The Immoral “Morality” of Libertarianism
by Saxon Day
LIBERTARIANISM IS a soul-sickening ideology that will be the death of the White world. The “great heroine” of libertarians is a crass Jew who called herself “Ayn Rand,” and who said that racialism was “collectivism,” which was “immoral.”
She also went around wearing a gold brooch in the shape of a dollar sign.
Libertarians have an august-sounding slogan which they swear by called the “non-aggression principle,” which is sort of “do no harm” for nerds. Ironically these libertarians are all for unlimited immigration; either they’re not keeping up with the news of the day, or think that murder, rape, and trashing a country are not “acts of aggression.” They also swear that all things can be measured by GDP — so that just might have something to do with it.
Former Congressman Justin Amash is, he claims, a libertarian’s libertarian. He is also considers himself an Arab so I’m not totally sure why he is allowed in the country, let alone why he was allowed to have a say in making our laws. He decided not to run for re-election last year, and many believe he has larger political aspirations. The “conservative” and “free market” (read: open borders) big-capital think tanks will probably give him support and funding.
Amash is the Will Rogers of immigration: He never met an invader he didn’t like. And showed his true colors (not White, of course, even though he looks like he might well have quite a bit of Crusader or Marcus Aurelius blood) by coming up with a truly demented proposed law called “The Protect Asylum Seekers and Practical Alternatives to Detention Act.”
I can think of many practical alternatives to detention — sending them packing forthwith being by far the mildest and most moderate of them.
In promoting this nation-wrecking piece of trash, he wrote:
Unnecessarily subjecting immigrants to detention and criminally prosecuting asylum seekers who have caused no harm undermines our values and doesn’t serve our nation’s interests. We need broad immigration reform, but until that becomes a reality, these targeted changes can limit some harms in the current system.
First off, it is necessary, and second they have caused harm (see murder, etc, above). And it is natural, I suppose, that his ilk worry so much about the alleged harms suffered by non-White invaders when not allowed to invade at will, and not at all about the harm to White America they cause. No matter how gracile his features, he will never think of himself as one of us. Add to that his attachment to raceless libertarianism, and he is dangerous to our continued existence.
Robert Frost, it’s said, once quipped that a liberal is someone who won’t take his own side in an argument. Well, libertarians are people who won’t take their own side, ever. Better to perish than to defend yourself. Better to perish than to cause pain to an invader. Better to pretend, in this world of warring races and ethnies, that your group doesn’t exist — that there are “only individuals.” This is nothing less than suicidal ideation on a grand scale all dressed up in the cloak of “morality.” And it doesn’t matter if non-Whites attracted to libertarianism are sincere or not, cloaking their hatred of our people in babble about individualism and “non-aggression” or not. Either way, they’re making war on us.
Watch for ambitious Amash. Whatever he does, you can be sure it won’t be good.
At the end of the day the border of a country is like the front door of a man’s home under the castle doctrine. We are inside; they are outside. And defending that boundary with extreme prejudice, and at all costs, is an inalienable right.
Government’s great function, above all other things it does, is to protect us from invasion. But libertarians say government should basically do nothing, and certainly should not protect its own people. The very concept of “its own people” is racist and collectivist and wrong, they tell us. And if we let them have their way, they’re going to be the death of us all.
* * *