Marcus, we paleolibertarians vehemently disagree with our paleoconservative friends on economic issues, and there is no "perhaps" about that. Economic laws *exist*, and not understanding this is the first failure of the paleocons. And we do stand for a global free market, even more rigidly so than the left libertarians. However, wherein they get caught up in trendiness, and push a concept of "stasism" and eschew all traditionalism, we zero in on private property, voluntary association, and hence the natural order. We realize that not everything is necessarily best because it is "dynamic." The paleocons also do not oppose immigration for the same reason that we do - private property. As Hans Hoppe says, free trade and free immigration follow the same principle, and that is "requiring an invitation for people as for goods and services." I have yet to see a paleocon make this argument.
To clarify the true nature of paleolibertarianism and the differences between us and the left libertarians, from my website bio comes a clear definition, from Lew Rockwell himself: “Paleolibertarianism holds with Lord Acton that liberty is the highest political end of man, and that all forms of government intervention--economic, cultural, social, international--amount to an attack on prosperity, morals, and bourgeois civilization itself, and thus must be opposed at all levels and without compromise. It is "paleo" because of its genesis in the work of Murray N. Rothbard and his predecessors, including Ludwig von Mises, Albert Jay Nock, Garet Garrett, and the entire interwar Old Right that opposed the New Deal and favored the Old Republic of property rights, freedom of association, and radical political decentralization. Just as important, paleolibertarianism predates the politicization of libertarianism that began in the 1980s, when large institutions moved to Washington and began to use the language of liberty as part of a grab bag of "policy options." Instead of principle, the neo-libertarians give us political alliances; instead of intellectually robust ideas, they give us marketable platitudes. What's more, paleolibertarianism distinguishes itself from left-libertarianism because it has made its peace with religion as the bedrock of liberty, property, and the natural order.”
