John Derbyshire: Geezers Don’t Care! Marc Faber Defies AntiRacist Moral Panic

Adapted from the October 20 Radio Derb, available exclusively on

See previous incidents under the tag "White Guy Loses His Job"

Culture hero of the week was surely investment guru and gold bug Marc Faber, proprietor of the Gloom, Boom & Doom market newsletter.

I can't afford a subscription to that periodical— it's $300 a year— but of course, as a fellow pessimist, I follow Mr. Faber's pronouncements with keen attention when I can get them for free.

In the latest issue of that newsletter, Mr. Faber committed the following thing:
Thank God white people populated America, and not the blacks. Otherwise, the US would look like Zimbabwe, which it might look like one day anyway, but at least America enjoyed 200 years in the economic and political sun under a white majority.

'Dr. Doom' Faber: 'Thank God white people populated America', by Jeff Cox,, October 17, 2017

Faber also passed comment on the matter of Confederate statues, which was September's nationwide moral panic, October's being of course the Harvey Weinstein business. Those statues are, he said, "of honourable people whose only crime was to defend what all societies had done for more than 5,000 years: keep a part of the population enslaved.”

Much shrieking and swooning ensued. CNBC, Fox News, and Bloomberg, all of whom had been using Faber as a talking head for years, said he would no longer be an invited guest on their business programs. As of Thursday at least five companies have dropped him from their boards, a loss of annual income to Faber of around half a million dollars. Read more >>

John Derbyshire: Austrians Vote Against Muslim Anschluss, Get Called Nazis

Adapted from the October 20 Radio Derb, available exclusively on

As reported here by James Fulford on Monday, Austria's general election last weekend was won by the center-right People's Party with 32 percent of the vote. The center-left Social Democrats got 27 percent. Just a whisker behind them was the nationalist Freedom Party at 26 percent.

The leader of the winning People's Party is Sebastian Kurz, who is 31 years old. That's extraordinarily young for a national leader: even Kim Jong Un is older than that—at least we think he is. Kurz is a real wunderkind: he was Secretary of State at 27.

And "center-right" doesn't quite capture his politics. When you hear "center-right" in an American context, you think of someone like Paul Ryan or Chris Christie: business-friendly but an open-borders squish on immigration and borders.

Not this guy. Quote from Kurz:
Our goal is that we decide who can come to Europe, and we decide who we help, and that we don't let the [people] smugglers decide … The concept of no borders is not going to work.[ Austrian officials say Europe, not smugglers, must decide which migrants make it , By Carol Morello, Washington Post, April 4, 2016]

Hallelujah! The question now is: which of the other two big parties, the center-left Social Democrats or the nationalist Freedom Party, will Kurz invite into a coalition? Read more >>

Hans-Herman Hoppe: Libertarianism, The Alt-Right And AntiFa—A Libertarian Strategy For Social Change

Speech delivered at the 12th annual meeting of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum, Turkey, on September 17, 2017

We know the fate of the term "liberal" and "liberalism." It has been affixed to so many different people and different positions that it has lost all its meaning and become an empty, non-descript label. The same fate now increasingly also threatens the term "libertarian" and "libertarianism," which was invented to regain some of the conceptual precision lost with the demise of the former labels.

However, the history of modern libertarianism is still quite young. It began in Murray Rothbard’s living room and found its first quasi-canonical expression in his For A New Liberty. The Libertarian Manifesto, published in 1973.

And so I am still hopeful and not yet willing to give up on libertarianism as defined and explained by Rothbard with unrivaled conceptual clarity and precision, notwithstanding the meanwhile countless attempts of so-called libertarians to muddy the water and misappropriate the good name of libertarianism for something entirely different.

The theoretical, irrefutable core of the libertarian doctrine is simple and straightforward and I have explained it already repeatedly at this place. If there were no scarcity in the world, human conflicts, or more precisely physical clashes, would be impossible. Interpersonal conflicts are always conflicts concerning scarce things.

I want to do A with a given thing and you want to do B with the same thing. Because of such conflicts—and because we are able to communicate and argue with each other—we seek out norms of behavior with the purpose of avoiding these conflicts. The purpose of norms is conflict-avoidance. If we did not want to avoid conflicts, the search for norms of conduct would be senseless. We would simply fight and struggle.

Absent a perfect harmony of all interests, conflicts regarding scarce resources can only be avoided if all scarce resources are assigned as private, exclusive property to some specified individual or group of individuals. Only then can I act independently, with my own things, from you, with your own things, without you and me clashing.

But who owns what scarce resource as his private property and who does not?

  • First: Each person owns his physical body that only he and no one else controls directly.

  • Second: as for scarce resources that can be controlled only indirectly (that must be appropriated with our own nature-given, i.e., un-appropriated, body), exclusive control (property) is acquired by and assigned to that person, who appropriated the resource in question first or who acquired it through voluntary (conflict-free) exchange from its previous owner.

