Anyone got a link? I wanna read that.
Britain vs Ireland? Well what about that little Holocaust thing? Trying to exterminate Gypsies (Indo-Europeans) and all that? All three ethnic groups Hitler was primarily after were white. (While the Japanese were “honorary Aryans”.)
And it was in the US too. The 1924 immigration act was put into effect to prevent many more people from Southern and Eastern Europe coming in.
Nonsense. Of course you are white. Nobodys skin tone is actually very white. Everyones skin tone is a bit brown, pink, orange, appricot, whatever.
“White” nowadays means all the people who can only be racists, but can never be victims of racism, so of course nobody wants to “consider” themselves white. Theyre all rather brown, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, South Asian and what not instead... But Iranians are not just white, they are descended from the ancient Aryans, so sorry buddy but youre a whitey and a prime suspect at that. What you “consider” has nothing to do with anything when we are talking biology.
Iranians are descended from the ancient Aryans yes, but ask around at stormfront or any other neo-nazi site and they will say that they even consider greeks to be “mongrelized” (lol, wtf). In Sweden atleast, I would not be ocnsidered white, so I have a free pass at being “racist” and so on. Oh yeah, this is me.
Yep, revenge method applied to removed generations. Ancient practice. Stupid one though.
Is there anyone who is 100% anything? For instance, I’ve met lots of caucasian people who claim to have 5% sioux blood or something! anyways I’ve heard that there are no genetic traits that are essential to each race particularly so that race is a badly founded concept. Is this true or are there any books that can suggest otherwise (perhaps those cited by rothbard?).
Everyone is 100% human.
I think that “The Bell Curve” seems to be an interesting read.
The people who speak of ‘mongrelisation’ &c. tend to have a tenuous grasp of reality and are usually the dumbest of the racialists (SF, Neo-nazis &c. are literally speaking the low IQ trash of the racialist movement.) The funny thing is that some of these ‘hardcore’ racialist ignorami are themselves ‘mongrels’, they’re just too stupid to know it. If your Swedish compadres don’t consider you ‘white’ it is probably due to ignorance on their part. Sucks to be so stupid tbh. Guess that statist-socialist education system really does the citizen’s well.
you are all guilty
of?
I admittedly have not read through all of the responses, but i noticed quite a few people trying to demonstrate the diversity of libertarians. doing so only supports the illusion that claims of “libertarians being a bunch of white guys” even matters. if the majority of those who believed murder was an injustice where female (and very few males agreed), would that make murder any less wrong? it’s important to separate correlation from causation. it’s true that most libertarians are white males, but it’s also true that most people who get involved in politics are white males. i won’t speculate as to why, but that seems to be the case. there are a lot of other factors that contribute to the attraction of certain ethnic/racial groups to a particular ideology, but that has little to do with the philosophical correctness of it.
don’t judge a set of principles (or anything for that matter) solely on the skin color or gender of the majority of those who hold them. judge them on reason.
As has been already noted, you are glossing over a great deal of ethnic and national diversity. As for why libertarianism is predominantly championed by white people, I would point out several factors. First, the ideas of classical liberalism developed first in Europe, which means that the consequences of those ideas will naturally be most advanced within this region at any given time. Second, the “centers of liberalism” have migrated over time from Paris to Vienna to San Francisco - that is, clusters of liberal thinking have tended to develop and then move out to other areas. Naturally, speakers of the language in which the liberal thinkers of the day wrote and spoke will have a greater exposure to those ideas. Today, the majority of libertarian writing is available in the English language. Hence, English speakers automatically have greater exposure to liberal ideas. A majority of English-first-language speakers are white. There’s your correlation.
But how does it matter? Are you suggesting that there is a secret KKK conspiracy to spread liberal ideas because they believe this will help the white capitalist masters better keep the dark-skinned peoples of the world in their place? I’m not understanding the point of your question.
Clayton -
I feel so guilty!!!
Help!!!
Clayton -
I think a lot of you may be jumping to wrong conclusions confusing causation with correlation when associating socio-economic conditions with intelligence, and intelligence with race. I would have thought how you are brought up would have a big factor to play, especially if the child has the stimulus and support of a cohesive family unit. This is something lacking in black households, especially in the US.
Throughout my school years I exceeded my classmates at Maths, but I know I would never have got anywhere near as far without my dad teaching me and pushing me from an early age.
South Asians in the UK tend to outperform whites on test scores, and also dominate the business sector. One would not necessarily infer this from comparing “cross cultural” IQ scores from South Asia and Western Europe. I even remember hearing talk about affirmative action for white males in this country!
Or maybe, this is an emotional reaction of mine considering I’m Indian.
If you are wondering why not many minorities are libertarians, I would say just look at the stats. I think your opinion of the market would be a bit dented too if you were in one of the unlucky racial.ethnic groups that are earning consistently earning less than a bunch of white guys.
Now you can explain that income difference all you like and talk about how in some homesteaded anarchist paradise it would never exist (though of course there are no examples of this utopia to sever as example), but politics is more about yesterday and today than it is about what-if and tomorrow.
if you are really interested in getting a more diverse libertarian base, start focusing on economic inequality issues. Not just a policy paper here and there about school vouchers or the like, I am talking a crusade to make the lives of minorities better through markets and freedom. If folks like Ron Paul put as much energy to addressing income inequality as he did the frickin’ Gold Standard, I think he (and the libertarian movement) would have had much more diverse supporters. But I would not hold my breath on this happening with any lib candidate in the near future.
FWIW, on those rare occasions that I find myself in jail, I like to amuse myself by proselytizing for libertarian ideas. I’ve found that blacks are quite receptive to libertarian ideas, especially the gold standard. I suspect that they just haven’t been exposed to such ideas, generally being taught to worship MLK and his communist ideology. I’d think there are more blacks in public school, as well, so they’d be more prey to the brainwashing that occurs there.
What’s strange, is that abolishing public schooling, the drug war, the minimium wage and the welfare state in general, would probably do more than anything else to lift the standards and earning potential of the lower income classes, it’s just paradoxically they would be the hardest group to sell this to too.
Also, I think the lack of support is partly a reflection of well statist propaganda has filtered through society, and become established wisdom. Socialism didn’t originate in the working classes, neither do we have any reason to believe it is necessarily the norm of the ideologies that shoud reign among them. It is our duty to change this.
“Minorities” is kind of vague. Which minorities? Lebanese and Persians do great here. So do Han Chinese, Koreans, Punjabis, Jews, etc. Meso-Americans are a little more diverse in terms of outcomes but for the most part, they seem glad to be here and opportunistic.
If you’re thinking of blacks, who voted in a 95% bloc for His Obamaness, most of them don’t want their lives to be “better through markets and freedom.” They just want to be rich, and specifically, they want to be rich in comparison to Anglos and Europeans. Abolishing affirmative action and transfer payments doesn’t get them there.
But there will always be income inequality. How does one ‘address’ what basically amounts to a non-existent ‘problem’?