Skunks and their tactics.
The people at the Mises Institute, who were closely tied to the Ron Paul newsletters that have so many people sick to their stomachs are stooping to a new low. These people have no shame.
These people, who inhabit the fringe of the Far Right and consort with racists and bigots of all types, have two labels they pin on anyone who disagrees with their racialist/isolationist perspective. And by isolationist I don’t mean non-interventionist foreign policy -- anyone who reads this blog knows I’m a hardcore non-interventionist.
They label anyone who doesn’t worship at the altar of Lew Rockwell and the Nazi friendly Hans Hermann Hoppe as either a “neo-con” or a “beltway libertarian.” Few libertarians of any kind are neo-cons even if they might be hawks. And beltway libertarian is their smear name for anyone who disagrees with Rockwell’s non-libertarian agenda.
The purpose of such smears is to inculcate, in the minds of their followers, that all non-Rockwellians are evil. This is the tactic of cults. The purpose of this is to prevent people from abandoning their own personality cult for any other libertarian group. It is meant to secure funding and support by demonizing the entire libertarian movement except for their own sect thus giving the deluded followers no other options for activism.
The reality is that Rockwell and crew are pretty much on their own. Few other prominent libertarian groups associate with them. Most just keep their distance and the one reason they have done this is precisely because of the sort of wrenching bigotry that we saw in the Paul newsletters.
Now the Rockwellians are trying to pin the blame for the newsletters on Cato. In a very thinly veiled attack they claim that the “hate-filled Beltway Losers” (isn’t it rich that people associated with the editor of those racist articles are calling other people “hate-filled”?) either “wrote it [the Kirchick article] or coached the author.” What evidence do they present for this? None of substance.
They note that Kirchick was able to find the Paul newsletters at the University of Kansas and that a former major funder of Cato is a patron of that University. Talk about stretching. This is almost as rich as Paul’s paranoid delusions about the NAFTA Superhighway.
The whole proof, offered by one of the head cheerleaders for a revived Confederacy, Thomas di Lorenzo, is this: “How on earth would a kid just out of college know to go to the library in Kansas, of all places, to dig up such stuff?”
First note what is missing. The Rockwell crowd, many of whom may be authors of some of these disgusting articles, have not challenged the veracity of the newsletters. They aren’t even trying. They are merely trying to divert everyone’s attention from the vile writings of their leader and perhaps, themselves.
There are numerous easy ways for someone to search libraries across the country and see what publications they have in inventory. Any journalist or researcher can do it quite easily. di Lorenzo ought to know this but his article on Rockwell’s site is not meant to tell the truth it is meant to divert people from paying attention to the truth. He also neglects to note that the author of the article also had to go to the Wisconsin Historical Society for copies. Di Lorenzo neglects to mention that source because he can’t find any tenuous connection between the Society and Rockwell’s imaginary foes at Cato.
If you don’t believe that it is easy to find old copies of Paul’s and Rockwell’s newsletter go here and you will see the search returns on one research sit,e which easily informs anyone that the Paul newsletters are on file at the University of Kansas.
Di Lorenzo has absolutely nothing but that doesn’t stop him. Such is the level of his scholarly research. He claims that one paragraph in the New Republic article resembles something on a web site run by a Cato employee. That would be Tom Palmer who is one of the honorable libertarians who has tried to expose the bigots and lunatics that Rockwell is promoting.
Di Lorenzo actually didn’t reprint said paragraph. He merely claimed it existed. That makes it difficult to compare. But let us saw that the Palmer paragraph and one Kirchick paragraph were similar. What would it prove? Nothing.
Jamie Kirchick obviously used the Internet to research his article -- everyone does these days. If Kirchick did a search on the Mises Institute and racism he would find many hits -- unfortunately. And some of those hits would direct him to Palmer’s web site. From that site he could easily glean information which, if he verified it elsewhere, he could freely and legitimately use in his article. At best di Lorenzo’s paranoid screed could charge that Kirchick researched his story. Instead the demented di Lorenzo tries to argue that this means Palmer was either the real author of the New Republic piece or “coached” Kirchick in writing it. That is real paranoia, even worse than the demented bullshit that Rockwell and Co., published in Ron Paul’s newsletters.
Former Rockwell writer, Wendy McElroy, warned on her blog, “whoever is publicly candid about what they know of this debacle is likely to become the target of retaliatory viciousness.” Wendy knows these people well.
But let us just pretend that di Lorenzo’s wacky delusions are accurate. So what? Isn’t the issue still the newsletters themselves? What they said is critical and many libertarians want to know why Paul published this crap. Many more are asking Lew Rockwell to 'fess up as to his role in these hateful articles. Those are the issues regardless of who exposed this disgusting collection of newsletters. Shit stinks no matter who finds it.
So Dr. Paul, please tell us who was working with you as the editor of that newsletter and is responsible for those articles. Mr. Rockwell were you the editor? Did other Mises Institute associates write the material? Was Gary North involved? Which articles did you write yourself? Maybe after we get answers to those question we might have time to pursue you diversionary claims.
A skunk doesn't actually defend itself. It's tactic is to try and spray it's opponent with a vile stench while it beats a hasty retreat. This disgusting odor is secreted from a gland inside the the skunk's asshole. The similarities are interesting.
Note: Ludwig von Mises was never associated with the Mises Institute since he died before it was founded. Many of the ideas they promote are quite different from what Mises actually believed and espoused.