An Open Letter to Libertarians...

[insurgent]

I've had some wonderful discussions with 'libertarians' who are convinced that Bush's Patriot Act and Anti-Homosexual Constitutional Amendment are 100% consistent with the Libertarian ideal, but are meanwhile very upset that the right to vote or freedom of expression are not more supressed.

Well, tell them they're not libertarians, then.

 

[IglooDame]

Copied from TheHighRoad.org discussion:

Folks, before anyone gets too upset or disillusioned, I am hearing that there's a good bit of doubt as to the authenticity of the Hospers letter.

Copied from an LP discussion site:
It is becoming more apparent that the John Hospers's endorsement of "W" is a hoax.

1) Rather than being part of Free Republic's main web site, this letter was posted to their "Forum" by someone with the handle "Y2Krap".

2) Repeated follow-up requests to Y2Krap for source information have not been answered in the thread.

3) One thread poster swears that he has contacted John Hospers who has verified not only is it indeed genuine but that he (John Hospers) posted it himself.

4) The letter has not surfaced on any credible web site.

Now why John Hospers (a philosophy professor at USC and probably at least 70 years old) would be posting such a letter on a Forum that is dominated by young Republican ditto-heads is beyond me.

Also beyond me is why a distinguished gentleman like John Hospers would use the handle "Y2Krap", as well as the idea that he would post such an endorsement exclusively on an ultra-conservative web site.

Now, I haven't done any research myself into it, so if someone DOES find backup evidence, I'm sure we'll all want to know that. But it all sounds fishy to me.

And look at the kinds of tactics the Dems and Reps are eagerly stooping to in order to "win" - like calling a woman whose spouse is fighting in Iraq to express sympathy for his death, and when she replies that she knows he's alive and well, the caller comes back with "Well, vote for Kerry to keep him that way!"

Keep the faith, folks. If this is a hoax, the Republicans must really be scared of the LP this year.

 

[Renata]

Getting peeved at some people in this thread. Must ... not ... take ... bait ... can't ... resist ...

I've had a pretty hard time finding a 'libertarian' that wasn't simply a Republican who wanted to be able to smoke pot while firing his gun at minorities.

I know two. Neither fit any of your criteria. They don't smoke pot or own guns (although one does loooooove the NRA), and they are not racist. I think their political views are silly, but they're decent people. Next argument, please?

The democratic party IS the home of radical enviromentalists, trial lawyers and goverment employee unions.

On the racists/anti-semites front the only people I can think of off the top of my head are Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Jim Moran, Fritz Hollings and Robert Byrd.

"Neo-conservative" is used as a code word for "Jews" by those who know that cant use "Jews" and get away with it. IE "Those damn Neocons control the Bush administration" Substitute ZOG instead of Neocons and you're one step away from the the same rhetoric as the Aryan Nation.

Are you for real, or just a troll? And if the former, where the heck have you been getting your propaganda? Neocon = Jew? You have to be kidding me. The holy neocon trinity: Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld. Any of them Jewish? Nope. The perception of the neocons among the left is overwhelmingly of self-righteous, reactionary, over-privileged, hypocritical, pseudo-Christian corporate suckups. I can't even conceive of where you could get that idea that it could be some sort of code-word for 'Jewish', unless you heard it from some right-wing talk-show host who pulled it out of his own nether regions.

And all the radical environmentalists left for the Green Party ages ago. Get with the ticket.

Renata

 

[joycem10]

Are you for real, or just a troll? And if the former, where the heck have you been getting your propaganda? Neocon = Jew? You have to be kidding me. The holy neocon trinity: Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld. Any of them Jewish? Nope. The perception of the neocons among the left is overwhelmingly of self-righteous, reactionary, over-privileged, hypocritical, pseudo-Christian corporate suckups. I can't even conceive of where you could get that idea that it could be some sort of code-word for 'Jewish', unless you heard it from some right-wing talk-show host who pulled it out of his own nether regions.

And all the radical environmentalists left for the Green Party ages ago. Get with the ticket.

Renata

Thanks for the personal attack, and Im pretty sure Im staying off of your ticket.

Jews considered prominant neoconservatives in the Bush Aministration:

Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Jay Lefkowitz, Richard Perle.


