Government is a neutral agency. Government is neither inherently 'good' or inherently 'evil'. It is only 'good' or 'evil' in relation to those who make the laws and/or selectively enforce them.

'Government' varies from Nation to Nation. It also varies within the Nations over time. Good governments can 'go bad' and bad governments can improve strictly on account of who is in control and what they -- as a ruling class -- believe, value, act upon; and conversely do not believe, value or act upon.

The 'libertarian' belief that we can be rid of 'government' is a disenfranchizing ideal. By alienating himself from the 'collective', he only empowers the 'other' group.

A society of individuals, is a society of slaves.

Yep. It seems the libertarian is a castrated conservative; when conservative values came under attack by the Left and Jewish media, many of the cons lacked the spine to defend them. Instead they said the government shouldn't have much power, or even no power at all.

Right were they in concluding that without government influence, people would gravitate toward a conservative and racially-aware way of life, as this is the natural order of things. Wrong were they in believing people would accept this strategy. Most people want to be led; they don't want the government to lack the power to control their lives. When conservatives lyingly said "We agree with your basic assumptions but don't want them to be funded by tax money," ordinary people said "If their basic assumptions are good, then they should be funded."

From then on, the Right-wing politician has always been the Left-minus-one-step, the professional silver medalist who wins only when he abandons original Rightist values.

The libertarian takes the Spineless Right to an extreme and conjures up an evil image of the State. The libertarian has never won and never will. Everybody understands that you need a government for lots of reasons. The libertarian will take the example of how cars on the road cooperate as individuals, without guidance, to go about their business; he forgets that all cars drive on the right side of the road by central decree, that their driving education is forced upon them by the state so as to avoid that the lazy and stupid kill themselves and others, that the road signs are put there by the state, that the road itself is paid for by taxes.

The non-libertarian conservative knows that the road is paved by the state, that the road signs are designed and put in place by the state, and that it has to be that way. Though maybe it could be outsourced to a private firm.

The White Nationalist knows even more; that it is not only the traffic rules, but the quality of the drivers, that determines how many people survive and how many are killed in traffic. The Iranians are the worst drivers in the world, and it's not because of bad road signs but bad blood.

Right were they in concluding that without government influence, people would gravitate toward a conservative and racially-aware way of life, as this is the natural order of things. Wrong were they in believing people would accept this strategy. Most people want to be led; they don't want the government to lack the power to control their lives.

I would go one step further and say that it is not a matter of "wanting" to be led or not, but rather that the people will be led one way or another whether they like it or not. The libertarian simply abandons the field of power politics to others while contending that he holds the higher moral ground from a 'universal' -- that is, other-worldly -- perspective.

These are the same people who won't blame guns for murder but are the first to say 'government' (the biggest gun of all) is responsible for 'evil' in the world and should be outlawed at the first opportunity. These types of arguments only prove that: a) they aren't holding the 'gun' and b) they think those holding the 'gun' will put it down because -- according to the non-gun-holders -- itz the 'right thing to do'. But such arguments don't apply to gun-holders. 'Libertarianism', therefore, is simply a means of self-deception and pacifism in the face of better-positioned adversaries.

The solution to bad government, is good government. When 'you and yours' are in control, things make sense. There's a discernible reason behind this or that decision or decree. When aliens and incompetents reign, everything emanating from the government is a mystery and a sham.

And good government is racial. Tribal even. Always has been.

http://koti.mbnet.fi/hh-88/media/Kdf__Wagen_KUVA.jpg

Government is natural.

I hate to be the stereotypical "nazi" WN but the national socialists of germany were way ahead of their time. They acted in accordance with nature. Earn by work. Emulate nature where possible.

Libertarians are wild oats. Nothing too wrong with them, but they can do better if they want to. They're friendly anarchists. They mean well. Libertarians help pick the hull clean if you let them.

Reading LRC again. Sometimes you find real good stuff, like what Karen Kwiatowski and William S. Lind write, and other times it's ... not so good. I suppose it depends on the authors. I can't imagine Kwiatowski or Lind going on about the same libertarian anti-govt stuff as many of the others.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/murphy/murphy94.html

Unlike the Star Wars series (II and III), I am no expert when it comes to Batman and so I’d better drop the cinematic analysis and focus on political economy. What I really can’t understand is how people can watch movies like this and not realize how corrupt the police and judicial system are when it comes to the Drug War!

It’s no answer to say, "Oh, it’s just a comic book movie, Bob, people won’t think it’s real!" If it were only superhero movies that had dirty cops, then that would be one thing. But it’s not just "fake" movies that accurately depict the drug market, it’s also "realistic" ones such as the Godfather trilogy and Traffic, and even true stories such as Serpico!

This guy watches Batman Begins and comes away with the belief there's an anti-drug war message in it. Sometimes it seems these people are trying to overtake the commies in being the most unrealistic group around.

Batman Begins many other movies confirms that people like justice, they like to see bad guys being punished, and they like heroes. The fact that Hollywood still has to make the main characters White in most movies shows us that there's a deep instinct to identify with your own kind in the audience, despite all that the propasphere has done to us. This is very comforting.

Libertarians should stick to economics where they're at their best. Deciding what people you're allowed to trade with should be left to WNs, though.