Richard Spencer

September 16, 2008

Over the past year and a half, LewRockwell.com has probably been the best source for commentary on Ron Paul?its writers? being engaged in advocating the principles of the movement that sprung up around the Texas congressman but then certainly critical of the campaign when necessary.

I expected LRC to be bullish on RP?s recent decision to buck the GOP and endorse all the 3rd parties?Constitution, Green, and Independent-Naderite. However, John Walsh?s recent essay on how RP?s ?endorsement? marks the beginning of a realignment in American politics that?s been developing since the end of the Cold War struck me as woefully disconnected from reality.

Here are a few reasons why:

1) What About Bob??The third-party candidate with the highest polling numbers wasn?t in the room. Bob Barr is clearly not generating any kind of mass movement; however, the 6% he commanded in a Rassmussen poll is higher than the polling of the rest of the third parties combined. Before getting excited about any historical inevitably of realignment, one needs to ask how many Americans are going to consider voting for the Green Party, not to mention a Green Party led by Cynthia McKiney.

2) ?Enemy of my enemy??Libertarians should beware of any ?we both hate X, thus let?s get together? coalitions. Take for instance, opposition to the Federal Reserve. Ralph Nader certainly does criticize the Fed, and former-chairman Allan Greenspan in particular. This doesn?t mean, however, that he?s much interested in ?sound money,? depoliticizing the money supply, or even fighting inflation, as are LRC & Co. Cynthia McKiney hates the Fed because her idiotic black nationalism leads her to hate wicked bankers, and for no other reason. Moreover, both she and Nader would not want to replace the Fed with free banking but with a new institution based on ?equity? and ?social democracy??that is, something that would probably end up being worse than what we have now! 

3) Right-wing Populism?In couselling an alliance with McKiney and Nader, Walsh seems to be consciously avoiding the far more straight-forward strategy of right-wing populism?how very un-Rothbardian! 

For a while now, Peter Brimelow and Steve Sailer of VDARE have been stressing the GOP?s need for a ?Sailer Strategy? based on immigration restriction and opposition to affirmative Action and social engineering. An ?America First? (though not strictly pacifist) foreign policy would be a natural corollary.

Not only is the Sailer Strategy a good idea but it?s, in many ways, already working?most Republican voters stick with the party because they believe it will be a bulwark against disastrous multiculturalism at home and will pursue their interests abroad, despite all the evidence to the contrary (!). Yes, the “America First” addition to the “Sailer Strategy” can lead to nationalism?and, yes, even ?freedom fries? and calls for interventionism. However, the ?right-wing + libertarian? alliance still makes sense in a way that the ?libertarian + far Left? grouping does not.