Articles where the Jew/Neocon link is explored. BTW slate is an overwhelmingly left-wing mag...

http://slate.msn.com/id/2064424

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/joelmowbray/jm20030527.shtml

http://slate.msn.com/id/2107047

http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/offsite_snieg_raimondo.htm

http://www.vdare.com/misc/macdonald_neoconservatism.htm

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gottfried/gottfried65.html



As for the envorimentalist, unions, lawyers comment. The mainstream groups representing all three have endorsed Kerry. If the true fringe wishes to vote for marginal parties, so much the better.

 

[Little Raven]

Thanks for the heads up about the possible illegitimacy of this letter, Igloo. I'm certainly willing to believe it's a fake. The only libertarians I've ever met who would agree with it would be the extreme loony fringe.

 

[thestonesfan]

A libertarian would not write that.

 

[Mescalhead]

I've had a pretty hard time finding a 'libertarian' that wasn't simply a Republican who wanted to be able to smoke pot while firing his gun at minorities.

Hey, that's me!

 

[Renata]

@ Joycem: You attacked first, sweetheart, by insinuating that anyone who despised the neocons must be an anti-semite, and that the Democratic Party is the party of left-wing nutcases. There are much better reasons to despise them, and if you want to pick on nutcases, make sure you clean out your own backyard first.

I won't be able to keep my temper, so I'm out of this thread.

Renata

 

[joycem10]

@ Joycem: You attacked first, sweetheart, by insinuating that anyone who despised the neocons must be an anti-semite, and that the Democratic Party is the party of left-wing nutcases.Renata

Wrong, I stated that the democratic party is the home of enviromentalists, trial lawyers and goverment employee unions.

I then stated the names of certain prominant democrats with questionable backgrounds regarding anti-semitism.

I finally stated that many anit-semites use the code word neo-con to avoid the word jew. I never said that all dems are anti-semites.

 

[joacqin]

So now it is not right to use the word neo-con as well? Hmm, what word is next going to be labelled as a coverage of "filthy jew" and thus remove it and all the criticism it might bring from the debate?

 

[Siegmund]

Libertarians have a lot of good ideas about improving the country. Darn shame they've got this guy giving them a black eye and reinforcing the commonly held notion that they are dangerous lunatics. A real setback for getting any sensible libertarian-minded ideas into place - which like it or not, requires finding some common ground with the establishment.

 

[Elizabet]

Here all this time I thought Libertarians were anarchists. And lo and behold it seems they're closet Republicans. Bizzare!

 

[Richard Cribb]

Here all this time I thought Libertarians were anarchists.

As an anarchist I resent that.
This assertion seems to be a rather common misunderstanding. Real anarchists, however, are anti-capitalists.
I recommend you to read this:http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/secFcon.html

 

[Godwynn]

I'm glad I kept on reading through this thread. I thought it really was John Hosper's letter, and I about got up, and threw my new computer off my desk in anger.

 

[IglooDame]

I offer this with no endorsement of it, I've been unable to find the forum post on badnarik.org which it is supposedly copied from (I got it from http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=1322265#post1322265)

EDIT: Found the original post: http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/2004/10/25/in-response-to-benedict-arnold/ and scroll down to post #41

It sounds reasonable to me. As I've said before, the 'war on terror' has made some people into single-issue voters, the other day (former NYC mayor and liberal Democrat) Ed Koch endorsed Bush based purely on his handling of terrorism.

Just found this on badnarik.org - I cant draw any conclusion - just putting this out there:



REPORT on DISCUSSIONs with Dr. Hospers.

I spoke with John from 9pm to 4:30 a.m. the night Oct. 25th-26th, 2004. He was on the phone speaking to a Libertarian from East Coast as I knocked on his Hollywood Hills Door. Only a young nephew is now living with John Hospers.

He can’t answer all the emails and phone calls. But he said tells all who inquire, that he did indeed author the letter. But he told me: Bush is better than Kerry, because Islamic [murdering] extremists are the greatest threat to Liberty. Hospers was bsolutely “fixated” on “Islamic extremists intent on killing
every non-Islamic person in the world".
This “threat trumps all other concerns".
I attempted to reason with Dr. Hospers from several angles of logic, but logic
seemed not to work. “Only Bush perceives
the great danger” was his reply.

After more than 8 hours of two way discussion, I concluded, that Dr. Hospers, has been isolated too long! He was unaware that David Cobb and Michael Badnarik had been arrested, unaware of several of the Patriot Act provisions, and numberous other factoids that most Libertarians knew for fact. He was not sure that Badnarik had been arrested at St. Louis, but was for the sake of arguement willing to take my word for it, without conceding it as a fact, known to be true.

