Bad oped imo, very incomplete on the history, like a lot we also see.
I didn't read the Rothbard article he linked but have read something like that before, from the time paleo-conservatism of Pat Buchanan became allied in an argument w/ Buckley and neocons over I believe Israel and American imperialism. I think it's correct to say there was some overlap of positional interests between Rothbard and Rockwell and what could be alt right, but for different reasons, which it sounds like they exploited, but too fringe to say it was ever a pipeline, and could have functioned the opposite way too. I think the Ron Paul stuff is accurate.
As far as how it relates to Shapiro speaking at Berkeley, which is one place where this comes up, I don't even think he's really libertarian, and his position is hardline pro-Israel. Really more of a mainstream conservative. He was at Breitbart pre-Bannon.
The alt-right loves Charles Murray I assume, but is his science at fault? Totally understand the controversy over the Bell Curve, but lost in that debate is the controversial part of the Bell Curve is very small, and I think handled with a good amount of care and sensitivity. There is of course the SPLC who tagged Murray a white supremacist, he's responded many times to the charges.
I don't even like libertarianism, was looking at alt-right to guage the danger when this all became a thing, is where I'm coming from here.
EDIT: Goldwater being anti-compelled integration probably fits in earlier somewhere.
[Post edited by hoodeyo at 09/20/2017 2:12PM]
|
(
In response to this post by WahooRQ)
Posted: 09/20/2017 at 1:47PM