{"id":9105,"date":"2017-12-14T02:51:59","date_gmt":"2017-12-14T07:51:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tucker.liberty.me\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/"},"modified":"2024-11-22T15:30:06","modified_gmt":"2024-11-22T20:30:06","slug":"its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/","title":{"rendered":"It’s Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jeffrey A. Tucker, who is the Director of Content for the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), has\u00a0published the book Right-Wing Collectivism: The Other Threat to Liberty<\/a><\/em>\u00a0in September. Last week, Kai Weiss\u00a0talked\u00a0with him via Skype about the book and the threat of right-collectivism.<\/p>\n

\n

Kai Weiss: Let\u2019s start off with an easy question. What was the purpose of writing this book<\/a>? Why was it important right now to take a closer look at the right-collectivist movement?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Jeffrey Tucker:\u00a0Right collectivism is on the rise around the world, both in Europe and the US \u2013\u00a0and<\/em>\u00a0in Latin America, as a response to the perceived weakness of the far-left. What people do not understand is that right-wing collectivism is, in fact, a coherent ideology. It\u2019s not just purely reactive, it\u2019s not just anti-leftist. It is\u00a0for<\/em> something, and \u2013 I think very crucially and critically \u2013 it\u2019s anti-liberal. And many people do not understand this. What happens typically is that you get well-meaning people who decide they don\u2019t like left-wing socialism, and they are looking around for movements that they can join to oppose them. And some of them might have libertarian impulses, or they might just simply want freedom. They don\u2019t understand what they are getting involved with these right-fascist movements that have a deep and rich anti-liberal agenda that dates all the way back to the early 19th century.<\/p>\n

The purpose in writing the book was to discuss this alternative tradition of statism. It\u2019s another way to control people, it\u2019s another cultural model for managing society from the top-down. That\u2019s what we are talking about. The reason my book makes a contribution is that there has not been much talk about this in many decades \u2013 especially for Americans this is the new kid on the block. And people are so<\/em> na\u00efve, they don\u2019t even recognize it when it\u2019s staring them in the face. They don\u2019t understand it. And I know this to be true, because within the last several years I have been at gatherings of libertarians for example, and had a speaker stand up, and advocate that magical combination of views: anti-immigrant, anti-trade \u2013 or mercantilist protectionist, in favor of strongman, top-down management of society, a worship of police, a despising of the free press, and a putting down of intellectuals.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s the rough outlines of the ideology, all these points, all combined into one speaker. And people can go sit there, and think: \u201cOh that is a fascinating view.\u201d They are completely oblivious about what this could actually mean, and where it actually comes from. So the purpose of my book was really to trace out a family tree of the rise of what I call right-wing collectivism, but I think is more accurately called right-Hegelianism.<\/p>\n

What distinguishes right-collectivism from other sorts of collectivism? In which way is it different?<\/strong><\/p>\n

That is a classical right-Hegelian view: the end of history is with the nation-state. Right-collectivism is different from left-collectivism because right-collectivism throws out the parts of socialism that the bourgeoisie tends to despise the most. One of the things that annoys the middle class and the bourgeoisie about left-socialism is that it tends to be against religion, it tends to be suspicious of family, and it tends to want to take people\u2019s property in various forms of regulation, taxation, and so on. Right-collectivism or right-Hegelianism is very happy to give you your religion, your family, and your property so long as all these institutions serve the nation-state. The nation-state becomes really the central unit of right-Hegelianism, it becomes the focus, really the end of history, \u201cthe source of happiness\u201d \u2013 which actually is a\u00a0quote<\/a>\u00a0by Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

That is a classical right-Hegelian view: the end of history is with the nation-state. The people organize according to nationhood and dictated to by a great leader. All of this has a history: This concept of nationhood by itself deserves to be unpacked because we don\u2019t really know what that means anymore. In particular libertarians and liberals<\/a> cannot discuss this topic of nationhood with any kind of intelligence or coherence \u2013 which is another reason I wrote my book: to help people who are opposed to despotism, to tyranny, in favor of freedom, think and talk about important topics like nationhood in a way it\u2019s coherent.<\/p>\n