My Conclusion:

Dr. John Hospers, is not in the same mental level of sharpness, he was even 3 years ago when I did a Tv interview for a documentary on the Libertarian Party with him at the 2001 San Jose Ca. State Convention. Randy Debber is more the author of the “Hospers” “Open Letter", than Dr. John Hospers, even though John
is quick to claim “credit” for it, while acknowledging “it probably won’t change many minds, least of all Libertarians".
Lastly, Dr. Hospers is now of somewhat fragil physical condition. He is certainly in a state of decline, but still wanting to not be forgotten… to have some impact … to save us all from
murdering Islamic extremists. Many elderly become obsessed with “security” as they become less able to care for themselves.

Therefore, even though a very aged Dr. Hospers accepts credit for the “Open Letter", I conclude Randy Debber used his knowledge of Dr. Hospers current condition and proclivities, and worries to put Dr. Hospers name on a document, that Debber coached out of Hospers. Dr. Hospers did indeed write his concerns in the letter, and will acknowledge that Dr. John Hospers considers Cheney the real brains, and Bush a bad debater and “not too bright", but still feels that “Kerry will not stop the Islamic Extremist intend on murder every non-islamic even in America".

He finally stated, that he did NOT think his “open Letter” would do much to bring Bush votes, but felt impelled to do it, when asked by a certain, Randy Debber. Finally, by way of long discussion, Prof Hospers let out that Debber had written the final draft, and Randy Debber had sent the email, because supposedly John is not computer savy [according also to what Mr. Debber emailed].

I indicated that since Kerry will sweep California, his letter will do no go whatsoEver since all CA electorial votes in the Electorial college will go to Kerry, even if Every BADNARIK supporter defected to Bush. Dr. Hospers agreed and acknowedged that, but stated he hoped it would reach Libertarians on “independant” voters in battleground states. Dr. john Hospers in the course of 8 hours stated, that the Libertarian Party was not even a blimp on the political radar screen as far as Presidential things go. then why bother to write a Open letter? John “hoped” it might do some good, while acknowledging, again, he probably did not change any votes.

For a man whose life was centered around rational thought, I felt I was talking only to a shadow of that mental giant. Logic, reason, were absent. The clich’es of logic and reason were there, but not the actual substance.

So I conclude, the Letter IS a FAKE, in that without Randy Debber, it would never have been. John Hospers has his own PC and is still capable of using it, and still answers some email, but DEBBER is the one who SENT the “open Letter".

Randy Debber, whom I have never met, and never heard of until I tracked down the Email author is in my view, the author of the John Hospers “OPEN LETTER”

John will stand there and tell you it is his, but I think what John Hospers wants most, is not to be forgotten, while he is still alive. He talks about Islamic Extremists, yes. But I think if he had met Mr. BADNARIK, and been invited to any discussion, Randy Debber would not have been able to get this aging elder philosopher to put his name on this letter. There is more to say, in detail, but this is my conclusion after more 8 hours of discussion.

What Randy Debbers motive was or is in this, I can only speculate, and that I won’t do.

William “B.J.” Wagener

 

[Arminius]

I've had a pretty hard time finding a 'libertarian' that wasn't simply a Republican who wanted to be able to smoke pot while firing his gun at minorities.

You just found one. I do own a gun, I won't use pot, but I think it should be legal (much like cigarettes), and my best friends are all from different minorities. Mixed up, ain't it?

 

[thestonesfan]

You just found one. I do own a gun, I won't use pot, but I think it should be legal (much like cigarettes), and my best friends are all from different minorities. Mixed up, ain't it?

Well, jpowers, in his wisdom, says libertarians are racist, so you have to shoot at your friends to really qualify.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Lunacy and conspiracy! Does it get any better?

The actual letter made my paranoiameter go off the scale every few sentences, so I didn't actually read thru all of it. I'd be surprised if anything written in that style convinced anyone, no matter the veracity of its factual claims.

This Wagener bloke appears rather apologetic; I get the impression he isn't so much constructing the most likely explanation he could, but one that would be the least mentally unsettling to himself. He does not want to believe that his old idol has gone crazy in his old age.

 

[thestonesfan]

If they were indeed obsessed with islamic fundamentalists, I could see a libertarian voting for Bush.

Personally, I'm more concerned with averting an economic collapse due to national debt than a bunch of idiot fanatics.

 

[Paradigne]

I was under the impression that libertarians were all for minimalist government? Which is really the only reason they want legalization of drugs. Most libs are actually non users...