Over the years I’ve known several such “traditionalist Catholics” and every single one of them was a purveyor of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. I am sure there are some exceptions, I’m only saying I never meet any such exceptions myself. Most were like the most famous “traditionalist Catholic” around today -- Mel Gibson and his viciously anti-Jewish father Hutton Gibson.

Mel has gone off on several rants about how Jews are evil and not all were done when drunk. And his father hangs out at neo-Nazi conferences and is a favourite with the Holocaust Revisionist crowd -- sort of like Rockwellian Joe Sobran. There are several branches of the traditionalist Catholics and some are more extreme than others. A decent account of the various traditionalists groups and their common anti-Semitism can be found here:

http://www.splcenter.org/inte...

Common to all is the conspiracy thread about how the Vatican has been taken over by Jews, Freemasons, communists and homosexuals -- though at times they seem to think anyone who is one of these hated groups is simultaneously a member of all these groups. While such “traditionalist&rdq uo; Catholics are a relatively small percentage of the population they do seem to make up a substantial number of top “scholars” at the Mises Institute.

One of the newer books attacking the Vatican from the “traditionalist&rdq uo; perspective is “The Great Facade” which has two authors. One author is the lawyer in Terri Schiavo case -- he was the lawyer fighting the husband and the doctors. The other author is Thomas Woods of Mises Institute fame. You will remember Woods from his affiliation with the extremists, white supremacists in the League of the South. Woods was a founder of the League. But according to this article

http://www.splcenter.org/inte...

Woods now says that he “has nothing to do” with the League anymore. Supposedly the Woods book claims that “Judaized semi-gnostic” sects have infiltrated the Catholic Church. (That sounds like the Jewish conspiracy claims I heard from the traditionalist Catholics I knew.) The Woods book also attacks the “widespread infiltration” of the Catholicism by gays who are part of an “ecclesiastical disease that is raging out of control and supposedly “warns of the Masonic threat, citing The Permanent Instructions of the Alta Vendita, an anti-Semitic tract.”

But after publishing this work Woods says he is no longer associated with his co-author and says he is no longer associated the “traditionalist movement” though he does edit The Latin Mass, which is a traditionalist publication thought not as extreme as some. The publication’s web site links to Joseph Sobran, another Rockwell ally, who has given speeches to Holocaust revisionist groups attacking “the Tribe” (Jews) and who was fired from National Review magazine for his anti-Semitism.

http://www.enterstageright.co...

One “long-time reader and admirer’ of Sobran at a Right-wing site says Sobran has is “stooping to dark references to sinister Zionist conspiracies. He says US foreign policy “are pretty much dictated by the Jewish-Zionist powers that be in the United States.”

http://www.latinmassmagazine....

Woods seems to have a tendency to involve himself with extremist groups and then, when the light is turned on the association, to disaffiliate himself from them. The Rockwellians seem to do this as we have shown here several times. Now one can understand that accidents happen and people end up being associated with someone without realizing what that person advocates. But if you find someone constantly ending up in bed with neo-Nazis, racists and anti-Semites you do have to question why this is the case.

In the matter of the League of the South it isn’t that Woods couldn’t have known what they stood for. He was a founding member.

It didn’t take but two minutes on the League’s web site to find them discussing racist issues. Was it possible that Woods never bothered to read the material put out under the name of a group he helped found? The Southern Poverty Law Center, which is on the Left but does a lot of original research into racist groups, says the League “is essentially theocratic” and “also clearly racist”. We have said the same thing in the past.

Woods is very good at writing long essays to “address” an issue and then basically avoid addressing the issue at all. He did that in his rebuttal to Cathy Young’s columns about him and he does it regarding his membership in the League. He gives a long discourse on the values of decentralization.

http://blog.lewrockwell.com/l...

He says “I had an intermittent membership in the League over the years”. And that he didn’t run it (no one said he did that I know of). “I am responsible neither for the comments of any other members nor for the politically incorrect statements I am told can be found on the League’s site.”

I’m not sure that racist, white supremacist comments can be dismissed as merely “politically incorrect statements”. In fact since the Rockwellians wear “political incorrectness” as a badge of honor to equate racism with not being PC is practically praising racism. And is he saying he never bothered to check out what the League was promoting? He allows them to list him as a founding member and he doesn’t bother to read what they believe? And presumably, even after he hears about this stuff he still hasn’t bothered to check out whether or not it is true. If he had checked it out he would either be admitting it was true or saying it was a lie. To say these are statement “I am told” are on the site indicates that even after he learned of the racist comments he wasn’t concerned enough to see if he was supporting a racist organization or is it just an “politically incorrect” organization?