For only the first appropriator of a resource (and all later owners connected to him through a chain of voluntary exchanges) can possibly acquire and gain control over it without conflict, i.e., peacefully. Otherwise, if exclusive control is assigned instead to latecomers, conflict is not avoided but contrary to the very purpose of norms made unavoidable and permanent.

Before this audience, I do not need to go into greater detail except to add this: If you want to live in peace with other people and avoid all physical clashes and, if such clashes do occur, seek to resolve them peacefully, then you must be an anarchist or more precisely a private property anarchist, an anarcho-capitalist or a proponent of a private law society.

And by implication, then, and again without much further ado: Someone, anyone, is not a libertarian or merely a fake libertarian who affirms and advocates one or more of the following:

  • the necessity of a State, any State, of "public" (State) property and of taxes in order to live in peace;

  • the existence and justifiability of any so-called “human rights” or “civil rights” other than private property rights, such as “women's rights,” “gay rights,” “minority rights,” the “right” not to be discriminated against, the “right” to free and unrestricted immigration, the “right” to a guaranteed minimum income or to free health care, or the “right” to be free of unpleasant speech and thought.

The proponents of any of this may call themselves whatever they want, and as libertarians we may well cooperate with them, insofar as such a cooperation offers the promise of bringing us closer to our ultimate goal, but they are not libertarians or only fake libertarians. Read more >>

White Replacement as Divine Command: Drew Fraser Reports From Theological College

Andrew (“Drew”) Fraser, longtime professor of law at Macquarie University in Australia and a too-infrequent writer for, gained public notoriety in 2005 for protesting mass immigration into Australia in a letter to his local newspaper. The scandal arose from his matter-of-fact reference to the increased crime that African immigrants could be expected to bring with them. He was immediately suspended from teaching, and a peer-reviewed academic article he had written— "Rethinking the White Australia Policy”—was hastily suppressed.

Fraser later recalled:
I received precious little support from fellow WASPS. Indeed, Anglo-Australians were well-represented among academic colleagues who did their best to foster a lynch-mob mentality against me among students and the public-at-large. This experience taught me that out-group altruism is seen by my co-ethnics as an occasion for moral preening. I began to wonder just what sort of ethno-pathology is at work among WASPs who refuse to take their own side in a fight.

His subsequent research resulted in publication of The WASP Question, a book well-received on the Dissident Right. Fraser came to see the problem with modern Anglo-Saxons as essentially spiritual in character. He learned that it had been the Christian Church, not the state, which presided over the birth of English nationhood. This suggested to him the possibility that the decay of Christianity, and more particularly of Anglicanism, might have something to do with the failure of Anglo-Saxons around the world to maintain a healthy sense of ethnic belonging.

The Anglican Church of Australia, for example, has been heavily involved in efforts to increase the number of foreigners granted “refugee” status in that country, something they justify by referring to the Good Samaritan parable. But unlike the Good Samaritan, the church itself is not making any sacrifice:
Church-run charities have been absorbed into the vast, sprawling administrative apparatus of the transnational corporate welfare state actively working to dissolve the ethno-religious identity of every European-descended people. Neither Anglican charities nor Anglican churches will shoulder the ever-mounting financial and social costs of refugee resettlement. The real costs are simply shifted to the taxpayers and working class neighborhoods in the outer suburbs.

Fraser, now-retired and wanting to understand, in his own words, “why the church is so screwed up,” decided he needed a better grounding in Christian theology. Perhaps naïvely, he assumed the place to get this was a Christian divinity school. His experiences provide an autobiographical aspect to his new book Dissident Dispatches: An Alt-Right Guide to Christian Theology. [ note: Currently only the Kindle edition is available through Amazon U.S., apparently because of legal harassment over the hardcopy’s use of Pepe The Frog in its cover art. The hardcopy edition is still available through e.g. Amazon Canada and also through Book Depository in the UK which provides free worldwide shipping, and Barnes & Noble U.S. More details from Arktos Press .]

Fraser applied to Sydney’s United Theological College, associated with the notoriously liberal “Uniting Church of Australia.” It turned out to be a “hotbed of multiculturalist ideology.” “Life as a student at UTC,” he writes, “has taught me what it means to be a member of a (despised) ethnic minority” [ The Cult of The Other , March 2, 2012] Read more >>

Patrick J. Buchanan: Is Liberalism a Dying Faith?

Asked to name the defining attributes of the America we wish to become, many liberals would answer that we must realize our manifest destiny since 1776, by becoming more equal, more diverse and more democratic--and the model for mankind's future.

Equality, diversity, democracy--this is the holy trinity of the post-Christian secular Read more >>
More Articles...