Would you say that nationhood is inherently evil, or can it also have positive manifestations?<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are five bad ways to conceive of nationhood and one good way. The five bad ways are race, religion, language, geography, and dynasty \u2013 like a shared dynastic, a hierarchy or something like this. Those are the five bad ways because all of these ways conceived as nationhood are potentially coercive to you \u2013 whether you want to exit or enter, there will be conditions.<\/p>\n

If you don\u2019t speak the language, you\u2019re excluded. If you do speak the language, you are included \u2013 you may not want to be included, by the way, but you will<\/em> be included. And this is true for religion, for race, for geography, for dynasty, and for language. All five of these are coercive in an inclusionary way and coercive in an exclusionary way. So when people talk about the nation, you really need to stop them, and say: \u201cHold on, do you mean race, language, religion, geography, or dynasty?\u201d And chances are that they will be a little shocked and go \u201ca little of both, a little of all of those things.\u201d<\/p>\n

A liberal view of society permits people to have a wandering sense of nationhood. But wait a minute, you can\u2019t just be a little of all those things. But the fact that I\u2019m a white Catholic with a dynastic history which traces back 300 years in this country, and I live in this country, does that require anything of me in your vision of nationhood? Am I allowed the right to exit? Either intellectually or physically? These are the critical questions, and if you get this wrong, you are potentially erecting something like a prison state.<\/p>\n

So what is the one way which nationhood makes sense? I think we have to go back to a brilliant lecture<\/a> from 1882, by Ernest Renan, a French historian, who gave at the end of the liberal era the best summary of what nationhood is, and it really comes down to an affair of the heart: Where are your affections? What do you love the most in life? What association, what group-based association seems to elicit the best in you, the things that you love?<\/p>\n

In that sense, I can be an American, and feel pride in my country, and in my Americanness. Or, I might read a book about Portugal, and fall in love with it, and consider Portugal my nation. There is nothing wrong with that. A liberal view of society permits people to have a wandering sense of nationhood. It doesn\u2019t forbid attachments, but it asks that your attachment extends from the heart and never be coerced by others. In that sense, we can legitimately talk about nationhood, but it\u2019s a very tricky topic, and I\u2019m highly suspicious of people who are constantly throwing out this weird nationhood, and talking about national identity \u2013 the nation as the source of our happiness, without ever being willing to explain to us what precisely they mean by that.<\/p>\n

When it comes to religion as an aspect of nationhood, there\u2019s an interesting book<\/a> by Rod Dreher from The American Conservative<\/em> called The Benedict Option<\/em>, who doesn\u2019t necessarily advocate for building a Christian nation, but he basically says that all Christians should come together, collaborate, and<\/em> retreat from society.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Full retreat might work for monastic life, but it can\u2019t for an enterprising life in commercial society. Rod Dreher has turned against liberalism, and how that manifests itself is a little bit random. And one of the reasons why I wrote my book is to warn people that if you are against liberalism, you might be trending in a left-Hegelian or right-Hegelian direction \u2013 and I think he\u2019s trending in a right-Hegelian direction, even though he doesn\u2019t know it. This idea of a Christian nation, of course, is true, but you know, Rod Dreher I think identifies himself as being Eastern Orthodox. There are many Christians in this country that do not regard this as Christianity. I think he was raised a Roman Catholic. There are many Christians in this country who wanted to exclude Roman Catholics from immigrating into this country because they did not believe they were Christians. So Christianity is a big,\u00a0big<\/em>\u00a0category that extends all the way from the Quakers of Pennsylvania to the Russian Orthodox of Belarus. And if you look at the two groups, they virtually have nothing in common, so Christianity is not the basis of a group identity, and it certainly cannot be the basis of nationhood.<\/p>\n

