The D.C.-based Crowd is at it Again

Thursday, December 23, 2004
Posted in category Uncategorized
Comments Off

When I posted on this on the LewRockwell.com blog, several months ago, a couple of LRC nationalist-paleocons attacked me viciously, and basically went apeshit. The problem? I used “war-worshipping” to denote Pat Tillman’s awful decision to “serve his country.” Under the Bush regime’s definition of “serving,” that is.

Now, Lew Rockwell posts a seemingly similar post, harmless as can be, and who goes apeshit? Why Tom Palmer of course. By way of that bastion of freedom, Washington, D.C., comes Palmer’s 4:11pm comment. Then read the rest of his stuff, including the main post. The guy is posting in a deranged manner, to put it nicely. I have never seen anyone throw a hissy fit like Palmer consistently does. I’m not so crazy about the Rogers post either, but I say “it’s not for me,” and move on. What’s the big deal? Some Palmerisms:

Another call (this time from Japan, by way of Auburn, Alabama) for killing Amerian soldiers

But “LewRockwell.com” does not have the wide array of views of those publications; it represents the bizarre set of Southern revisionist, anti-American, zany, crackpot ideas with which Lew Rockwell has tried to poison discourse about matters ethical, political, and economic in the U.S.

My point was that they’re mixing poison in with their product, and I think that if more people were aware of the sick(ening) people lurking at Lew Rockwell (or, to use another metaphor, the moths flying around the Lew Rockwell flame), they’d be less likely to be sucked into their cult.

And the writers at antiwar.com and at lewrockwell.com who call for killing Americans or who denounce those who are working for security and for elections show that they are complete phonies. They aren’t advocates for peace. They want the other side to win.

Furthermore, I would recommend anyone with a lick of sense to do their best to stay away from the vortex of bitter anti-Americanism that Lew Rockwell has created.

Lew Rockwell and his supporters make it harder to advance liberty, but it is our respondibility to shoulder that burden. We have no other option.

You know, I used to save some respect for Palmer, thinking he was scholarly, well-read, and one of the last, semi-principled holdouts of the Cato crowd who dared to attack touchy issues like intellectual property, and so forth. However, this constant vixenish behavior on his part is, quite frankly, bizarre and distasteful.

Then from a smug, self-glorifiying neocon, once again playing the libertarian wannabee, comes this little gem-of-a-comment: “Dr. Palmer–what’s your answer for the fact that, for large numbers of people these Doughface Libertarians are what comes to mind when they hear the word “libertarian”? How do we counteract their influence within libertarianism?” When you see the name ‘neath the comment, you’ll say, “Ohhhh yea, makes sense….”

Mr. Sandefur, you are not within libertarianism, and you have never even resembled one who is. And that’s just fine by the world, however, where do people like you get the half-cocked notion that you somehow respesent the bulwark of intellectual libertarianism? Shall we compare Rockwell’s writings, networks, deeds, triumphs, and successes with yours, Timothy Sandefur? If you, Mr. Sandefur, are “what comes to mind when people think of the word libertarian,” it’s because they are from the D.C.-Statist-Sellout crowd and/or they just don’t know any better about real libertarianism. Palmer is, of course, a libertarian, just one of different stripes (D.C. stripes). Sandefur’s musings, however, don’t even bring to mind the word “libertarian.”

Mr. Sandefur is a Lincoln Fellow at the very Republican, very Social Democrat, very Neocon Claremont Institute, as mentioned before by Tom DiLorenzo. Lew Rockwell, by the way, is one of the top Austrian economists in the world.

The Claremont Institute, Mr. Sandefur? Let readers, on their own, compare the ideological/philosophical content of “scholarship” turned out by Claremont, as vs. that churned out by the Mises Institute. Each to his own, and the world is grand, but when the question becomes “who/what” is more “libertarian,” a quick glance by anyone, and Mr. Sandefur’s charges are laughingly rebutted.

(Read this unbelievable review by Sandefur – on Lincoln the Jeffersonian (not a misprint!) – and note the last paragraph.)

Be Sociable, Share!
Both comments and pings are currently closed.