Paul Gottfried

I want to welcome everyone back to the Pete Quiñones Show.

I am happy to have Dr. Paul Gottfried with me today.

How are you doing, Dr. Gottfried?

Okay, fine.

Paleo was tight.

Yeah, Paul Gottfried, that type of people.

Later, though, because you could say this is neither here nor there, you know, I don't know these people, whatever.

In 2006, Hoppe starts his own group, the Property and Freedom Society, to discuss libertarian ideas.

And yet in this group, you find...

Paul Gottfried, which again, you could say, okay, he's libertarian, whatever.

But you also find Jared Taylor, the famous race realist or white nationalist.

You find Richard Spencer, you find other race realists, and you wonder, Why are these people in these libertarian circles? Could it be because they're the only ones who uphold, let's say, one's right to discriminate? But this is not the case.

And I think that's one of the reasons, too, some people find some of these...

Paul Gottfried makes the point about Straussians a lot, and such that Straussians talk about this sort of thing, you know, they affect a kind of, like, superficially right-wing style that seems to... take on a sort of stoical, or stoic in a colloquial sense, sensibility about the inevitability of change and things, but they're obviously not objecting to it, and they're also explicitly redacting the deliberate cultivation of these conditions and who the identity of the cadres that not the sole proximate cause of these changes, but are an essential cause.

That's what I mean.

In those territories where the zeitgeist of the short century reached monumental zenith, Central Europe and then the nascent USSR, to live historically by way of psychological and conceptual orientation towards identitarian and cultural aspects of human life, be they symbolic, heritable, or liminal in nature, became transposed into a nakedly partisan act of dissent." In the absence of categorical distinctions that conventionally qualify human beings, individually and as well as constituent standard-bearers and psychological vessels of a partisan idea contra and opposed to a true civilian, noncombatant status that carries with it an absolute exemption from formal political violence at hands of uniformed military elements and nontraditional conflict actors alike, All aspects of previously civilian life take on a political character, without regard to intent nor conscious decisionism on the part of individual persons who constitute the body politic.

Yeah, I'd almost say it's like the paradigm shift was a century ago.

I mean, essentially, the institutional left, which to include Marxism, but I mean, as Paul Gottfried said and Thomas has said, the problem with critical theory and, you know, social, cultural Marxism is it's not really Marxism, even though it's derivative and, you know, it's sort of descended from those things.

So it's something more than that.

It's something worse than that, that sometimes we can't really name, but that, I think that paradigm really became dominant post-World War I, because again, with the ending of the, the Habsburg monarchy, the ending of the Hohenzollerns in German, Germany, you basically had the elimination of any monarchy with one or two exceptions in which the actual executive authority was, you know, in the person of the monarch.

Well, finally coming, uh, coming forward to the sixties, um, he starts talking about, uh, critical theory and the critical theorists and brings up Marcuse and, um, His description of Marcuse synthesizing Freudian psychoanalysis with Marxism to challenge Western culture and morality is... probably a good starting point and a probably good overall description of what was being promoted in the 60s in the counterculture definitely so um yeah and i mean i've read marcus's repressive tolerance on my on my show before gone over it.

And, um, yeah, he's, uh, I mean, when you realize that he was Paul Gottfried's, uh, thesis advisor, you realize, wow, this guy was, um, this guy was in the United States and he was working and he was working in, um, you know, uh, my parents' lifetime, your parents' lifetime.

So it's, uh, just watching that, um, when you take into consideration, if you've, if you've studied Freud at all, if you've read Freud at all, and once you see exactly what was being promoted in the sixties, it's almost impossible not to see how, um, Freudian psychoanalysis was, uh, had an influence over so much of the propaganda and engineering that was being put out there.

Of course.

...

but I think this is a really important chapter in Paul Gottfried's book, After Liberalism.

So, um, we were just before we started recording talking about Paul Gottfried.

You actually just finished doing a live stream with him.

Um, talk a little bit about this book and why, you know, you were eager to read from it.

Uh, and this is one thing that Gottfried is really, um, I wouldn't say it's unique to him, but it's something that he really is, um, unique in terms of, like, overall traditionalist conservatives, like, who have this meta narrative story of things.

He does emphasize discontinuity.

Uh, Paul Gottfried always recognizes that the New Deal replaced something before it, and the, um, you know, the po- the post-1960s left replaced the New Deal left.