continued from “Libertarianism is against aggression (4)”
Libertarianism is definitely not submission to might makes right. Libertarianism is the most consistent philosophy of human rights: libertarianism is the only non-nihilism.
Libertarianism is the opposite of nihilism
А психология урки очень проста, очень доступна к усвоению:
- Хочу жить и наслаждаться, на остальных на…!
- Прав тот, кто сильней.
- Тебя не <дол>бут - не подмахивай! (т. е. пока бьют не тебя, не заступайся за тех, кого бьют. Жди своей очереди.) Бить покорных врагов по одиночке! - что-то очень знакомый закон. Так делал Гитлер. Так делал Сталин.
[And the psychology of the urki was exceedingly simple and very easy to acquire:
- I want to live and enjoy myself; and fuck the rest!
- Whoever is the strongest is right!
- If they aren’t [beat]ing you, then don’t lie down and ask for it. (In other words: As long as they’re beating up someone else, don’t stick up for the ones being beaten… Wait your own turn.) Beat up your submissive enemies one at a time! Somehow this is a very familiar law. It is what Hitler did. It is what Stalin did.]
– Александр Солженицын, Архипелаг ГУЛаг, “Глава 16. Социально-близкие” [ Chapter 16: The Socially Friendly ]
About the speech of Duda, which infuriated me to the bottom of my soul, perhaps Poland should remember its borders of 1939. He says, ‘if we fear Russia’s nuclear weapons, we might as well surrender. Should we get scared and obey Putin’s directives, and fulfill his political goals in Europe just because we fear nuclear weapons?’ Here’s what I would say to Mr Duda. You know, it’s very cynical, but if you live with wolves, learn how to howl. I would respond that yes, you should. Yes, you should. That’s how this world works, that’s life.
Нет, Россия не белая и не пушистая. Россия такая, какая она есть. И мы не стыдимся показывать себя такими, какие мы есть
Russia is not squeaky clean. Russia is what it is. And we are not ashamed of showing who we are.
– Сергей Викторович Лавров, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, “Меня глаза Запада не интересуют вообще”, [“Lavrov: Russia is not squeaky clean and not ashamed”]
Умом Россию не понять, Аршином общим не измерить: У ней особенная стать — В Россию можно только верить.
Russia cannot be understood with the mind alone, No ordinary yardstick can span her greatness: She stands alone, unique – In Russia, one can only believe.
– Фёдор Иванович Тютчев, “Умо́м Росси́ю не поня́ть” [“Intelligently you cannot understand Russia”] (in images)
The West isn’t completely innocent when it comes to truth telling, but while Western propaganda attempts to construct a narrative and convince people of it, Russia propaganda often seems to strive for contradiction and dissonance…. The dissonance is part of their strategy. They need chaos and confusion, and actively strive for it.
– Roman Skaskiw, “Nine Lessons of Russian Propaganda”, March 27, 2016
Chaos for the sake of chaos. Destruction for the sake of destruction. Can anyone still pretend, given the enormous cost of the war for Russia (strategic – rearmament and unity of their enemies, diplomatic – sanctions, economic – sheer cost of it, military – sheer number of lost men and tanks, etc), that the Donbas, even assuming they do get it, was worth all that? “What’s the cost of war for Russia, and what could be done with this money?”
At a rough estimate of 7 billion USD per day, at 100 days of war, the cost is already at about 3,000 $ per inhabitant of the Russian federation… Or 90,000 $ per ethnic Russian in Ukraine.
If concern for the Russians in Ukraine were the goal, certainly there would have been cheaper ways to help them. If preventing Ukraine from joining NATO were the goal, there were cheaper alternatives as well. What reasons, then, remain?
As with all crime, making it more costly to prevent it is always a good idea. There is such a thing as rational selfishness. Nihilism is not just morally wrong. It’s suicidal. Certainly “continuing to arm Ukraine” that is, making the invasion even less appealing from a cost-benefit analysis, is not what caused it.
To explain - and predict - Russia’s actions, it is useless to ask what would be rational.
What you need to ask is what they did before.
But some crimes are irrational, in which case having the means to stop them is also a good idea. In other words, whether the Russian leadership is rational or not, arming Ukraine was and is the right thing to do. Again, libertarians understand this when it comes to individual self-defense.
Previously we mentioned socialism as the common thread. But it goes deeper. Socialism, properly understood, is merely a form of nihilism. This is why, for the Russian KGB leadership, abandoning Marxism was not heart-breaking. They stayed true to their real (non-)ethos.
в его последней стадии коммунизм представлятся не как победа социалистического права, а как победа социализма над правом вообще.
[In its final stage, communism doesn’t represent a victory of socialist law as much as a victory of socialism over Law itself.]
– Пётр Иванович Стучка, President of the Supreme Court of Soviet Russia, Энциклопедия государства и права, Vol. 3, 1927, p. 1593.
The destruction of Law, revolution for revolution’s sake:
What made Che such an heroic figure for our time is that he, more than any man of our epoch or even of our century, was the living embodiment of the principle of Revolution.
