4 replies »

1. The State of Arizona is anything but a local government and illegal immigration is a symptom, not the disease itself. But then again, I’m a 500th + generation brown American, where should my racial loyalties lie? I’m confused.

   Reply

2. “The State of Arizona is anything but a local government….”

   I agree. Here’s what I’ve written about this before:

   “On immigration, it is clear enough that the only viable solution is one of local sovereignty. Obviously, we should not wish to strengthen our great common enemy, the US federal government, by militarizing the borders and building a Berlin Wall along the Rio Grande. Instead, the Swiss model can be applied to immigration policy and individual communities can decide whether to be pro-immigrant “sanctuary” communities, anti-immigrant communities with the Minutemen stationed at the county line, or somewhere in between.”

   I’d probably be in the “somewhere in between” camp.

   “illegal immigration is a symptom, not the disease itself.”

   Agreed. Murray Rothbard used to say that a problem with the state is that it will go out and fuck something up, and then the fuck-ups cause serious problems, leading to calls for more statism as a corrective, leading to more fuck-ups.

   “But then again, I’m a 500th + generation brown American, where should my racial loyalties lie?”

   I often wonder if mine should be to the Celts, Saxons, Franks, or Cherokee.

   It looks like immigration is becoming the new version of what the abortion issue used to be. I remember the abortion wars of the 80s and 90s where it was impossible for people with different views to have a civil dialogue, and those with a moderate position were attacked by both sides. The abortion thing seems to be a little less intense nowadays. Most research I’ve seen shows that most Americans are still moderately pro-choice. But the pro-life side is gaining, particularly among younger people, but today’s pro-lifers are generally not as militant or extreme as past pro-lifers.

   Reply

3. I like your line of thought and I see how it can jive with the right if they can let go of the state. Can they, though? I suppose this is where we look to the National Anarchists to make inroads.

   Reply

4. The way to advance the anti-state cause among the Right is to make them aware of the fact that not only do their enemies control the present state in all of the Western countries, but that there is also no hope of reclaiming the state for themselves. That only leaves anarchism as their only way out. That’s why we’ve seen such a growing interest in anarchism and secession on the “far Right” in more recent times, with even old style German Hegelian classical liberals like Paul Gottfried or the 1920s-style racialists at TOQ almost being ready to come on board. Such sentiments need to spread into the more mainstream center-right, and they will eventually as the totalitarian humanist Left becomes more aggressive and the Right comes under more direct attacks.

   The entire spectrum of the center-right to far-right is a possible constituency for us down the road: Catholic traditionalists (like Buchanan or Jim Kalb), Protestant fundamentalists, gun owners, small property owners, conspiracists, hard money types, anti-tax groups, home schoolers, fans of some of the more radical talk radio types (like Alex Jones), white separatists (excluding the psychopaths), anti-immigrationists, alternative medicine, on down the line. More mainstream conservatives will be pushed towards the radical right with time as well. For instance, most of the writers at AltRight would have been part of mainstream conservatism when I was growing up in the 70s, but they’ve moved further away from the state and from the system as the state/system has moved further away from them.

   Reply