Rand Paul's co-author and prominent staffer is a racist

[_Droopy]

I've always said that many of those on the extreme right "Libertarians" such as Alex Jones have some Leftist ideology in them. The way they are critical and misrepresent conservatives, just like the left does, etc.

Quite true, faqs. Racism had been a defining feature of the Left from Marx through Hitler to the American progressives to the contemporary multiculturalist movement within academia.

In any case, this is just more yellow journalistic guilt-by-association smearing by yet another organ of the Ruling Class. Nothing to see here.

The neo-confederates are "lost causers" to be sure, but its doubtful they're all racists (and perhaps most aren't), as the philosophical defense of Southern values and perspective (which, I'll admit up-front, I know little about, having only briefly skimmed some writing about this over the years) contains much that is independent of race or racial issues.

I also find in astounding yet quite in keeping with what the Left really is that they can attack Rand Paul in this way while allowing their own president, Barack Obama, a man who for 20 years attended a well-established church led by one of the most unhinged racist demagogues of modern 20th century history, who had seamlessly combined Marxism with black power ideology (a racial separatist ideology by design and intellectual pedigree) and which Barack and Michelle filled their heads with for two decades, less than a wink and a nod.

[_Droopy]

The reality is that Ron Paul, and to a somewhat lesser extent, Rand Paul have long-running associations with groups of people who are either outright neo-confederate racists or sympathetic to them.

So does the entire Democratic party and much of the Left, but regardless, I'm sure then that you can document that here with empirical documentary facts. I'm not a defender of Ron Paul, and his bizarre beliefs and feelings toward Israel (among others) have long walked the ling of antisemitism, but Rand Paul seems cut from different cloth.

I know that you, with the rest of the Left, thinks that the race card is still the best ace to pull from the bottom of the deck when you want to poison the water supply, but its actually a dead horse that isn't even worth beating.

Failing any actual quotes from Rand Paul and clear demonstration that he has knowingly associated with groups he knows to be racist (when did he become a Democrat?), I'll just consider this yet another standard left-wing Molotov cocktail so beloved of the mainstream media and the liberal pop culture.

[_Morley]

...thinks that the race card is still the best ace to pull from the bottom of the deck when you want to poison the water supply, but its actually a dead horse that isn't even worth beating.

Classic.

[Guest]

So If 'Any sort of evil or wrong is left', your contention would be that the Ku Klux Klan is a left wing organization?

The Ku Klux Klan is a totalitarian movement based upon an ideology of collective solidarity and unity based on race/nationality, rights/privileges/access to power, and standing before the law based on identity group membership, a status society as over against a contractual, rule of law-based society, and that much of modern history is the history of a struggle between the white race and other "mongrel" races, and most particular, blacks, which will eventually end in a definitive race war.

OK, so much of this sounds pretty much like the kind of thing taught every day in American colleges, universities, and K-12 education as "multiculturalism," only with the white hats and black hats mixed up or juxtaposed.

One could also point out the following: Marxism is a totalitarian movement based upon an ideology of collective solidarity and unity based on class/economic status; rights, privileges, access to power, and standing before the law based upon identity group membership, a status society as over against a contractual, rule of law-based society, and that all of human history has been the history of the struggle between economic classes that will eventually end in the violent seizing of the means of production by the Proletariat and the flowering of communism (and the end of alienation) for all.

Yes, the KKK is anti-communist, but its also viscerally anti-liberal democratic/anti-classical liberal, which means that its far from either modern conservatism or libertarianism, and contains salient features of traditional leftist thought and psychology.

[_EAllusion]

but regardless, I'm sure then that you can document that here with empirical documentary facts.

Have you read the thread you are posting in? Apparently not, so I direct you to the top.

I know that you, with the rest of the Left, thinks that the race card is still the best ace to pull from the bottom of the deck when you want to poison the water supply, but its actually a dead horse that isn't even worth beating.

Oh, then I guess having a pro-secessionist radio pundit, neo-Confederate activist, and (since softened) white nationalist co-write your books is irrelevant then. Incidentally, for this board, I'm probably one of the posters the most friendly to Rand Paul's political ambitions.

(Others probably are going to point out that this mixed metaphor is so bad it's epic.)

Failing any actual quotes from Rand Paul and clear demonstration that he has knowingly associated with groups he knows to be racist (when did he become a Democrat?), I'll just consider this yet another standard left-wing Molotov cocktail so beloved of the mainstream media and the liberal pop culture.

This post implies you know next to nothing about the Lew Rockwell / Von Mises crowd and its neoconfederate / white nationalist wing the Paul machine drives its deepest support from. This is awesome, because you have frequently quoted from their haunts especially re: Austrian economics, which says something about the superficiality of your reading. You won't recognize it, but I do, and it's pretty great.

Anyway, here's libertarian Dave Weigel pointing out people who actually are familiar with libertarian circles have long known that Rand Paul associating with and getting support from such people isn't much of a problem to Rand Paul.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/ ... uthor.html

[Guest]

Have you read the thread you are posting in? Apparently not, so I direct you to the top.

Yes, and it demonstrates nothing, especially as it provides no quotes or sources for its claims regarding the individual in question, and demonstrates nothing whatever about Rand Paul.