As for retreating, on a practical level, that can be non-destructive and even valuable, insofar as it means taking greater control of your domain and bearing full responsibility rather than outsourcing that to the civic culture. Dreher\u2019s sense of the corruption of our times is too despairing for my tastes. He goes way too far to inspire his desired end of complete civic detachment. I wish he could be more precise to say: the political sector is corrupt to the bone but the rest of civic culture contains vast health and vibrancy. How can you start a business, have a successful career, or live a good and full life if you are completely detached from the source of life in society? Full retreat might work for monastic life, but it can\u2019t for an enterprising life in commercial society.<\/p>\n

Right-wing \u201cpopulist\u201d Viktor Orb\u00e1n, for example, often talks<\/a> about his goal of retaining \u201ccultural homogeneity\u201d in Hungary. Let\u2019s say you are a Catholic, isn\u2019t it in a way natural to want to be, to live with other, \u201clike-minded\u201d Christian people, or is that a falsehood where you go down the road to collectivist thought?<\/strong><\/p>\n

No, I don\u2019t think there\u2019s anything wrong with that \u2013 I generally do not. That\u2019s the reason we have Churches, that\u2019s why we have Sunday. And you can look at other traditions like the Hasidic Jews that tried to extend their sense of identity to pervade many aspects of life: who you marry, the ceremonies, your education, and so on. And sometimes these actually can become very coercive.<\/p>\n

It turns out that in a market economy, there is a strong economic reason for continuing integration. On the other hand, if you enter into them voluntarily, I don\u2019t see a problem with that. Group identity of that sort is not necessarily bigoted. However, I think it\u2019s important to remember that in order for groups like that to thrive and do well, they have to be relatively small, and they generally have to live within the context of a liberal society, which can, in fact, tolerate smaller cells of homogenous identity, so that\u2019s one point \u2013and that\u2019s fine.<\/p>\n

But the second point is this: within a market society, there is a constant tendency towards integration, ever more mixing of groups. You cannot stop it because talents are widely dispersed. There have been politicians in the past that tried to become homogenous on their own choosing. The earliest origins of the Nazi party, of National Socialism in Germany, was \u201cDo not hurt the Jews, use no acts of violence, but just stop doing business with them.\u201d This is 1932. That did not work of course. Because if you want better vegetables, you will go to the Jewish grocery. You need a heart surgery, you are going to go to the Jewish doctor, and so on.<\/p>\n

It turns out that in a market economy, there is a strong economic reason for continuing integration. There may be people who you despise, but actually, you find value in them in terms of voluntary exchange. The Nuremberg laws were passed as an emergency measure because you could not get people to become homogenous voluntarily. You have to do something to force them to become that way. So when I hear about people longing for homogeneity, the question is, let\u2019s say I have a preference every once in a while for being heterogeneous. What will you do about it? That\u2019s the question.<\/p>\n

There is one very interesting theory that conservatives and leftists each like in their own way, and I would love to hear your opinion on it. It is by David Goodhart, a British journalist, and his theory<\/a> is that you get the populism that you are seeing right now because there are two different kinds of people: there are \u201csomewheres,\u201d and there are \u201canywheres\u201d in society. The \u201canywheres\u201d are cosmopolitan, urbanized people who just want to live and travel around the world and don\u2019t have any attachment to a group identity, while the \u201csomewheres\u201d are the people who do have some sort of group identity, want to keep their roots, and they want to live with \u201ctheir\u201d people. And because the \u201canywheres\u201d are mostly in power, and \u2013 from the point of the \u201csomewheres\u201d \u2013 are dictating the lives of all others, there\u2019s this backlash. Is that a comprehensible theory, or what do you think is the reason for the rise of populism?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think it\u2019s completely comprehensible, and it sets up a very interesting irony actually, because there is no doubt that the rise of heterogeneity into a country that is unprepared for will create a backlash, and that backlash itself will become the major threat to liberty in that country. This is the great irony of all this: The problem is not the immigrants, the problem is the response to the immigrants. We have seen this again and again. F.A. Hayek actually writes that the rise of the Nazis was fueled in part by the growing heterogeneity of Jewish immigration itself, that it\u2019s one thing to have Jews from Germany and from Poland, but when Russian Jews are bringing in new kinds of cultures, that gives rise to a totally unjustified, but populist resentment, which then becomes the source of authoritarianism and intolerance.<\/p>\n

