An oldy-but-goody from Dylan Waco at the Left Conservative.
Fresh off the heels of my post about the generational gap within the paleo movement on matters of race, comes the latest race obsessed nonsense from the folks at VDare. This time the issue is the alleged sellout of paleolibertarianism, by lewrockwell.com and the Murray Rothbard inspired, free market fundamentalists associated with the Austrian School of economics. While I am not a partisan of the Rothbardians, it does strike me that they are the saner of the two groupings, and they certainly have their priorities in order. They also understand tactical alliances, something that flies right over the head of the VDare crowd all to often.
Generally speaking I am a fan of the VDare website, particularly its focused work on immigration. While I don’t consider myself a restrictionist, I do think immigration is one of the major problems facing the nation, and lefties who pretend that the tide of illegals sweeping onto our shores is not an issue worthy of thought ought to quit pretending they care about things like the environment, urban sprawl, fair wages, or the autocratic status of the third world hellholes these folks are fleeing from. That said, VDare’s obsession with what it calls the “National Question”, is for the most part ideologically driven nonsense, and postings like the one offered up by “Arthur Pendleton” (most likely a pseudonym) do nothing to advance the cause of decentralized government, personal liberty, or community empowerment.
The bulk of the material offered as proof of a paleolibertarian surrender to pc platitudes revolves around two primary issues, writings posted by Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com fame, and some things that were printed and later removed from the lewrockwell.com website. Hilariously the second charge is leveled by a writer who almost assuredly is writing under an assumed name, a tactic commonly used at VDare. Who is hiding what and for what purpose?
The first charge is theoretically more serious, especially since the implication is that Raimondo has “flip-flopped” on issues regarding race in order to form a tactical alliance with post-9/11 anti-imperalists leftists. There are several problems with this argument, but perhaps the largest is the fact that one of the key pieces of evidence linked by “Mr. Pendleton” is a piece Raimondo wrote almost a year BEFORE Sept. 11th.
Another problem is the method used by “Pendleton”. “Pendleton” seems to believe that by quoting the deceased Murray Rothbard on issues relating to crime, immigration, ethnicity, et. he can trap Raimondo in inconsistency or politically correct pandering. The problem is that this ignores the core arguments behind Rothbard’s statements, not to mention Rothbard’s own record as a writer pertaining to the very matters Raimondo is accused of being soft on.
To take one example, this quote regarding the Jeremiah Wright fiasco is used to indict Mr. Raimondo:
Of course, Wright’s contention that “no black man will ever be considered for president” is refuted by the very fact of Obama’s front-runner status. Perhaps only Hillary Clinton—who recently offered Obama the vice presidency, in spite of the fact that he’s ahead of her by every measure—and a few yahoos out in the sticks are stuck in this old mindset. As for the rest, it’s undeniably true. We do have more black men in prison than in college—way more. Racism is alive and well; driving while black is still a dangerous pastime. This country was founded with a near-fatal flaw in the constitutional order, one that permitted slavery to continue for another hundred years.”
There may be an argument worth having about WHY there is a higher rate of black crime, or why blacks are pulled over in disproportionate numbers, but is “Mr. Pendleton” seriously arguing that Raimondo is off the mark? The statistics don’t lie on this one, and though Murray may have given a favorable review to the Bell Curve, he also endorsed the communatarian spirit of the Black Panthers and in his recently published book The Betrayal of The American Right Rothbard argued that the spirit of the “Old Right” was directly linked to abolitionists of the William Lloyd Garrison variety.
Frankly, “Mr. Pendleton” either hasn’t read much Rothbard, or is only interested in Rothbard and the paleolibertarians as a tool to further a narrow white nationalist agenda, that offers little in the way of solutions to complex questions it has no problems raising.
As I have said before, “race realist” paleocons ought to ask themselves some serious questions, not the least of which is “what if we are right?”. If it is true that multicultural societies don’t work (their strongest argument in my opinion), that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites, and that ethnicity matters as much or more than anything else, what sort of program is the best for their cause? Demented fantasies about recolonization and paternalist statism aside (the Charles Murray preferred approach I might add), the best option appears to be culture and community secession, for autonomous groups of all ethnic makeups, mixed or otherwise. Strangely (or not so strangely if you ask me), this is the exact same proposal called for by the Rothbardians, whether “Left-libertarian”, “paleolibertarian” or unaffiliated. This has also been the argument of a variety of black nationalists and localists from Fredrick Douglas to Booker T. Washington to Robert Williams to Amiri Baraka to the NOI to the Five Percenters to the..well, you can see the trend.
Again, it is time from the white nationalists and race mongering paleos to get serious. Instead of bitching about Raimondo’s tactical alliance with leftists, they ought to examine why prominent writers from their movement have had no problem writing for the Israeli-First, neocon lunatics at FrontPageMagazine. Instead of applauding Lew Rockwell for pro-police state comments he made in the LA Times over a decade ago, they ought to ask themselves how similar tactics worked out for Randy Weaver and his family. Most of all, instead of criticizing the colored folk for being pissed off about the racial realities of American life, they ought to consider what small government separatism can and would mean for both sides.