At PRA we study the whole spectrum of the U.S. political right, so I am not trying to imply that the right is an undifferentiated blob--just the opposite in fact.
Setting aside his bloated ego, I still find Raimondo problematic due to the unstated aspect of his type of right-wing libertarianism where he ends up in effect as an apologist for the xenophobia of Buchanan and Rockford/van Mises; and then there is the essential idea that the state sucks and therefore has no role in trying to promote fairness and equality in the arenas of class, race, ethnicity, and gender.
But hey, then I am one of those West/Ehrenreich democratic socialist types.
:-)
-Chip
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Doug Henwood
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:21 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: U.S. Political Right Reactions to 9/11 & Middle
> East Crisis
>
>
> Chip Berlet wrote:
>
> >No Right Answers:
> >How the U.S. Political Right Reacted to 9/11 and the Crises in the
> >Middle East
> >By Chip Berlet
> >May 5, 2002
> >
> >Now online: http://www.publiceye.org/frontpage/911/reactions.html
>
> You include Raimondo & the his kind of libertarian on there without
> much comment, but what do you make of them? They're not racists.
> Rockford/van Mises are more problematic, but they're not Duke or
> Buchanan. How bad are they on your spectrum?
>
> Doug