Populism is only a problem when expressed politically. It\u2019s for this reason actually that F.A. Hayek himself was cautious about Muslim immigration to Great Britain, and spoke out with some concern about this \u2013\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0because there was anything wrong with Islam, or that Islam can\u2019t be integrated into British society. That\u2019s not what he said. What he was concerned about was that their presence could be used as a kind of excuse for authoritarian crackdowns, for unscrupulous politicians to feed people\u2019s irrational fears to create a kind of despotic response. To me, that\u2019s a very interesting fact.<\/p>\n

But here is what I think is wrong with that observation: a lot of times you don\u2019t even need immigration to cause this paranoia. Just as an example, before Trump was talking about the problem of Mexican immigration into the US, all the polls showed a great deal of pro-immigrant sentiment in this country \u2013 and immigration had been declining for many years. If the US ever had an immigration \u201cproblem,\u201d it would have been 30 years ago \u2013 it wasn\u2019t three years ago. So Donald Trump was able to manufacture a kind of panic out of nothing, just by tapping into people\u2019s fears.<\/p>\n

He kept saying: \u201cWe\u2019ve got a problem, we\u2019ve got a problem, we\u2019ve got a problem,\u201d and people listened to this and go: \u201cWell, I didn\u2019t know we had a problem, but he says we have a problem. I guess we have a problem.\u201d And there\u2019s a very base element to the human mind \u2013 and this is why all the right-Hegelian fascists have been very successful \u2013 that we fall back to thinking of personal identity. \u201cWho am I? I am Christian, I speak English, I\u2019m white, I\u2019m male, I was born in Texas,\u201d and so on. When we get lost and confused, then we begin to think our primary value is really biological and historical \u2013 and this is where populism becomes a very serious danger.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think, by the way, that populism would be a danger at all if we had a free society. If populism expressed itself in the form of people buying lots of junk food, binging lots of Netflix, and buying stupid things from Walmart all the time, I don\u2019t mind that kind of populism \u2013 that\u2019s peaceful, that\u2019s beautiful. Maybe I don\u2019t like your taste of music, I maybe think your food is terrible, but it\u2019s fine by me. Populism is only a problem when expressed politically.<\/p>\n

Would you say that all the right-wing \u201cpopulist\u201d movements that are gaining steam around the world are more or less fascist \u2013 or at the very least problematic, or are there also movements where you see some positives?<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s very difficult to speak about that because I can\u2019t know the specifics of for example the case in Austria, or the case in Germany \u2013 it\u2019s very difficult for an outsider to look at these kinds of movements. The older I\u2019ve gotten the less I trust my political instincts on other people\u2019s countries because it can be very complicated. But I will tell you about the US\u2019 case: Donald Trump has done some terrible things. He\u2019s also done some very good things. They are happening at the same time.<\/p>\n

Let us be free to choose and associate and speak \u2013 live how we want to. Just as an example:\u00a0 last week, his head of the Federal Communications Commission rejected net neutrality, which was a kind of price control over the use of internet, so it was a deregulation measure. The same week his Justice Department refused a merger between Time Warner and AT&T because Time Warner is the owner of CNN \u2013 he doesn\u2019t like CNN, and he tries to punish a media that he doesn\u2019t like, which is really an attack on free speech in the name of anti-trust. So\u00a0one is good<\/a>, one is terrible.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a mix of things, and I think as liberals we need to be principled. We need to look at these cases and call them on a case-by-case basis. If a fascist regime cuts taxes and deregulates industry, we should say: \u201cThat\u2019s good.\u201d But if that same regime keeps out immigrants, sets up trade barriers, centralizes executive power, and unleashes the cops on drug users, we should say: \u201cThis is evil and it must be stopped.\u201d<\/p>\n

