TROLLQUOTE:

“There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They – the advocates of alternative, non-family lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism – will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.”

Hans Herman-Hoppe, self-identified libertarian, Democracy: The God That Failed

Does that sound like a certain Sam0345? You bet it does!

(Lew Rockwell attempting to run damage control on Hoppe's quote. Yet... some might question why Hoppe couldn't run it himself then, eh? Keith Preston unintentionally intensifies the damage instead. Then intensifies the intensification of damage. Isn't he a charming guy too?)

P.S.: Extra bonus trolling, for the same single downvote of yours! Bryan Caplan vs. feminism. Discussed on PoliticsForum.org.

C'mon people, I'll be disappointed if my comment is not at -10 by tomorrow!

P.P.S. what am I trying to achieve with such trolling?

I hesitate to say - as it might sound rather extremist - but I'm trying to hint that 1) "right-wing" leanings might be incompartible in their essense with both neurologically egalitarian leanings and the acquired memeplex of Universalist morality, 2) that most readers of this are likely to share - on a fundamental psychological level - a sufficient part of the Universalist memeplex, and 3) that it follows that right-wing philosophy might be in its core objectively hostile to your extrapolated volition.

In other words, if you feel a coherent moral objection to what Keith Preston says in the above links - something like here (and here) [1], where actual Anarchists operating within the Anarchist tradition kick the shit out of his "national anarchism" - this by itself means you're ultimately a "Universalist" in these coordinates, and it might be incoherent/irrational for you to oppose Universalism instead of trying to fix its errors. Even if you thought you were broadly against "leftism" - this breaks down the borders of "leftism".

Yeah, that's a very radical claim even for me. I'm not sure how serious I am about it.

[1] Damn, this "Aster" in the comments is simply so badass.