Anyway, he says racism is just a “a word that is thrown around at anyone who looks cockeyed at Jesse Jackson.” So he downplays the actual type of remarks that were made such as how Blacks would never be allowed to hold office in the White Christian republican envisioned by the League. He says the League is only emphasizing “the importance of preserving Anglo-Celtic heritage”. It is one thing to promote one’s heritage and another to claim that means people of other heritages would not be allowed equal rights in your society.

He downplays the problem of racism in his Jackson comment. He describes racists comments as being just “politically incorrect”. He says the white supremacists are only “preserving Anglo-Celtic” culture. He apparently refused to read the actual statements on the web site, if he had he wouldn’t honestly be able to refer to them as merely statement he “heard” about. This all sounds rather apologetic for racism to me. And he conveniently ignores what was actually said on the web site by indicating he has never read them even after they became an issue.

His final response is: “I find it revealing that white supremacist organizations have repeatedly and vocally condemned the League.” He never names the organizations in question that supposedly do this nor does he explain why they condemn the League. I have read one Nazi group attacking another Nazi group. That the one attacked the other doesn’t mean both aren’t Nazis. Woods rebuttal tells us nothing and rebuts nothing.

This last statement would only have some possible meaning if he bothered to tell us to whom he was referring and what they said about the League. But Woods drops the issue saying “That should be more than enough to satisfy anyone’s curiosity.” Another reply that actually manages not to reply to the issues at all.

Listed among the neo-confederate movement is now the Ludwig von Mises Institute -- pity poor Mises. They say: “Both Rockwell and institute research director Jeffrey Tucker are listed on the racist League of the South’s web page as founding members -- and both men deny their membership. Tucker has written for League publications, and many League members have taught at the institute’s seminars and given presentations at its conferences.” They also noted that Rockwell ally Thomas Fleming has been a speaker at numerous Mises seminars and that he to is “a founding League member” and that Rockwell’s web site “often features articles by League members.” Fleming is an adjunct faculty member of the Institute as well.

http://www.chroniclesmagazine...,_Poor_Mel.html?seemore=y

So many people associated with Rockwell and crew are involved with racists or anti-Semitic groups that one wonders how anyone can claim this to be anything but intentional. Thomas Fleming certainly gives one reason to believe he falls into that camp as well. Now we all know about Mel Gibson’s tirade against Jews blaming them for all the wars of the world -- a theory he gets straight from his father. Blame it on the drink but the views were daddy’s. To Fleming this was no big deal. He called it “poor Mel’s little gaffe” and said that the attention paid to his outburst is “the best argument in favor of anti-Semitism”.

Fleming says that various Jews might think Gibson an anti-Semite but adds “we Christians do not have to accept their option, which is deliberately crafted to suggest that most Christians throughout history are classic anti-Semites”. That almost sounds as if he is saying that anti-Semitism is a Jewish invention. Mises Institute ally (and ally to Fleming) Joseph Sobran has basically said the same thing. He quipped that anti-Semite used to be someone who hated Jews not it only means someone the Jews hate. Sobran takes almost the same position as Fleming. What distinguishes Jews, or as Sobran calls them “the Tribe,” is that “they are anti-Christian.” He says that Jews today define themselves “by antagonism to Christianity” and more importantly that Jews adopt their because “chiefly because they are repugnant to Christians.”

Disliking Jews, says Fleming, is merely “a matter of taste, preference, and upbringing”. He says: “It is hard enough for Baptists to tolerate Lutherans and a bit too much to insist that they become matey with Jews who often despise their religion and their way of life.” Notice his wording. The Christians are not being matey while the Jews are people who despise Christianity. He repeats this claim about Jews hating Christians several times. He says Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League is a “Christophobic charlatan”. He writes: “The fact that so many troublemakers of the past 150 years have been of Jewish extraction... is certainly no argument in their favor. Jewish “intellectuals&rdqu o; continue to be in the forefront of the movements that aim to destroy our religion and culture.” And while there are Jews who “are fine and admirable people” Fleming can’t help put says “they reject my God”. As do many gentiles I might add.

The Rockwell-Hoppe crowd is a stench to libertarianism. They actively associate with the most bigoted, authoritarian groups around. Libertarians should stay as far away from this people as possible.