My main concern is that as an intellectual we need to be constantly celebrating the free society and constantly celebrating liberalism as an alternative to the despotism of the left and the despotism of the right \u2013 and I genuinely believe that our position is a third way, by just saying that society is better off left alone. Let us be free to choose and associate and speak \u2013 live how we want to. We won\u2019t create a perfect world. But it will be the best possible world we can have. And most importantly: the liberal solution is the one that\u2019s most compatible with human rights and human dignity. That\u2019s the message to me that we constantly have to hammer home, and it\u2019s a message we should never get tired of delivering. Because liberalism is what gave birth to civilization as we know it, and we must protect and guard it and treasure and fight for it if we want to keep it \u2013 because it\u2019s constantly under threat from both sides, the left and the right.<\/p>\n

On the history of right-collectivism, you wrote that Hegel is the start with the release of his book<\/a> Elements of the Philosophy of Right<\/em> in 1820. In which way has Hegel influenced collectivism \u2013 obviously communism \u2013 but how did he influence the right collectivists?<\/strong><\/p>\n

There was at the time he wrote the book and he became such a powerful philosophical voice in Germany lots of confusion about what was happening to the world \u2013 liberalism had already been unleashed, a new middle class was being created, dynasties were being overthrown, people had new kinds of mobility, families were being defused, because people had new choices and options, and the dynasties and hierarchies of history were giving way to new forms of social engagements, new forms of enterprise, and new levels of mobility. And there was a great deal of concern by 1820-or-so, where we are heading. Everyone had a sense that we are heading somewhere, there was a sense of a new direction to history, and Hegel stepped forward and tried to define how that looked like. He created a sort of historiographical map of the way history works. And it just so happens that his map was independent of human action and human choice.<\/p>\n

The left-Hegelians culminated in Marx, the right-Hegelians culminated in Hitler. <\/span>It was as if he created a meta-narrative for how we might imagine our place within the structure of this bigger thing called the wave of history. And in his vision \u2013 and all Hegelians think that there\u2019s some kind of wind blowing in the structure of history, we are just carried along by it. That\u2019s an appealing idea for people who don\u2019t like the idea of just freedom, just life unfolding according to human choice. They want to believe that there\u2019s some kind of logic, some sort of grand vision at work. And in his vision there\u2019s a culmination point of history \u2013 because history can\u2019t have a direction unless it has an endpoint, and so the endpoint in the Hegelian point of view was \u2013 and it\u2019s always this way \u2013 \u201cAll powers to the Prussian state, the Prussian Church\u201d \u2013 that\u2019s it. Because somehow the state always ends up being this magical thing that people think is going to solve all our problems. The left-Hegelians took his vision further and said: \u201cWell, this is right, there is a direction to history. But it\u2019s not just in Prussia, it\u2019s all over the world, it\u2019s humanity itself that\u2019s being buffeted by these giant winds.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mises was the one that alerted me to this. You know, sometimes a great intellectual like Mises says something and it changes your whole outlook. In a lecture in 1956, just in passing, he said the Hegelians split into two factions: the right-Hegelians and the left-Hegelians. The left-Hegelians culminated in Marx, the right-Hegelians culminated in Hitler. This is a passing comment he made, and it was the most fruitful observation I\u2019ve ever heard, because it helped me reconstruct these ideological tendencies, and this is what led to my book.<\/p>\n

Do you think that there\u2019s any kind of direction that history has?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I think liberalism itself had this tendency in the late 19th century: the liberals all believed there was some kind of inevitability to the idea of progress. That now that we have discovered the key to peace and prosperity, humanity will never go back. And they were wrong. They were just wrong. And I think we need to be cautious about this, my friend, I really do. History really is built by the choices we make. And we can make very bad choices, and we can make very good choices, and I think that that is the proper conception of the molecules of history. It really comes down to the choices we make, and I think that is the correct liberal view.<\/p>\n

What I was quite shocked about was that in one chapter you were quite vicious on T.S. Eliot, who is mostly seen as a conservative. Russell Kirk, for example, traced<\/a> the history of conservatism in his The Conservative Mind<\/em> \u201cFrom Burke to Eliot\u201d. Could you elaborate on how T.S. Eliot fits into right-collectivist thought?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Yes, but one quick comment on Russell Kirk, and if somebody reads this and wants to correct me on it they are welcome to, but I\u2019m almost certain that I\u2019m correct about this: this was a later edition of the book. T.S. Eliot was added to later editions, but F.A. Hayek was included in earlier editions and was excluded later.<\/p>\n

