*The Color of Right, Rush
A few days ago you wrote a brief comment that I chose not to post; I am sure you remember it. At the time I considered not posting any more of your comments. If you chose to make such a comment again – toward me or any member of this community – I will not be so forgiving.
This is an interesting community here. As I only recall you a newcomer to the comments section, I will offer some background. A reasonably wide variety of perspectives are found in the comments section – ranging from puritan libertarians (I have come to embrace the term “autistic” libertarians) to what is generally understood as alt-right (I use the term for convenience; it applies to those here, including libertarians, who value tradition and culture; call them conservative).
I am sure that the autistic libertarians consider me conservative, while the extreme alt-right considers me libertarian. I am pretty satisfied straddling this position – one who buys into the non-aggression principle as a political theory while valuing certain cultural mores and traditions.
This is not to say that I do not value the NAP or understand the theory; I am 100% (not a typo) certain I can build an argument on the theory as well as anyone writing today.
Certainly this community reflects the topics on which I chose to write – much of which is centered on the idea of libertarians and culture, libertarians in a world populated by flawed humans. That I allow such a wide-ranging dialogue has cost me with individuals on the extreme ends of the spectrum, but I have concluded that the price I have paid is worth what I have gained in exchange.
I have disagreements with those on the far ends of each end of the spectrum – on both the extreme libertarian end and the extreme (non-libertarian) alt-right end; one because there is no value placed on groups, and the other because there is no value placed on individuals.
What I have found is interesting: from these two extreme groups with which I sometimes disagree, the rudest and least civil, the most evasive, the most obnoxious, the most sanctimonious, the most picayune, the most likely to ignore what was written and respond to whatever is made up, the ones who introduce the strawman arguments, come solely from the extreme libertarians.
It is as if the ideology has become a religion to them, handed down from some god, infallible. It struck me when, the other day, I read Walter Block describe the NAP as the one true faith; it really is an ignorant statement. I see examples of its faithful here regularly.
Further, I find those on the alt-right end of the spectrum within this community as being quite well-versed in understanding the NAP; the extreme libertarians demonstrate approximately zero understanding of the reality of culture, tradition, and nation. In other words, those on the alt-right in this community understand both sides of the argument; the autistic libertarians only understand their own.
You will note: I say nothing about agreeing or disagreeing, differing opinions, etc. I don’t care if someone disagrees with me or any member of the community; I care about the dialogue, and that the dialogue is held by individuals who can contribute positively and productively.
Now, why do I bother with all of this – at least all of it past the part where I warn you that you are one uncivil comment away from being unwelcome here? From your comment:
Nor do I believe that "European Jews" per se were bad for Palestinians.
Per se: by, of, for, or in itself; intrinsically.
Very little of the complexity in this world is “per se.” However, even a superficial understanding of the role European Jews played in history when it relates to the treatment of Palestinians would make clear the connection, would make clear Matt’s point. You seem too knowledgeable not to know this history.
I offer the following from Rothbard (and I won’t offer links, these are easy enough to find):
At bottom is the point which many of us had to learn painfully over the years: that there can be no genuine separation between formal political ideology and cultural views and attitudes.
…we must not fall into a nihilist trap. While only individuals exist, individuals do not exist as isolated and hermetically sealed atoms. …all individuals grow up in a common culture and language.
The nation properly refers, not to the State, but to the entire web of culture, values, traditions, religion, and language in which the individuals of a society are raised. It is almost embarrassingly banal to emphasize that point, but apparently many libertarians aggressively overlook the obvious.
“Embarrassingly banal”: such is Rothbard’s view of autistic libertarians.