Family And God Vs. The Mentally Ill

Mises Institute President Jeff Deist took a bit of a shellacking this week from fake libertarians who  smeared him as a National Socialist over his use of the phrase “blood and soil” in a fantastic speech.

It seems the idea that cherishing your nation, people, and homeland naturally requires stuffing Jews in ovens.

The level of kvetching among those triggered was both hilarious and disturbing. Deep down, they know exactly what Deist meant and didn’t mean, but they don’t have the intellectual gusto to admit that they’re opposed to “bourgeouise” traditional values or religion. So they lied.

So they lied.

While Deist is warning libertarians not to overlook the role of family, God, nation, and heritage, concepts that appeal to the average American who might be interested in learning more about libertarianism, Cato Institute is peddling groaners like this in an effort to cater to the mentally ill and dengerate among the society.

Deist should take comfort in knowing that people will probably remember his speech as the one that saved libertarianism from irrelevance over the coming decades, while Cato’s agenda will serve as nothing but cannon fodder for shitlord memes.

Posted in cultural marxism, Culture, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Gospel Message of Fake America.

This exchange the other between White House Press Secretary Stephen Miller and CNN-hack Jim Acosta demonstrates everything that’s wrong with American politics today. Rather than be an advocate for the American people, #FakeNews is a shill for what Chateau Heartiste calls the globohomo elites interested in turning America into the world’s sex slave that anybody can come inside when they want.

The argument Acosta makes is so profoundly stupid that I’m rather impressed with Miller’s restraint. Had I been in his place, I would have chewed the bastard out for wasting my time with such BS, dressed him down for interrupting me, then had him physically removed from the room.

Bear in mind these are the same people who spit on the Bill of Rights and have supported the destruction of the U.S. Constitution and its restraints on the federal government. And now they’re actively promoting soft-genocide against the ethnic group responsible for documents in the first place.

Somehow, the First Amendment doesn’t protect “hate speech” and the Second Amendment only applies to militia, and all other rights are subject to the interpretation of the modern-day ephors that sit on the Supreme Court. Our Constitution is a “living, breathing” document that changes with the times.

However, a poem (or the only section of it anybody actually knows) written by a Fake American on a statue given to us by a foreigner somehow constitutes sacred American law that cannot be questioned and must be interpreted literally – and if you don’t agree, you’re Literally Hitler.

What other poems are suddenly constitutionally-binding? Mark Twain’s War Prayer? Is Edgar Allen Poe now a lawmaker, too? What Robert Frost poem can we use in a courtroom?

The Statue Of Liberty Poem is the Gospel Message of Fake America.

Courtesy of Vox Day’s Daily Meme War:



Posted in Immigration, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

An Open Meme To Steve Horwitz



Blood and Soil Libertarians.

P.S. You’re a Fake American, and you have to go back.

Posted in meme war, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

The Myth of Legislating Prosperity

A persistent myth one encounters among leftists is that government action via legislation leads to prosperity. In fact, I would argue this is the defining characteristic of a leftist, albeit to some extent many among the Alt-Right; government is the source of wealth and economic development. The private sector is a necessary evil at best through which the state can create it, but it must be restricted, controlled, and regulated like a wild animal.

Examples abound. As they would have you believe it, minimum wages raise a worker’s economic status, the 40-hour work week and the end of child labor was made possible only by mandate. Without these laws on the books, we’re supposed to assume, tomorrow everyone would be paid pennies and have five-year-old children slaving away in apple fields.

All of this completely and totally ignores the actual reason why employees have 40-hour work weeks and why kids attend school today rather than work in sweatshops. Technological advances increased the productivity of workers and/or the value of a product to the point where they didn’t need to work more than 40-hour work weeks to put food on the table, nor did children have to work in tactile factories in order to help feed their families. The wealth generated by the adults, typically the father, was now sufficient.

If passing laws and regulations are what makes countries improve economically, why does the United States send billions overseas in foreign aid to Third World nations? Why do they not simply pass the same laws that we’ve had on the books for decades?

This video from Learn Liberty explains how a man’s invention of the containership drastically reduced the cost of shipping cargo around the world. All of this was accomplished through one man’s cleverness, not by a bill or regulation.

Ironically, those opposed to these positive changes to global trade were politicians and organized labor.

Years ago, Jeffery Tucker correctly identified modern progressives to be regressive technologically and economically; they don’t want to raise people’s standards of living. They don’t actually want progress to occur. Quite the opposite; they want everyone to return to “former, simpler” times, which translates into ordinary people living in squalor while a few, chosen elite get to enjoy all the benefits of a system they deny to all others.

That may sound cynical and pessimistic, but how many times must a system fail before people recognize its inherent failure? You either acknowledge your preferred policy doesn’t work and try something else, or you have ulterior reasons for pushing it apart from the “official” justification.