So I knew Russell, he had dinner at my house several times, he was a friend. He trended anti-liberal as the years went on. And when he first wrote that book in 1954 he did not think of conservatism as being anti-liberal, he thought of himself as a Burkian \u2013 certainly, Burke is part of a liberal school of thought. As time went on he ever more tried to distinguish his writing of conservatism from classical liberalism, which I think is very regrettable.<\/p>\n

You know exactly where these guys are going. If you think Eliot is a liberal you only need to read\u00a0Notes Towards the Definition of Culture<\/em><\/a>. T.S. Eliot has a top-down view of what society should look like, and how it should operate \u2013 like a snobbery, an elitism that overcame his liberal impulses if he ever had any \u2013 I don\u2019t think he ever did actually \u2013 but he celebrated elites, hierarchies, a kind of trickle-down theory of cultural enlightenment, and it would not surprise you at all to see him putting down and disparaging the products of capitalism, which in fact is what his most famous poem\u00a0The Waste Land<\/em><\/a>\u00a0is all about. It\u2019s about mass consumer culture, which is capitalism \u2013 so give me a break. And it will not also surprise you, given the time in which he was writing, that he was highly sympathetic to eugenics, and wrote in favor of it, and worried about the decline of the race by being mixed with inferior peoples. It all follows.<\/p>\n

You do enough research in this area, you don\u2019t overly get surprised; you know exactly where these guys are going. It might start with some snobbery, that leads to a kind of elitism, a celebration of the king, and \u201cBlood and Soil<\/a>,\u201d and then, of course, goes on to pseudo-science that celebrates eugenics and resents capitalism \u2013 and I\u2019m sorry to say, but this is T.S. Eliot. And you could probably describe what I wrote as being \u201cvicious,\u201d but believe me, I was toning it down. Because I\u2019m telling you, Mr. Eliot is not from Great Britain. He was from St. Louis. He\u2019s an American. He emigrated to this other country, and put on a costume of some British aristocrat and dedicated the rest of his literary service on behalf of a tradition that wasn\u2019t even his. I smell a rat in this guy\u2019s work, and I very much resent it actually, and I\u2019ve lived with it for far too long.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s funny that you mention it because I was describing in a casual conversation with a friend all about T.S. Eliot and I went on this tirade similar to what I\u2019m saying to you now \u2013 and she said to me: \u201cWow, what did he ever do to you?\u201d And I said: \u201cOh, I\u2019m sorry, he died not long after I was born.\u201d She said: \u201cOh, I thought \u2026 It seems so personal for you.\u201d<\/p>\n

You have both in conservatism or even liberal conservatism \u2013 I\u2019m thinking of R\u00f6pke, Nisbet, Jefferson, and so forth, this kind of advocacy for natural authority, a natural elite so to say, which develops in society. Is that in and of itself bad?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The best solution is just to embrace the liberal tradition. It is not, and I try to make this very clear in the book: that when I talk about right-Hegelianism or right-wing collectivism, I\u2019m really not talking about conservatism. Certainly not talking about Tory-, Burkian-style conservatism \u2013 I\u2019m not even talking about traditionalism as such, like the Joseph de Maistre-variety, I\u2019m not even talking about religious fundamentalism as such. I am really talking about an ideological apparatus that detaches the motion of history from choices from individuals themselves. It\u2019s a pure ideology, and I don\u2019t think conservatism in that classic British sense, or even in the classic European sense, is necessarily ideological. It\u2019s a kind of impulse, a preference, a caste of mind, an affection. There\u2019s nothing wrong with any of these things, and I really do want to separate out that classical form of conservatism from what I\u2019m talking about.<\/p>\n

