in the discussion.

However, Tucker’s piece ends with a flawed conclusion regarding the fighting between the Alt. Right groups and antifas. He advocates for a nonintervention policy, but this assumes that only those who want to be a part of Fight Club participate.

What happens when nonparticipants are targeted for violence?

This is why the attempted legal extortion of Richard Spencer’s mother should alarm all. If they can go after innocent relatives of political activists, then they can go after anyone for any reason. They will target brothers, sisters, spouses, and grandparents. Or, they will go after friends of friends.

It proves my point that no one is truly apolitical; you may not want to get involved in politics, but sooner or later politics get involved in you. Neutrality is impossible when your participation either way is required by one or more parties.

This entry was posted in civil war, cultural marxism, libertarianism, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s