I’m not the one proposing that land be redistributed according to race.
But given the long history of contention between blacks and whites, again, it may not be a bad idea.
I am not sure it would be possible to do so without violating the rights of innocent people today. If Rothbard does not agree with letting bygones be bygones I must respectfully disagree with him on this point. Even brilliant people sometimes make mistakes and this may be one of Rothbard’s
Byzantine often comes off as a racist and he does not seem to care if he does. He is the type of person who gives supporters of the free market a bad name. I have no problem with occasionally raising very sensitive subjects but Byzantine seems to revel in making posts that make him look like a racist. It is almost as if he WANTS to alienate black people and Hispanics.
I don’t know, there are plenty of things that libertarians are associated with that are far worse than racism, in my eyes anyway.
Two points:
-
The proposal was not that of Mr. Block - it is not clear he even supports it and was not the point of his article.
-
The proposal was not “based on race”. Barack Obama would not qualify for this program if it were implemented. His father came from Africa.
Such as?
Cultural leftism.
Bending over backwards for anti-discrimination fanatics.
Cultural leftism means different things to different people. Can you describe what it means to you and why you think of it as worse than racism?
You have a right to discriminate if you want to. That does not mean I must have a shred of respect for you after you do. We can differ on this issue and both be libertarians.
Right, but you asked what is worse than the actions of people like Byzantine.
General opposition to all authority, as is demonstrated with the fondness of phrases such as “equality of liberty”. In addition to some sort of strange Orwellian “forced tolerance” in regards to those who live alternative lifestyles. Opposition to natural, pre-state, institutions of the church and the family.
All this in addition to rudeness, arrogance and lack of culture.
There are more races besides white, black and hispanic.
I don’t mind Byzantine’s race baiting, it forces us to think. There is nothing worse than culturally left and dogma positions.
We’ve all been socialized not to distinguish based on race. It is a political correctness faux pas. I think intelligent people need to explore every idea, and come to their own conclusions. If Byzantine is a racist it’s irrelevant to me, unless he is being coercive. I certainly do not want the masses judging my discrimination and social attitudes based on political correctness.
Perhaps I should have asked what you meant by “Bending over backwards” do you mean supporting laws or simply trying to be sensitive to the feeling of others? I do not support things such as “affirmative action” if that is what you imply.
Neither was Walter Block. That is a strawman, and you are smart enough to know it.
I dunno. Blacks and whites seem to be pretty good at oppressing themselves. If we’re shooting for justice, it won’t be based on racial lines.
Anyone who supports “forced tolerance” is not libertarian. I am skeptical of any claim that the church is a pre-state institution. In much of history the church and the state are fused as one - but that is a topic for another thread. In your view have I been rude or arrogant? I try not to be. But I am not sure one could call me a “leftist” although I am an ignostic.
Not you personally. I am referring to the kind of mentality that puts anti-discriminatory agendas above private property. I don’t see how alliances with people with such a mentality are conducive to it, and I think they’re far more harmful than some libertarians coming off as racist.
That mentality is not and cannot be libertarian - not even by the sloppy modern LP definition.
Indeed. Hence my point that it is harmful associating it with libertarianism in the first place. It has nothing to do with it, given that libertarianism is, strictly speaking, neutral on the topic of race.
He has the freedom to be racist if he wants (thankfully), I was just trying to get clarification on his motivation.
I’m not particularly racist (I think we all are to a certain extent), but I think the neutral position of libertarianism on race is the only logical one. Giving deference to any group to avoid “discrimination” is a contradiction and wholly unproductive.
On another note, I never knew about Malcom’s views on welfare, but I have to say I agree.
Yes, he does. And I have the freedom to point out the illogical nature of judging people based upon the melanin content of their skin. I also have the freedom to point out that if the freedom movement is to advance we need to convince more people of all races and what he is doing may alienate many of the very people we need to recruit as supporters of the free market.
Me too. I wish that more people who call him a hero would read his words on this subject.