1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/15186/frank-chodorov-educator/

Frank Chodorov, Educator

December 31, 2010 by

You have only a few years to live and cannot hope to remake society in so short a time. Nobody now living will see a free society in America. But, in fighting for it, one can have a lot of fun. Consider the effort as a legacy to your great-grandchildren. FULL ARTICLE by Jeff Riggenbach


DS December 31, 2010 at 12:28 pm


EXCELLENT article and thanks for the Enlightenment and choosing to share it!

It hit home with me to my core and has shed a useful light upon my ‘conversation of life’ as I navigate and integrate all that I continue to learn going forward.

The closing sentence so aptly stated resonates truth after my own heart in my desire to pass along the ‘Torch of Freedom and Truth’ onto my very own children and my children’s children…

“In the circumstances, what better heritage could you bestow than some understanding of the principles of freedom and, perhaps, a will for freedom?”

Thanks again and blessings to you and yours.


P.S. Which of Frank Chodorov’s writings was most of this article derived from?

B.K. Marcus December 31, 2010 at 5:25 pm

“P.S. Which of Frank Chodorov’s writings was most of this article derived from?”

Much of it was taken from the Chodorov article we also ran today: “About Socialism and Socialists.”

niku January 1, 2011 at 3:47 am

Great man, Chodorov!
Thanks for the article.

Dave M January 1, 2011 at 11:35 am

Great article!

Leon Haller January 1, 2011 at 2:23 pm

Chodorov was a leading advocate of radical individualism. Individualism, however, is really no more than an evolved white racial trait. It is appropriate in intra-white contexts; that is, amongst undiversified (authentic) white nations. It is totally inappropriate outside of white contexts, under conditions of horrible, Big Totalitarian Government-inflicted ‘diversity’ (unwanted Third World immigration being the leading statist program of our age in the West). In those contexts, whites must subordinate their individualistic instincts, and behave tribally, if only for mere survival.

Libertarians are congenitally/psychologically incapable of understanding the limits of individualism, but circumstances will eventually put an end to their dreams of “libertarian universalism”.


Leon Haller January 1, 2011 at 2:27 pm

“In those LATTER contexts” I meant to say immediately above.

Sione January 1, 2011 at 2:42 pm


I’ve come across some weird mumbo-jumbo in my time, but your racist smears are right down there with the worst of filth- setting a standard of desperate vileness. One can only wonder at the polluted state of mind that would produce such irrationality as that which you have written. As a Polynesian (i.e. non-white), I am no less an individual than any other person, white or not. Leon, it’s time for you to quit being a collectivist bigot. Grow up and recognise people as they are, not as you’d like to force them to be.


Leon Haller January 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm


You have not disproved anything I stated. Nonwhites have ruined innumerable white cities, and whole societies (eg Rhodesia, South Africa, Belgium, The Netherlands, California, etc ad nauseam). We whites would be much better off living among ourselves alone, but neither our own treasonous governments, nor pushy and violent nonwhites themselves, will LEAVE US ALONE – in our own lands (see youtube video).

Libertarianism is another part of the white leftist refusal to face racial realities. For whites, libertarianism, like liberalism and socialism, is an enemy of our liberties (for proof look at nonwhite voting patterns – leftist all the way, from Muslim Obama on down).

Here’s an idea: Let the US secede from Hawaii. I’m all in favor of Polynesians having their country back – assuming you all leave MY country, the USA. Good fences make good neighbors – the essence of private property (something libertarians are supposed to advocate, but which they invariably relinquish when “race” and “civil rights” enter the discussion).

Sione January 3, 2011 at 1:08 am

Leon, you racist swine,

Firstly, I’m not Hawaian and I am not resident within the USA.

Secondly, since you insist on viewing the world in racist terms let’s accept your premise for a moment and apply it.

You decide that Hawaii should be seceded from the USA and Polysesian Hawaiians get “their country back.” You need to be consistent and apply your principles to the continental North America as well. North America is not “your country”. A consistent application of your racist mumbo-jumbo requires you to immediately depart from that continent so that the Mexicans and Native Americans can receive “their country back”. After all you are trespassing on their land. You should LEAVE THEM ALONE and leave. Think on it!

Racism is the lowest form of collectivism. You’ve trapped yourself within it and are now hoist by your own petard. Think on that as well, fool.


Leon Haller January 3, 2011 at 7:19 am

Obviously, you understand not the first thing about libertarianism (or political philosophy, or racial science or sociology, etc). A country belongs to those who built it, who brought it into a condition of property/civilization. North America was a wild, savage place until the coming of the white man. Whites took this barren wilderness, and built a great civilization (now being in part transferred in collectivist fashion to, and in other part ruined by, nonwhites). American Indians are allowed to live here, too, but they did not create America; they did all they could to prevent its creation. Mexicans have had almost nothing to do with the US until domestic race traitors (‘liberals’) decided to change our traditional, “whites only” immigration laws in 1965, and then allow in tens of millions of Third World invader/colonizers. They are trespassing on whites’ land.

I am not a libertarian, but apparently I have a much deeper understanding of libertarian philosophy than you do.

Sione January 3, 2011 at 2:04 pm

Leon, you racist swine,

You are inconsistent and self-contradictory. When it suits, you arbitraily apply a notion of giving people what you identify as “their land”. When it doesn’t suit, you don’t want to even think about that idea at all. Instead you wriggle, twist and turn, seeking an exception, a way out of a notion you originally posited and sought to apply.

