Does Nationalism Mean a Right to Exclude?

Nationalism entails a collective right to exclude. So it sounds like there's not gonna be too much disagreement.

You know, to me when the audience is pretty agreed, it's like why do they want to hear us just sit up here and like uh uh talking talk to each other about how great each other are?

But yeah, I mean, of course, like what I well, I mean what I mean, yeah. You can have an open borders nationally, where is this way there's a lot of things? I think where where is the actual controversy? Yeah, and the the controversy is the difference between the Anne Coulter nationalists and the Vivek Ramaswamy nationalists.

So Anne Coulter Oh, I see, I see, I see, I see.

But I mean Anne Coltered Kind, I guess.

There is well Anne Coulter said

she would never vote for V Vivek Ramaswamy because

she doesn't see him as fully American, and

she doesn't believe that his culture could

assimilate to American values, and she would never vote for someone like that for president of the United States.

So she's more of an ethnic nationalist. And I confess I'm not an ethnic nationalist.

I would vote for Vivek Ramaswamy in a heartbeat. Uh yeah, in a in a heartbeat. Uh it was actually Vivek Ramaswamy that inspired me to write the Libertarian Nationalist Manifesto because when he was running for president a couple of years ago, he described himself as a libertarian nationalist

at the time. And I remember he was having that conversation with Ancultur, she said, I would never vote for you for president. And I said, Well, I would.

And I think that and there was nobody out there sort of describing the sort of collective ideals of people who would vote for Vivek Ramaswamy.

What is it that he believes? How why is he so why is why was Vivek Ramaswamy so compatible with Donald Trump and Trumpism? Many people who dislike Ramaswamy just say,

oh, well, he's really just trying to latch on to MAGA. That's what they accuse me of, like just trying to, you know, suck up

the power or anything like that.

But there was a there was a true compatibility between Vivek Ramaswamy and Donald Trump until right up until the Iowa caucuses. But when Vivek Ramaswamy described himself as a as a libertarian nationalist, but was sparring with Ann Coulter of that concept of nationalism,

I realized that here was a whole like book

opportunity, really, an opportunity to sort of describe

these.

And I I'm actually hoping tonight to get ideas from all of you who who are buying into these ideas of what you believe it

is.

But I think the right to exclude it is

probably our most important right.

And as a matter of fact, I'm probably more exclusionary now than I've ever been, because I started in this

movement in 2008 as a Ron Paul libertarian,

and I've actually, and I I I really hate saying this, but I I now disagree

with the reasons for why I joined the libertarian movement in the first place.

I find myself in a very awkward position of defending libertarianism, but that I think I was wrong when I thought that the reason that we are attacked by Muslim extremists is because of our intervention overseas.

And that was a because of my ignorance at the time, 20 years ago when I first started. But once I really started to dive into American history, I

realized that there has been interventions, conflicts between what Thomas Jefferson called the Muhammadan world at the time, the Muslim world and Americans, since you know 250 years of American greatness, and we're still fighting those same Somali pirates. We're still fighting those same fights. And I don't believe, I don't believe that if we were to simply remove our pro our presence from the world, that people would suddenly find peaceful relations for us. I've had, unfortunately, I've had too much violent in altercations

with people who I never did anything or said anything to, who violated my NAP without and and I didn't intervene.

I didn't start anything, but they started it. And uh, and I think that unfortunately that the non-aggression principle has gone from a very good idea to treat between individuals, and we've allowed we've allowed anarchists to define the non-aggression principle on a formal national and international level, and I think that that's really done a lot of damage, and it's really broken us apart because it's paralyzed us from acting, because even acts of self-defense

become a non a violation

of someone's non-aggression principle. So a right to exclude, we should exclude people who are anti-libertarian. I think we should we should exclude people yeah, thank you.

Isn't that like obvious? Why should we allow communists and isn't that? My friend Judge Department of the United States? And we used to be in agreement on everything and now we're kind of disagreeing on everything these days. And he believes in open borders, and he believes that if a violent terrorist wants to come to the United States, then the US government has no right to exclude them.

I asked him specifically if someone wants to come and bomb the trade tower, the World Trade Tower again, and says, I'm not even bomb the tower, should the government rather than I'm sorry, but that that to me is that's just suicide. Without Machiavelli, without Sung Tzu, without a without a proper theory of war, without the capability of defending

liberty, you won't have it. Because someone will take it from you. We see it everywhere.

Yeah, I think this one's kind of a given. It's like if a nation is going to maybe putting a given on the things proposition, but I think we're talking

about I think um if if if you're gonna say the nation has something different about it, and and you want to maintain it over

time to any degree, I mean if you don't just want to let it uh

you know just completely uh you know melt to the lowest common denominator or float in the wind in whatever

direction whoever comes, you obviously have to do this. I think we can disagree over like the degree to which it's