This post implies you know next to nothing about the Lew Rockwell / Von Mises crowd and its neoconfederate / white nationalist wing the Paul machine drives its deepest support from. This is awesome, because you have frequently quoted from their haunts especially re: Austrian economics, which says something about the superficiality of your reading. You won't recognize it, but I do, and it's pretty great.

We've been over this before, at length, and you've never been able to provide anything more than 4 or 5 people at the Von Mises Institute who hold to the Christian reconstructionist position. Many of them, as with much of the rest of the libertarian movement, are clearly secularist/non-religious in general philosophical orientation.

If its "pretty great," then you've had years tangling with me to support your bomb-throwing, but have failed to stand and deliver on squat. Now, we won't discuss the concept of superficiality as relating to much of your posting history, D, but suffice it to say that my reading of Austrian economics has hardly been superficial, which is probably what rattles your chain, because in all the years since the mid-nineties that I've been reading the books and listening to the lectures of the Austrians, I've never come across the neo-confederate standpoint, or arguments for it, even once, not until some of the stuff written by Thomas DiLorenzo was pointed out to me.

That's how minor and, for all intents, invisible it is within that organization.

In any case, I don't consider Mahr libertarians like yourself to be authentic or remotely serious libertarians representing the best of that tradition. That kind of libertarianism is just a stalking horse for social/cultural liberalism and, frequently, militant atheism masquerading as a concern for "freedom" while its adherents want government to keep its hands out of their personal pockets.

Shallow, unperceptive, and philosophically obtuse.

[_EAllusion]

For those unfamiliar, there is a subgroup within libertarian culture often referred to as paleolibertarians. The term is a self-description rather than something imposed on them.

Paleolibertarians share libertarianism's general desire to reduce the size and scope of government. There are wide areas of agreement ranging from opposition to the drug war to civil libertarianism, to opposition to most military actions. They invariably are into hard money Austrian economics and are specifically influenced by Luwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. A desire to end the federal reserve and to return to a gold standard is usually if not their top, one of their few top priorities. Obsession with that topic is the most obvious sign a person probably is a paleolibertarian. Unlike most libertarians, they tend to be broadly isolationist and oppose free trade agreements and open immigration. While not necessarily favoring imposition of their religion in government, they often are religious social conservatives. There are a few areas where this social conservatism impacts politics. They are highly likely to oppose legal abortion and oppose gay marriage, for example. Outside of paleo types, libertarians tend to be socially liberal on most topics.

Paleolibertarians are much more likely to be into the survivalist movement and believe Bircher-like conspiracies about the government. Christian Reconstructionists - who seek to impose an Old Testament Law style theocracy on the United States - are usually paleolibertarians and some of their leaders, like Paul associate Gary North, are major players in the movement. However, those hardcore theocrats make up a subset within this subset. Due to former Paul chief of staff Lew Rockwell's views, Paleolibertarianism also has attracted a substantial white nationalist / neoconfederate following and several of its major players are influential in the crowd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism

[_Droopy]

For those unfamiliar, there is a subgroup within libertarian culture often referred to as paleolibertarians. The term is a self-description rather than something imposed on them.

Paleolibertarians share libertarianism's general desire to reduce the size and scope of government. There are wide areas of agreement ranging from opposition to the drug war to civil libertarianism, to opposition to most military actions. They almost invariably are into hard money Austrian economics and are specifically influenced by Luwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. A desire to end the federal reserve and to return to a gold standard is usually if not their top, one of their few top priorities. Obsession with that topic is the most obvious sign a person probably is a paleolibertarian. Unlike most libertarians, they tend to be broadly isolationist and oppose free trade agreements and open immigration. While not necessarily favoring imposition of their religion in government, they often are religious social conservatives. There are a few areas where this social conservatism impacts politics. They are highly likely to oppose legal abortion and oppose gay marriage, for example. Outside of paleo types, libertarians tend to be socially liberal on most topics.

Paleolibertarians are much more likely to be into the survivalist movement and believe Bircher-like conspiracies about the government. Christian Reconstructionists - who seek to impose an Old Testament Law style theocracy on the United States - are usually paleolibertarians and some of their leaders, like Paul associate Gary North, are major players in the movement. However, those hardcore theocrats make up a subset within this subset. Due to former Paul chief of staff Lew Rockwell's views, Paleolibertarianism also has attracted a substantial white nationalist / neoconfederate following and several of its major players are influential in the crowd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism

Very good, D. I see you dug up Gary North, and now you can add the half-dozen or so other neo-confederates to North to fully form your "pretty great" wing of Austrian economics that permeates the Von Mises Institute.

The last time we went around this sugar bowl, I actually had to provide most of the names. I don't expect much more to be forthcoming here.

[_ldsfaqs]

Thanks for responding Droopy.... You've said things better than I could on the KKK etc.

[_EAllusion]

Very good, D. I see you dug up Gary North, and now you can add the half-dozen or so other neo-confederates to North to fully form your "pretty great" wing of Austrian economics that permeates the Von Mises Institute.

Your posting in this thread is confusing the Christian Reconstructionists like him with the Neoconfederates like Thomas Woods. Good job.

The last time we went around this sugar bowl, I actually had to provide most of the names. I don't expect much more to be forthcoming here.

Heh. Is that what happened?