Posted in economics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Blood and Soil Libertarianism

This week, Mises Institute President Jeff Deist gave what is probably the most important libertarian speech made in the past decade (bold emphasis added):

…libertarians have a bad tendency to fall into utopianism, into portraying liberty as something new age and evolved. In this sense they can sound a lot like progressives: liberty will work when human finally shed their stubborn old ideas about family and tribe, become purely rational freethinkers (always the opposite), reject the mythology of religion and faith, and give up their outdated ethnic or nationalist or cultural alliances for the new hyper-individualist creed. We need people to drop their old-fashioned sexual hangups and bourgeois values, except for materialism. Because above all the archetypical libertarian is presented as an almost soulless economic actor, someone who will drop everything and move to Singapore tomorrow to make $20,000 more in the gig economy.

…It scarcely needs to be said that family has always been the first line of defense against the state, and the most important source of primary loyalty — or divided loyalty, from the perspective of politicians. Our connection with ancestors, and our concern for progeny, forms a story in which the state is not the main character. Family forms our earliest and hence most formative environment — and at least as an ideal, family provides both material and emotional support. Happy families actually exist.

But government wants us atomized, lonely, broke, vulnerable, dependent, and disconnected. So of course it attempts to break down families by taking kids away from them as early as possible, indoctrinating them in state schools, using welfare as a wedge, using the tax code as a wedge, discouraging marriage and large families, in fact discouraging any kind of intimacy that is not subject to public scrutiny, encouraging divorce, etc. etc.

This may all sound like right-wing talking points, but it doesn’t make it untrue.

Religion forms another important line of defense against the state. In fact the whole history of man cannot be understood without understanding the role of religion. Even today healthy percentages of people in the West believe in God, regardless of their actual religious observance. And believing in a deity by itself challenges the state’s omniscience and status. Again, religion stands as a potential rival for the individual’s allegiance — And it has a pesky tendency to resurface no matter how much authoritarian governments try to suppress it.

Mecca is not Paris, an Irishman is not an Aboriginal, a Buddhist is not a Rastafarian, a soccer mom is not a Russian. Is it our goal to convince them all to become thorough Rothbardians?

….In other words, blood and soil and God and nation still matter to people. Libertarians ignore this at the risk of irrelevance.

I highly recommend you read or listen to the entire speech. Libertarians everywhere would be wise to heed Deist’s counsel. He clearly understands that unless libertarians acknowledge these realities, they will be irrelevant in an age of renewed nationalism and decentralization.

Further, the myth of a “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” libertarianism is dead. A true libertarian society would be both fiscally and socially conservative. Libertinism is sustainable only by forcing a healthy, productive sector of a community to subsidize the behaviors of a few social parasites.

Blood and soil, God and nation – these are things that people value most, not cheap, imported goods or fast Internet connections and casual sex after a puff of weed. Any libertarian policy that ignores or rejects this truth is both flawed and useless to solving the very problems libertarianism claims to address.

Posted in Culture, nationalism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Trumping The Trannies


* I shouldn’t even have to say this, but for all you out there who require it, this poem is facetious.

Hail our God Emperor
There is none like him
He takes his most hated foe
Those how scream “not my president!”
Labeling him a racist bigot
He causes them to demand the chance
To kill and die at his command
In foreigner adventures overseas
The reasons matter not
For why they kill strangers
Save that the God Emperor wills it.

Posted in military, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

No Imagination

You’ve got no imagination. You couldn’t even decide what to do with all that money, so you had to buy what everybody else wanted. – Charlie Croker, The Italian Job

Update: A reader with an imagination writes: Would we even needs cars?

Critiques of libertarianism are often marked by a profound lack of imagination on the part of the critic. To have an entity other than the state perform basic services is simply inconceivable for them (or perhaps simply not preferred or desired?)

Private businesses create innovative and cutting-edge technology on a continual basis, and have throughout history, yet one of the most cliché throwaway snarks among libertarian critics is “Who will build the roads?” It’s as if the idea of pouring concrete and asphalt with painted lines on the ground is beyond the capacities of industries that build skyscrapers and modern office buildings.

But a part of that rejoinder implicitly stated is “how will people pay for roads?”


Again, we need only look at the private sector to see how it is actually done. A vivid imagination is not required. Shopping centers are privately-owned, yet no one pays for admission, and rarely for parking, the way they do for an amusement park.

You can enter a Cabelas and spend all day there with your kids enjoying the free entertaining diversions they make available, but no one demands that you buy anything.

And, of course, we have social media that is totally free – because the user is the product, not the customer.

This isn’t to say that healthy skepticism of libertarian claims is not warranted.  Indeed, it is only through intense ridicule and attacks that libertarians refine and hone their arguments, develop better theories, and create more realistic scenarios of how society would operate in the absence of the state.

I’ll note that many libertarian solutions are practical and workable, but frankly not realistic due to constraints caused by people’s lack of imagination.

A profound lack of imagination, and not the actual proposal itself, is what makes much of libertarianism theoretically sound but untenable.

It would seem, then, that the biggest challenge libertarians face is reawakening people’s ability and desire to dream of what is possible beyond the state.

Posted in libertarianism, stateless society, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments