[u-89]

Not wanting to turn this into a Civil War agruement thread as there are enough of those already on FR but I do not think it very controversial to say that in those days people thought of themselves as a citizen of their State, not The United States, like Lee turned down a Federal commission to defend his homeland of Virginia.

Today of course there is no such thing as a soveriegn state and most people no longer have the attachemnt to their State as folks did in days of old but that does not mean that these things were not legitimate in the begining or that today that understanding of how things once were or the desire to return to that understanding is beyond the pale.

Since perfection in human endeavors has not existed since Eden there is no perfect society to point to and fully embrace. That does not mean that high ideals of certain societies should not be championed and emulated. The bad points need not be returned to - it is not take it all or nothing. Such an arguement is leftist - they try to discredit limited government and the free market because some of the founders owned slaves. They also discredit the idea of state's sovereignty because of old time racial injustice. It seems odd to me that conservatives say they want to conserve all that was good of the old republic on one hand and on the other adopt leftist tactics to discredit their own dear traditions.

[x]

The US tried "state sovereignty" under the Articles of Confederation. It did not work well. We had trouble paying for our own defense and our other debts.

It also looks like Lee had little trouble thinking of himself as an American citizen first and a Virginian second, until Virginia joined the rebellion. His was a tragic choice, but it's the sort of choice made by those in all countries facing civil war, not the basis of a political philosophy.

I'll certainly grant that the country could have pursued another, more decentralized course that might have had benefits. It could also have had serious problems. But putting in a good word for Jefferson or the Anti-Federalists, or contemplating the tragic choices of the 1860s is not the same as a full-fledged embrace of the CSA and a hatred of those who fought to preserve the union.

Asked if he thought Saddam Hussein was evil, Rockwell said, of course he’s evil, he’s a politician. Asked if he feared nuclear weapons in the hands of Hussein, Rockwell pertly replied that he also feared nuclear weapons in the hands of George W. Bush.

Rockwell hardly a "leading intellectual influence." He's more like an adolescent idiot. Thomas Fleming and his Confederamania did a lot to kill off paleconservatism. "Paleolibertarianism" was never much of anything serious. Basically it was an attempt to overcome some flaws in libertarianism without addressing other, equally serious drawbacks.