…and not libertarians.

[Added: I use the word statist not as a pejorative, but to describe accurately. As readers of this blog know, my goal is to subvert these kind of slogans…

But, historically, the use of the government to redistribute after the fact has been understood as statism.

The classical liberal position is  thus not statist.  It was Mises’ position and Rand’s, but not Rothbard’s, although Rothbard also selectively dropped pure anarcho-capitalism (sic) when it came to fractional banking.

The full anti-state position of the right seems so internally contradictory that in my estimation it returns one to socialism and the left…

Again, I am being descriptive. I don’t demonize the whole left or socialism as such and I distinguish between types of socialism…and communism…and between voluntary communism and state-enforced communism.

Whether that return to socialism was Rothbard’s intention all along is my fear…or suspicion…or unhinged paranoia….]

Bleeding hearts are very nice statists, of course.

Cultured, well-read, and much better to invite over for dinner and trust with your silverware or your sons than your average libertarian.

[Here I am talking about real libertarians, not poseurs working hand-in-hand with the financial elites and backed by intelligence……of which there are so many I’ve stopped looking, unless I trip right over them.]

Unfortunately, never having been at the receiving end of government force, and only indirectly of its largesse, bleeding-hearts exaggerate both government power and government virtue.

Their opponents (the Rothbardians) take the other tack.  They exaggerate the evil. But they too over-rate the power of governments.

Governments are merely machinery.

[I deleted the last few lines of this blog-post because they needed explanation and clarification that I’d prefer not give in this venue.]