Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Right to Discriminate - Continued

A reader linked an article by Tim Wise in the comments section of my last post.  The title of the post was Rationalizing White Supremacy, Racism, Free Markets and the Morally Obtuse Rand Paul. There is a close up of him holding his temple.

As one of Tim Wise's (did he name himself that?) unmentioned "nary a black libertarian" Larry Elder puts it,

"Constitutional rights extend to both saints and sinners and those in between, no matter the outrage... 

This is freedom 101.

It is this freedom to discriminate that enabled Black Entertainment Television founder Robert Johnson to become a billionaire through the use of race-based programming. It is this freedom that allows the Miss Black America beauty pageant to exclude non-black applicants."

Read his great article here. 

From this very eloquent article written by Lew Rockwell,

"Referencing the great controversy about the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Karen De Coster put the issue to rest by turning Rachel Maddow's question on its head. She [Maddow] demanded to know whether a white businessman has the right to refuse service to a black man. Karen asked, does a black businessman have the right to refuse service to a Klan member? "  

I really think this gets to the heart of the subject very quickly.  What does Tim Wise have to say to this I wonder?

More from Lew,

"...It is the same with college admissions, church membership, fraternities, civic clubs, and nearly every other association. They all exercise the right to exclude. It is central to the organization of every aspect of life. If this right is denied, what do we get in its place? Coercion and compulsion. People are forced together by the state, with one group required at the point of a gun to serve another group."

Stossel writes in regard to the cries that Fox needs to fire him for his racist comments,

"It wasn't free markets in the South that perpetuated racism. It was government colluding with private individuals (some in the KKK) to intimidate those who would have integrated.
It was private action that started challenging the racists, and it was succeeding—four years before the Civil Rights Act passed."

Tim Wise is undertaking a very important and difficult task.  He is trying through his writing, teaching, and lecturing to eliminate, or at least minimize racism.  I think that is a wonderful thing, and the article he wrote is very clearly written for his point.  Unfortunately, Mr. Wise's point in this case is that all libertarians are white supremacist nut jobs who know absolutely nothing about the way the "real" world works and are morally corrupt weak-minded simps.  Tim Wise is the clearly the product of the states' self propagating education system and is ignorantly suckling on the teat that is government=panacea.  The ridiculusly ingrained confirmation bias that markets=evil is so pervasive in this type of writing, but at least its consistent.

As a friend wrote in an email disscusing this subject

"It was government that institutionalized slavery.
It was government that institutionalized segregation in the south.
It took private citizens and market pressures (Frederich
Douglas, ML King, Rosa ParksJackie Robinson, etc.) to overcome these abhorrent injustices"

Reader Tim writes
"I often wonder if such rigid adherence to a way of thinking and focus on consistency can hamper ones ability to react to certain situations and deal with issues"

I think examining this subject with the consistent and principled eye for natural rights and property rights has allowed me to further understand this topic and its relative importance regarding anarcho-capatilism and truly free market economics. I must say, a big reason for that is the reading of links readers have sent and the comments themselves.  Thank you both for that.   

Libertarianism by its very nature is anti-racist!  The focus is on the individual, and the racist focuses on a group. 

Having said all of this, what we are discussing was a small part of a huge law that was passed almost 50 years ago which will never change.  

1 comment:

  1. I would argue that you are ignorantly suckling on the teat that is free market = panacea. I think that both kinds of ignorant suckling can be equally disastrous from a social policy standpoint.

    "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -Emerson