On this occasion you post that a “country belongs to those who built it, who brought it into a condition of property/civilization.” Yet clearly that does not apply to you at all. You did not build the USA, let alone bring to it any improvement in condition. You did nothing that counted whatsoever. Not at all. You were responsible for none of it. Nothing. Nada. Not a whit of civilisation did you erect. It is clearly the case that you believe that solely on the basis of the tone of your skin you are special and that your wishes, dreams amd musings should be seriously applied. That wishful irrationality doesn’t hold. So, you need to begin packing your bags little man. By application of your own random notions you have no business being in North America. It aint your land. It aint your country. Move out and move on. See if anyone will have you.

Whichever of your approaches were to be applied, you, Leon Haller, get moved out. Were we to apply your original idea, then not only would Hawaii become a land of its native inhabitants, so too would the whole of continental North America. After all, stolen property remains stolen property, even when modified or “improved”, even when converted and passed to a receiver! Hence, according to you, it is you who remains the trespasser. Were we to apply the second notion, that the country belongs to those who built it, again you’re excluded. You didn’t build the country at all. You merely squatted there.

I had to laugh at your imbecilic recitation of a myth of how the naughty natives sought to prevent the creation of a “great civilisation” in North America. Conveniently you ignored the genocidal policies of the union government, its cronies and its acolytes. One can imagine your hypocritical squeals of outrage were millions of North Koreans and Iranians to move into the town you live in and begin applying identical policies to those the govt applied to generations of Mexicans and Native North Americans.

Of course all of your musings are utter nonsense, based on racist pig-ignorance. What you have demonstrated here is that you are a collectivist. You utterly fail to consider the nature of the individual at all. Does it occur to you that your idiocy with regards to Hawaii (and anywhere else for that matter) requires the destruction of Individual Rights. Attempting to right the wrongs of the past (the invasions and confiscations of property, the enslavements of free people, the destruction of an entire culture, the deaths of the majority of Polynesian residents etc) by taking property from innocent present owners of said property is a destruction of Individual Rights. Your collectivist approach is to do this on the basis of the attribute of skin colour. Hardly civilised. Hardly likely to work out peacefully. Hardly moral. Hardly libertarian.

Here is something for you to consider. Nothing you have claimed in your post is libertarian. What you have achieved is to promote collectivism of a particularly vacuous and primitive type- racism. While you may claim to understand libertarianism deeply the evidence is that apart from being a racist, you are also a liar.


Ymbel January 2, 2011 at 2:34 am

I guess it can go without saying but I do think that a great majority of anarchist/libertarians will disagree with Mr. Chodorovs’ assertion that libertarians and socialist are made and not born. Education of any kind is a beacon in the dark that supplies many with points of reference that in the hands of a healthy mind knows that it(knowlegde) is only a map describing a reality that must constantly be updated and revised and can never claim to be “The Truth”. That is why education is important. I’m sure that people like Walter Block and David Kramer and many others that held strong socialist ideals are proof of that. History is also proof of the fact that without support(political) socialism would be nothing more than abstract theories that some would play with. History is the laboratory were these ideas are being played out. Look at the Pilgrams at Plymouth,or the first few brave Chinese farmers(of which I’m sure there were many but with the force of the state were afraid to act) who risked their lives and now we are witnessing the seed that they have planted become this capitalistic juggernaut. Witness also what is happening to the Israeli Kabuts and even Chomskys’ idea of worker own companies(if it’s a more productive idea why isn’t it spreading like wildfire and toppling other means of production).

Another point I disagree with and also reminded me of another article in the liberatrian tradtion(the one on Mencken) is his and Menckens’ confusing the belief that because most or the majority of people are not intellectual elites freedom will be very hard to achieve……”most people are ‘unprepared for freedom [and] incapable of understaning what it is…….’It is obvious that there are some men who,regadless of their backgrounds and environments, are more plentifully endowed with intellectual curiosity than others [and] that the proporion of this unexplainable “intellectual elite” to the number who are content to grub along is small.’ I don’t disagree about a minority of elites or that nature “abhors uniformity”. With these things I agree. What I don’t agree with is that you can never reach a stateless society because of this “great number who are content to grub along”. That’s what’s call the politicalization of society. The less politics is involved in the sphere of people’s lives the less important will intellectual ideas of freedom be. People,ordinary people, do know what freedom is. And what is freedom? I’ve heard that serfs in medival times were freer than we are now. And in a free society freedom to one person would mean letting others make decisions for them,while for someone else it would be the polar opposite of that. In an anarchist society freedom would mean the freedom to choose. And history will let us know in what space and time is the more appropriate expression of that freedom. And I found it ironic that these two great men (Chodorov and Mencken) both were robbed of the means to express their intellectual gifts by strokes.

Ymbel January 2, 2011 at 11:01 am

meant to say “are born,not made”.

Stone January 2, 2011 at 8:11 pm

Regarding libertarians and socialists being born and not made, I think it is more accurate (and more hopeful) to say that the philosophy of the individual will follow his presuppositions–which can be corrected with education and the grace of God. Cornelius Van Till, as elucidated and expanded upon by Greg Bahnsen, makes this clear.

Yet, Chodorov would to some extent seem to agree with R.J. Rushdoony, who stated that, “History has never been dominated by majorities, but only by dedicated minorities who stand unconditionally on their faith.” This gives us all the more reason to educate–both to encourage and equip those whose presuppositions fall to the freedom loving side and to give the majority–who really seem to not care about such things unless the centralists’ programs impinge too greatly upon their own desires–reason enough to acede to not side with the opposition.

Ymbel January 3, 2011 at 1:33 am


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: