The Nazi-like “Bellamy” salute was standard fare in American — another one of those things that’s been whitewashed out of the history books.

His comments about Jews in the media, etc., is taken out of context. If you read the entire quote, you’d be hard-pressed to disagree.

(Lindbergh) warned of the Jewish People’s “large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government,”

Interventionists created pamphlets pointing out his efforts were praised in Nazi Germany and included quotations such as “Racial strength is vital; politics, a luxury.” They included pictures of him and other America Firsters using the stiff-armed Bellamy salute…

Because of his numerous scientific expeditions to Nazi Germany,[citation needed] combined with a belief in eugenics, Lindbergh was suspected of being a Nazi sympathizer.

Lindbergh’s reaction to Kristallnacht was entrusted to his diary: “I do not understand these riots on the part of the Germans,” he wrote. “It seems so contrary to their sense of order and intelligence. They have undoubtedly had a difficult ‘Jewish problem,’ but why is it necessary to handle it so unreasonably?”

..
However, he clearly stated elsewhere that he believed the survival of the white race was more important than the survival of democracy in Europe: “Our bond with Europe is one of race and not of political ideology,” he declared

…Critics have noticed an apparent influence of German philosopher Oswald Spengler on Lindbergh. Spengler was a conservative authoritarian …

Lindbergh developed a long-term friendship with the automobile pioneer Henry Ford, who was well-known for his anti-Jewish newspaper “The Dearborn Independent.” In a famous comment about Lindbergh to Detroit’s former FBI bureau chief in July 1940, Ford said: “When Charles comes out here, we only talk about the Jews.”

Lindbergh considered Russia to be a “semi-Asiatic” country compared to Germany, and he found Communism to be an ideology that would destroy the West’s “racial strength” and replace everyone of European descent with “a pressing sea of Yellow, Black, and Brown.” He openly stated, if he had to choose, he would rather see America allied with Nazi Germany than Soviet Russia. He preferred Nordics, but he believed, after Soviet Communism was defeated, Russia would be a valuable ally against potential aggression from East Asia.

Lindbergh said certain races have “demonstrated superior ability in the design, manufacture, and operation of machines.” He further said, “the growth of our western civilization has been closely related to this superiority.” Lindbergh admired, “the German genius for science and organization, the English genius for government and commerce, the French genius for living and the understanding of life.” He believed, “in America they can be blended to form the greatest genius of all.”

…Holocaust researcher and investigative journalist Max Wallace, agrees with Franklin Roosevelt’s assessment that Lindbergh was “pro-Nazi” in his book, The American Axis. However, Wallace finds the Roosevelt Administration’s accusations of dual loyalty or treason as unsubstantiated. Wallace considers Lindbergh a well-intentioned but bigoted and misguided Nazi sympathizer whose career as the leader of the isolationist movement had a destructive impact on Jewish people.

#

That’s part of the problem some libertarians have with Lew et al.

The specific people Trent mentions are not what I meant when I said “that’s part of the problem some libertarians have with Lew..” (and note the use of the word some).

What I was referring to was that they are enamored of the Old Right in general, and many libertarians aren’t.

wikipedia:

This anti-New Deal movement was a coalition of multiple groups:

(4) conservative states-rights Democrats from the South;

6) soured radicals, such as Father Charles Coughlin

Influential members of the American Old Right include:

celebrities: Charles Lindbergh,

..

The Southern Agrarian Wing of the “Old Right” drew on some of the values and anxieties being articulated on the anti-modern right, including the desire to retain the social authority and defend the autonomy of the American states and regions, especially the South.

..the Southern Agrarians:

“Rejected industrial capitalism and the culture it produced. In I’ll Take My Stand they called for a return to the small-scale economy of rural America as a means to preserve the cultural amenities of the society they knew. Ransom and Tate believed that only by arresting the progress of industrial capitalism and its imperatives of science and efficiency could a social order capable of fostering and validating humane values and traditional religious faith be preserved.

Jesse Helms’s is not. At least not without qualification.

Regardless, the bigger issue here is how Barr claims that Helms, Reagan, and the Fed defeated Soviet Communism.

Im not positive about that. I will say this–the man deserves more praise than most US Senators. My grandmother is still racist, because she was born in Livingston Parish, Louisiana in 1936–but she’s still a good person and would still be capable of doing her job good too. Same for Helms–his racism is deplorable, but he DID stand for many good things during his time in the Senate. Federalism, anti-UN, pro-life issues, etc etc etc.
GE–what do you think of Senators Wherry and Bridges of the Old Right?

I think The Jeffersonian/Hamiltonian split is DEFINETLY exagerrated. I certainly appreciate his work on Lincoln, though. In person he is gruff, he claims becuase “every Lincoln lover in the country wants to shoot me”. Nice guy though. Thomas Woods is about the nicest scholar you’ll ever meet, not arrogant or above-it-all. Rockwell and the rest, I can’t say the same of. I got a very arrogant vibe from the rest of them–although I still like their work. If you ever goto one of their conferences, approach Max Raskin–the 17 year old Austrian-school prodigy and ask him about his debate with “that slimy minarchist”

EDIT: Let me exempt David Gordon from that arrogance. The man is like a grandpa.

Mencken made a few statements that could be considered racist — although his whole schtick was to offend.

I’m aware of no such black marks on Buffett’s career.

Frankly–I think the idea of using a political figure’s supposed racism from pre-1960’s is cheap. The vast majority of people were what we would consider prejudice. Its like saying “I liked Cato the Younger, but he treated women as servants”.

Wood’s catholicism has been KEY in reaching out to the religiously-political and giving them the message of Mises/Rothbard/Ron Paul.

“DiLorenzo is THE man, though. I’d rate him just behind Ron Paul and Mary Ruwart in the most awesomest people alive.”

Why do you like DiLorenzo so much?

“Trent – I don’t think Buffett was influenced by Rothbard, but more likely the other way around.”

You are, somewhat, correct. Howard Buffet remarked in 1954 that his favorite writer was “Aubrey Hebert”, a hardcore right-winger. Rothbard would write to Buffet in 1956 confessing that he was, in fact, Aubrey Hebert. Buffet and Rothbard had met the summer before at one of Mises’ seminars. Of course, this was AFTER both stints in Congress–so I suppose we are both right. =)

I don’t recall anything specifically about Buffett, although I’m pretty sure I’ve read that Mencken was prejudiced. I don’t have that in front of me now, and don’t want to go too far out on thin ice.

But I didn’t mention names – it was various people on the Old Right that some libertarians disapprove of Lew et al associating with. Not necessarily the two you mention at all.

In fact, since you used to criticize LR for alleged racism, quite vociferously if you recall, you may even remember the specifics. I know you have changed your mind – that’s not my point.