A conversation with Richard Storey, for The Council of European Canadians

2gsjgnRrABUb4zYhgrB2BPEdMRNiHnWu8cSAeH6Pk1prKVACUsqDy9xYCGfpGpThi4tJo1w5Fq4Bi7VpwdSVdyfCyL3bggPDkvzzsdJmJVXKggXiCe  Richard Storey LL.M is a Catholic traditionalist, sometimes described as a medieval libertarian. His writing spans law, history, theology, and cultural criticism, and he is the author of The Uniqueness of Western Law: A Reactionary Manifesto. He lives in England with his wife and three children.

  Grégoire Canlorbe: Ayn Rand’s notion that scientific racism is the worst form of collectivism has virtually reached the whole libertarian spectrum. How do you conciliate libertarian individualism and race consciousness?

  Richard Storey: Well, at once we need to first understand what we mean by libertarian. Most libertarians would believe they are libertarians because they are Austrian economists or because they are extremely individualistic, I would say, “hyper-individualistic”. That is not libertarianism. Libertarianism is only a theory of law, that’s it. What kind of law is that?  Well, it is the rule of law – a deontological theory of law. The law rules above everyone. The law is king of kings, if you want to put it that way. And so I think most libertarians do not even understand what the word means themselves.

  So, where does this more modern, secular libertarianism, which we are more familiar with, come from? It emerged from an Anglo-liberal, classical liberal background, inspired by figures like John Locke. It is very individualistic, of course, as anyone with a passing knowledge of Ayn Rand can see full well. And yet, even figures like Murray Rothbard, Jeff Deist, who is of course the current President of the Mises Institute, recognize and speak very openly about the necessity of family and of the groups into which we are born; they speak about culture, they speak about religion, and of course nationality – your territorial, ethnic group if you like. That is something you are born into as much as your family, your immediate family. Or at least it used to be.

  Of course, in cities, in the artificial environments we have been created for the past 2000 years, the situation is very different. Your family, or what you might call your family might just be a group of loose friends that you have, maybe who you meet at the café, or some people you see at work and, really, you do not have a great deal of interaction in your community, in your neighbourhood. So, many libertarians are now realising, through my writings, those of Frank van Dun and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, that the former intermediary institutions and communities between the individual and the state, which formed medieval society, were essential in preventing the rise of centralised, coercive states among European civilisations.

Continuer la lecture de « A conversation with Richard Storey, for The Council of European Canadians »

Libertarianism, cosmopolitanism, and Indo-European tradition

  Warning: this article lies on a metapolitical and ideal level, and not on a programmatic and political level. It was first published on « Counter-Currents Publishing. »

11-19-18-10-1  The obsession of liberals [libertarians, either “classical liberals” or “anarcho-capitalists”] with condemning economic or cultural Marxism is a dead end. Saving Western civilization requires the wisdom to identify, the courage to name, the true contemporary enemy of the West: cosmopolitanism. Cultural Marxism is a sluggish expression, which may at best designate Gramsci’s doctrine that Marxists must, before attempting the Revolution, achieve cultural hegemony; as for economic Marxism, which is only a way of designating communism and planning, it subsists at the margin. Cosmopolitanism is the ideology promoted by the “global superclass,” according to the expression popularized (if not initiated) by Samuel Huntington: the world superclass consists of a transnational network of uprooted and denationalized people, whose gestation dates back at least to the beginning of the 20th century and whose constitution accelerated with the fall of the Soviet bloc. This article aims to elucidate the conceptual relations between liberalism [libertarianism] and cosmopolitanism; and will outline the contours of a new variety of liberalism: a liberalism simultaneously directed against bourgeois nationalism and against cosmopolitanism.

Definition of cosmopolitism

  By cosmopolitan ideology, one must understand, here, the ideology that rejects humanity divided into nations. As such, cosmopolitanism condemns the particular mode of organization that characterizes a nation, which confers on a group of individuals the identity and the unity of a nation. That mode of organization is the following: a relative genetic homogeneity, as well as cultural; a chain of social and juridical ranks that goes back to a sovereign political authority (i.e., the supreme authority within the government); a territory that is covered by, and which limits, this hierarchical and homogeneous organization. Cosmopolitanism attacks the sense of territory and therefore borders, by forbidding governments to defend nations against indiscriminate free trade or free immigration. It also attacks the juridico-political hierarchy of a nation, in advocating the sole income and occupation inequalities, or in defending a world government. Finally, cosmopolitanism condemns the genetic and cultural differences between nations: not content with advocating the relativism of values within each nation—the abolition of moral boundaries enacted within them—it praises the leveling of races and cultures.

Continuer la lecture de « Libertarianism, cosmopolitanism, and Indo-European tradition »

Une conversation avec Olivier Piacentini, pour Suavelos

vignette-zoom-2017-01-23  Olivier Piacentini est depuis 17 ans le directeur d’un cabinet de conseil spécialisé dans la création d’entreprises, mais aussi essayiste prolifique et politologue, souvent invité dans des émissions radiophoniques et télévisées. Cette conversation avec Grégoire Canlorbe, Vice Président du Parti National-Libéral, a eu lieu à Paris en avril 2018.

  Grégoire Canlorbe : Pourriez-vous commencer par nous parler de votre proximité vis-à-vis des « jeunes de quartier » qui se lancent dans la création d’entreprise – et doivent endurer l’oppression des taxes et du code du travail ? Jusqu’à quel point vos essais sur la France, le déclin, et la mondialisation empruntent-ils à cette expérience de terrain ?

  Olivier Piacentini : Je dirige depuis 17 ans un cabinet de conseil spécialisé dans l’assistance aux créateurs d’entreprises. Situé dans le département de Seine Saint Denis (le fameux 9-3), je suis amené à travailler souvent avec des jeunes de banlieue, dont certains ont eu un parcours chaotique, parfois même la délinquance, avant de se ranger et de vouloir créer leur propre emploi. C’est là que l’incohérence, voire l’injustice, du système Français saute aux yeux : auparavant dans l’oisiveté, l’échec, ou l’illégalité, ces jeunes se trouvaient excusés par un système judiciaire laxiste, victimisés par les discours des assistantes sociales, des avocats etc. Pour ceux qui décident de sortir de l’ornière, la surprise est grande de constater qu’à peine les statuts de la société déposés au greffe, ils passent sans transition de l’autre côté de la barrière : de victimes, ils deviennent des patrons, donc des exploiteurs, des profiteurs, et ne bénéficient plus de l’assistance des pouvoirs publics, mais subissent, au même titre que tous les autres indépendants, l’oppression fiscale et réglementaire qui finit par en décourager bon nombre. Continuer la lecture de « Une conversation avec Olivier Piacentini, pour Suavelos »

Entrevue avec Henry de Lesquen, pour Institut Coppet

  Cette entrevue a été initialement publiée sur le site web de l’Institut Coppet, le 18 avril 2017.

lCo9oYbl  Henry de Lesquen est un haut fonctionnaire, homme politique, dirigeant de radio, et essayiste français. Il poursuit de 1974 à 2013 une carrière d’administrateur civil. Président du Club, puis Carrefour de l’Horloge depuis 1985, il a pris la tête de Radio Courtoisie en 200. Il est par ailleurs conseiller municipal de Versailles de 2001 à 2014. Se réclamant du national-libéralisme, il a toujours été classé « divers droite » dans les scrutins auxquels il a participé. En 2015, il a annoncé vouloir être candidat à l’élection présidentielle de 2017, mais s’est finalement retiré en faveur de François Fillon, « seul capable de faire barrage à la gauche ».

Continuer la lecture de « Entrevue avec Henry de Lesquen, pour Institut Coppet »