Though what I would say if you want to immunize yourself completely and fully and wholly from right-Hegelianism, the best solution is just to embrace the liberal tradition, which I have a very broad definition of what that is, and basically extends from St. Thomas Aquinas all the way up to Robert Nozick and Murray Rothbard \u2013 so I think it\u2019s a big tradition. And it\u2019s not complicated, it just says that society is best off when people are permitted to say what they want, to do what they want, to believe what they want, trade with whom they want, so long as they don\u2019t hurt anybody else. That\u2019s it. That\u2019s why I think the core of the liberal claim is that we should resist trying to manage the social order towards any particular end other than freedom. To me, that\u2019s the core of the liberal claim. If you believe that, then I want you on my team.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a bit of confusion \u2013 or at least I have a problem with \u2013 seeing right-collectivism on the \u201cright,\u201d and also when I\u2019m thinking about \u201cright\u201d I\u2019m thinking about Edmund Burke. It\u2019s kind of difficult to comprehend why both are on the same side.<\/strong><\/p>\n

You could hear a speech by Bernie Sanders and hear a speech by Donald Trump, and 80 percent was basically the same. I get that, and I\u2019m not sure I entirely understand why we continue to use these terms \u201cright\u201d and \u201cleft.\u201d But the reason I do this in the book is that I somehow want to distinguish\u00a0Carl Schmitt<\/a>\u00a0from Karl Marx \u2013 and they are not the same person. Strangely they have a lot in common, but \u2013 certainly Karl Marx never knew Schmitt, but he would despise him, and vice versa. These are different flavors of a poison that turns out to be equally deadly, but they definitely taste different.<\/p>\n

And honestly I think there\u2019s another sense where we use the terms \u201cright\u201d and \u201cleft\u201d that is not in reference to the tradition of German philosophy, but rather returns to the positioning of the French parliament: for the old regime, or for revolutionary liberalism, and that\u2019s where it gets a little bit complicated. Your view on the French revolution, this can get to be a very messy issue. Mises himself celebrated the ideals of 1789, he had a great deal of affection to the French revolution as it was briefly conceived, but the results I think were definitely indefensible. So in that sense, that\u2019s not the way I mean \u201cright\u201d and \u201cleft.\u201d I want to very carefully distinguish this from something like Burkian conservatism.<\/p>\n

But<\/em> I want to use the terms in the same way, because here in the US the rise of neo-Nazi movements \u2013 as incredible as that may seem \u2013 they certainly think of themselves as being on the right. So in a sense, it\u2019s out of deference of their own self-description, even though you will find very similar views between the far-right and the far-left \u2013 in our election season in 2016, you could hear a speech by Bernie Sanders and hear a speech by Donald Trump, and 80 percent was basically the same.<\/p>\n

For the last question I initially wanted to sound very pessimistic so that you can have an optimistic ending, but then I read in your book: \u201cWhen it comes to politics, it\u2019s the 1930s all over again.\u201d What hope is there?<\/strong><\/p>\n

What I mean with that is literally that when it comes to politics<\/em>, it is the 1930s all over again. So my hope is that politics are not going to matter as much anymore in the future. I think politics is doomed, it is so disgusting \u2013 like, why do we keep doing this? Why can\u2019t our politics basically be liberal? I don\u2019t know, but I think the future of liberalism is outside of politics. It\u2019s within technology, it\u2019s within education, it\u2019s within culture, and more and more people who believe in human dignity and human rights and human freedom and human flourishing need to pursue other avenues for realizing their dreams besides an exclusive focus on political organizing and that sort of thing. This is definitely my sense.<\/p>\n

