Norm, funny to see this regimist adding a new smear against Rothbard as well: that he cheered on Pol Pot. In fact, the Republicans supported this mass-murderer because they hated Prince Sianhouk for his neutralism, and the Khmer Rouge were fanatically anti-Vietnamese and would be de facto US allies. Thus the mass-murderer Nixon’s massive “secret” bombing of Cambodia. Republicans continued to back Pol Pot right up through the Reagan administration.

The Best of Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Tom, I noticed that Cathy Young’s response to your reply refused to address any of your points, instead it just continued to smear you and other non-interventionist, decentralist libertarians. Particularly upsetting is her use of the old charge that because Rothbard pointed out the lessons for libertarians in the downfall of the governments of South Vietnam and Cambodia he was a fan of Pol Pot. I cannot hope to improve on Joesph Stromberg’s refutation of that smear so I will merely direct Cathy Young to Rothbard’s 1990 talk on the death of the Soviet Union, which he called “the most exciting event of my life,” available on the Misses Institute web page and LRC’s Rothbard page. People can also read what Rothbard actually wrote about the fall of South Vietnam in The Libertarian Forum, April, 1975.

Young also does not state if she is reading other pro-secessionists out of the movement, such as Walter Williams, Lord Acton, or her fellow cold warrior Frank Meyer. Of course, I would not expect someone who thinks we need to submit to a police state in order to preserve our freedom to understand the link between decentralization and liberty. Perhaps Cathy Young should read what her editor and fellow contributors have said about the need to sacrifice liberty to preserve freedom.