– Murray N. Rothbard, “Ernesto Che Guevara, RIP”
The principle of Revolution being the principle of permanent chaos and destruction. This is what Rothbard stands for when he admires the communist murderer. That’s what socialism is all about: destruction of values, destruction of wealth, destruction of ethics, destruction of civilization, destruction of life on earth. Destruction for destruction’s sake. Che Guevera, in the foosteps of Lenin, himself in the footsteps of Robespierre: conquest of power and rule by random murder.
The means are the ends, comrade Rothbard: the revolutionary means’s destructiveness is consistent with their true goal. Anyone not grasping that, is, well, their useful idiot.
Libertarianism is the opposite. “Revolutions” that bring about worse regimes are no progress for freedom, obviously. Revolution for revolution’s sake is not a “principle”, it is pure nihilism. Nihilism is the ideological justification for the life-threatening menaces we’ve discussed.
Indeed, in practice, nihilism leads to a very pragmatic rule: might makes right. We see this today, exposed: Russia’s sphere of influence, buffer zone, security feelings, etc... but where is the concern for Poland’s? Or Liechtenstein’s, for that matter? Nihilism is plain submission to destruction, to brute force. That same nihilism we already denounced as blaming Ukraine (the victim) for Russia’s nuclear threats (the aggressor).
The negation of values, the negation of Law…. leads only to the Führer principle. Rule by brute force. Reliance on a random dictator – and utter chaos when his rule ends. And barely contained chaos during his rule. National socialism, as a form of socialism, itself a form of nihilism, was not order, it was chaos. And, contrary to what Hannah Arendt said, it was, of course, not logical.
Truth is a value. Logic is a value. Truth and logic are preconditions for libertarianism, for non-nihilism, for Law. The contradictions and lies, therefore, are part of the (non-)“logic” of opposing ideologies. Their rejection of values in favor of sheer destruction should not surprise us.
Truth, logic, Law, would be unbearable constrains on the Führerprinzip:
Thus we have the whole farce of a “denazification” executed by nazis, and supported by chairmen of think tanks named after Ukrainian Jews, happily linking to websites actually supporting nazism:
Putin’s campaign against this Nazi revival and his defense of the independent Russian areas in the beleaguered Donbas region deserve our admiration, not our condemnation.
– Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., “Exposing Some Myths About the Ukraine War”, April 18, 2022
“What the US Government Has Done to Normal People” By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
December 2, 2021
Click Here:
Daily Stormer
The Daily Stormer? Ah yes:
The Daily Stormer is an American far-right, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, misogynist, Islamophobic, antisemitic, and Holocaust denial commentary and message board website that advocates for a second genocide of Jews
Imagine being chairman of an Institute named after a Jew, and linking to websites advocating for a second genocide of Jews. And claiming to be libertarian.
Oh, this one was removed?
There’s still these:
-
“Where LRC Stands” – LRC posting a listing where it is itself alongside The Daily Stormer…
-
Ron Unz, “Racial Politics in America and in California”, where the Daily Stormer is referred to as an “energetic right-wing website” (sic).
Also:
In other words, blood and soil and God and nation still matter to people. Libertarians ignore this at the risk of irrelevance.
– Jeff Deist, president of the Mises Institute, “For a New Libertarian”, July 28, 2017
And then there’s LRC contributor Paul Craig Roberts.
I admire the Kremlin’s restraint and disinclination to resort to violence.
– Paul Craig Roberts, “Decision Time Has Come for Russia in Ukraine”, June 2, 2022
The reality, being of course:
-
“Russia has incited genocide in Ukraine, independent experts conclude”
-
“‘The Killings Didn’t Stop.’ In Mali, a Massacre With a Russian Footprint.”
Libertarianism is (real) self-determination
Das Selbstbestimmungsrecht, von dem wir sprechen, ist jedoch nicht Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Nationen, sondern Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Bewohner eines jeden Gebietes, das gross genug ist, einen selbständigen Verwaltungsbezirk zu bilden. Wenn es irgend möglich wäre, jedem einzelnen Menschen dieses Selbstbestimmungsrecht einzuräumen, so müsste es geschehen.
[However, the right of self-determination of which we speak is not the right of self-determination of nations, but rather the right of self-determination of the inhabitants of every territory large enough to form an independent administrative unit. If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual person, it would have to be done.]
– Ludwig von Mises, Liberalismus [ Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition ]
A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.
– Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics
Live free or die… unless you’re in Ukraine, in which case, please get used to the boot stomping on the human face forever
– Cathy Young (Екатерина Юнг), commenting on “Libertarian” Party New Hampshire (a state with “live free or die” as a slogan)
Whatever one thinks of self-determination, the Russian referenda were not it. Not in Chechnya, not in Crimea, not in LPR or DPR. In fact, the last time a real referendum was held, the Ukrainians regions voted to go with Ukraine. Incidentally, bear in mind that a referendum to join Russia is a very one-way road.
- “Pundits on Russian state TV begrudgingly acknowledge that Russian-speakers in Ukraine they supposedly came to ‘liberate’ are actually fighting against invading Russian troops.”