Thanks for the interview!<\/strong><\/p>\n

This article originally appeared on Austrian Economics Center<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":95,"featured_media":9205,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[274],"tags":[541,1165,357,201,192],"content-type":[3493],"coauthors":[1476],"class_list":["post-9105","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-article","tag-books","tag-collectivism","tag-jeffrey-tucker","tag-libertarian","tag-socialism","content-type-article"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nIt's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"It's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free the People\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/freethepeople\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jeffreytucker.official\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"900\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jeffrey A. Tucker\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@https:\/\/x.com\/jeffreyatucker\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@freethepeople\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jeffrey A. Tucker\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"24 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jeffrey A. Tucker\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/62e402961880347c2f1d2622ed36c96f\"},\"headline\":\"It’s Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":5530,\"commentCount\":1,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg\",\"keywords\":[\"books\",\"collectivism\",\"jeffrey tucker\",\"libertarian\",\"socialism\"],\"articleSection\":[\"article\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/\",\"name\":\"It's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00\",\"description\":\"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg\",\"width\":1600,\"height\":900},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"It’s Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free the People\",\"description\":\"Free thinkers, unite.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free the People\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Free the People\",\"alternateName\":\"Free the People\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/282873789_318682847093508_129724565035754006_n-2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/282873789_318682847093508_129724565035754006_n-2.jpg\",\"width\":600,\"height\":600,\"caption\":\"Free the People\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/freethepeople\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/freethepeople\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/freethepeople\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/free-the-people\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/freethepeople\",\"https:\\\/\\\/rumble.com\\\/c\\\/c-1372972\",\"https:\\\/\\\/odysee.com\\\/@freethepeople:a61\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/62e402961880347c2f1d2622ed36c96f\",\"name\":\"Jeffrey A. Tucker\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/01\\\/tucker-96x96.jpga2b3c2292d9d13da7999050891201716\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/01\\\/tucker-96x96.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/01\\\/tucker-96x96.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Jeffrey A. Tucker\"},\"description\":\"Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/jeffreytucker.me\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/jeffreytucker.official\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/jeffreyatucker\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/jeffreyatucker\",\"karapally\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/freethepeople.org\\\/author\\\/jeffreytucker\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"It's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About","description":"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"It's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About","og_description":"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.","og_url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/","og_site_name":"Free the People","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/freethepeople","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jeffreytucker.official","article_published_time":"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1600,"height":900,"url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jeffrey A. Tucker","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@https:\/\/x.com\/jeffreyatucker","twitter_site":"@freethepeople","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jeffrey A. Tucker","Est. reading time":"24 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/"},"author":{"name":"Jeffrey A. Tucker","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#\/schema\/person\/62e402961880347c2f1d2622ed36c96f"},"headline":"It’s Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About","datePublished":"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00","dateModified":"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/"},"wordCount":5530,"commentCount":1,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg","keywords":["books","collectivism","jeffrey tucker","libertarian","socialism"],"articleSection":["article"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/","name":"It's Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg","datePublished":"2017-12-14T07:51:59+00:00","dateModified":"2024-11-22T20:30:06+00:00","description":"Jeffrey Tucker speaks about his latest book and the pervasive threat to liberty that is right-wing collectivism.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/12\/dreamstime_xs_84509168.jpeg","width":1600,"height":900},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/its-not-just-socialists-we-need-to-worry-about\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"It’s Not Just Socialists We Need to Worry About"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/","name":"Free the People","description":"Free thinkers, unite.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free the People","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#organization","name":"Free the People","alternateName":"Free the People","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/282873789_318682847093508_129724565035754006_n-2.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/282873789_318682847093508_129724565035754006_n-2.jpg","width":600,"height":600,"caption":"Free the People"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/freethepeople","https:\/\/x.com\/freethepeople","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/freethepeople","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/free-the-people","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/freethepeople","https:\/\/rumble.com\/c\/c-1372972","https:\/\/odysee.com\/@freethepeople:a61"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/#\/schema\/person\/62e402961880347c2f1d2622ed36c96f","name":"Jeffrey A. Tucker","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/tucker-96x96.jpga2b3c2292d9d13da7999050891201716","url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/tucker-96x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/tucker-96x96.jpg","caption":"Jeffrey A. Tucker"},"description":"Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.","sameAs":["https:\/\/jeffreytucker.me\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jeffreytucker.official","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/jeffreyatucker","https:\/\/x.com\/https:\/\/x.com\/jeffreyatucker","karapally"],"url":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/author\/jeffreytucker\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9105","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/95"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9105"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9105\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9205"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9105"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9105"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9105"},{"taxonomy":"content-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/content-type?post=9105"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=9105"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}