It's worth clearing something up about the strategy that led to
the Paul newsletters. Paleolibertarianism began as a way to get
libertarian politics back in touch with the normal customs, habits,
and mores of most people while keeping the focus on antistatism.
The idea was that libertarian hostility to religion and to the
nation-state was hurting the cause of more freedom and less
government. Most people are to some extent religious. They don't
reject all forms of social authority. When they hear that a country
is just a bunch of people who happen live in the same geopraphic
location, and that there is no reason to feel more loyalty to an
American than someone else, it doesn't quite ring true to them.
Unfortunately, as evidenced by the types of people these
newsletters were marketed to, some prominent paleolibertarians took
these insights and then veered off into rather ugly directions with
them. Ironically, by doing so they have probably strengthened the
very tendencies in libertarianism they once sought to mitigate.
topics:
Religion, Libertarianism