- “How Russia Rigged Crimean Referendum”
- “Ukrainian Rebel Commander Identified As Russian GRU Military Intelligence Colonel”
- “local militia fighters”: Russian soldiers in unmarked uniforms, the Little Green Men
As in Crimea, the “referendum” in DPR was a complete lie:
The pseudo-referendum on the creation of these “people’s republics” was conducted in just a few towns and cities located mostly around the Donetsk metropolitan area, using only a small fraction of the polling stations that would normally operate during a vote. What proportion of the population actually took part in the referendum is simply unknown because there was no external verification of the count (not that any was even proposed).
– Nikolay Mitrokhin, “‘For Eight Years They Sat There in Cellars Under Fire!’ — On One False Narrative About Ukraine” (Russian original)
Note, also, that “The fighting in the Donbas began on Russia’s initiative.” Russia started the war, not Ukraine. And today’s Kremlintarians regularly use the casualties of that war, started by Russia (14,000 dead from both sides, including civilians), to somehow justify the next one, started by Russia as well… Kremlintarian logic.
Self-determination is not occupation soldiers voting. Self-determination is not invasion, in the first place. Kremlintarians, meanwhile:
The article “Ron Paul Is Supporting Russia’s Illegal Occupation of Crimea” has the subtitle “useful idiot” for a good reason.
See replies:
- “We are classical liberals and we do not support Ron Paul”
- “Ron Paul Gets It Wrong When He Speaks about Secession and Crimea”
And why do Kremlintarians professing to love decentralization into micro-states (when it’s about weakening the relatively liberal Europe or USA), at the same time applaud violent expansion of the territory of the largest state on earth (when it’s about strenghtening an oppressive, totalitarian dictatorship, which itself violently represses any idea of secession)?
And why are Kremlintarians so enthusiastic about blatant Russian imperialism and expansion through brutal murder, while at the same time calling for a weakened, defenseless Europe and USA, and hysterically shrieking at voluntary, peaceful, “expansion” of NATO?
And why are Kremlintarians so eager to find excuses for the actions of a brutal, authoritarian dictatorship, in which they would be the first to be arrested (and actual libertarians are)?
Ah yes: because they are Kremlintarians. Modern day Walter Durantys. Useful idiots of chaos, destruction and socialism.
Libertarianism is a universalism
At no point do these so-called “libertarians” blabbering about “self-determination” consider alternative opinions of Russians or Ukrainians, especially not of libertarian ones.
Isn’t it fascinating how so-called American anti-imperialists will claim that NATO/the US is exploiting simple Ukrainians without caring about what they actually want, and then IMMEDIATELY shut up any Ukrainian who dares to disagree with them in the replies?
Noam Chomsky is totally wrong. Our government request heavy weapons. Our civil society leaders request heavy weapons. I personally request heavy weapons. Sorry, we don’t want to die and want to be able to defend ourself. Maybe it’s a surprise for some western intellectuals
Paradoxically, these alleged anti-interventionists are as arrogant as the caricatured Western interventionism they despise so much, in thinking that only they, Americans, know what’s best for the whole world, whether that be “America”, or “non-America”:
We American libertarians know who and what is the main danger to peace and freedom in this world
– Justin Raimondo, “Ron Paul Is Right About Crimea”, March 26, 2014
When some of the local libertarians dare offer a different opinion, they are hysterically insulted (sic1), accused of “russophobia” or “hating their country” (sic2), being wannabe Stalins (sic3), threatened with lawsuits (sic4), accused of being paid by the CIA (sic5) or called nazis and told to go kill themselves (sic6).
Apparently for these American “libertarians”, allegedly so keen on fighting “American exceptionalism”, only Americans are allowed to criticize the government that oppresses them, be libertarians (in Europe, we’d never heard of liberty until Rothbard invented it, there’s not even a word for it in French!), own firearms (we have no gun culture in Switzerland! No gun owners whatsoever in France, nor libertarians… Actually, the French, armed libertarian in the video comments on the Paris attacks: what if all those who filmed it with their cellphones had had guns instead?) and defend themselves against aggression:
While libertarians can universally condemn slavery, or authoritarian collectivism, it’s quite another thing to suggest how other societies ought to organize themselves politically. Yet consistent universalism requires this. Gay rights in America means gay rights for Saudi Arabia7, open borders for Germany means Monaco also must open its doors to refugees, and Texas-style open carry is the prescription France needs to prevent another Bataclan.
– Jeff Deist, president of the Mises Institute (successor to the infamous Lew Rockwell), “Self-Determination, not Universalism, is the Goal”
If libertarianism is anything, it is the identity of rights of all human beings. Indeed, this is the whole basis for libertarian criticism of government agents and their pretense at dictating others’ lives. Those who deny these very basics are not libertarians and we need to clearly dissociate from them. For a true libertarian, gay rights in Russia or Saudi Arabia are as legitimate as in America (and, Biden’s contradictory actions and statements notwithstanding, women rights are as important in Afghanistan as in the US), and the right to keep and bear arms is as essential in France, Israel, Ukraine, etc. as it is in Texas. This should not have had to be said.
Luckily for the world, luckily for freedom, there are real libertarians and courageous people fighting for their rights all around the world, who did not wait for permission from these fake libertarians to exercise and defend their universal human rights.
