Misrepresenting Libertarianism

Oddball · #1 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 10:42 AM

Looks like we've had a whoooole lotta that there "misrepresentin" thing going on around these here parts, too.

Quote:

The editors of the New York Times misrepresent libertarianism by way of Rand Paul and his statements about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, saying:

Quote:

"As a longtime libertarian, he espouses the view that personal freedom should supersede all government intervention. Neighborhood associations should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, he has written, and private businesses ought to be able to refuse service to anyone they wish. Under this philosophy, the punishment for a lunch counter that refuses to seat black customers would be public shunning, not a court order.

It is a theory of liberty with roots in America’s creation, but the succeeding centuries have shown how ineffective it was in promoting a civil society. The freedom of a few people to discriminate meant generations of less freedom for large groups of others.

It was only government power that ended slavery and abolished Jim Crow, neither of which would have been eliminated by a purely free market. It was government that rescued the economy from the Depression and promoted safety and equality in the workplace."

Let’s start with the most obvious canard, which is the proposition that Jim Crow had anything to do with free markets. They were called “Jim Crow Laws“, not “Jim Crow Markets”, the obvious reason for which is that separate accommodations were mandated by state governments, not organically grown in some mythical garden of free association rights. Indeed, the entire reason for the corrupt deal behind the presidential election of 1876 was to throw the South’s support behind a president who would end Reconstruction.

It was government–in this case, the state governments in the South–that imposed Jim Crow, and government that forced private companies to impose the desired restrictions on blacks. If government intervention was required to [abolish] Jim Crow, that was only because governments had imposed it in the first place....

Misrepresenting Libertarianism | Questions and Observations

Ravi · #2 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 10:55 AM

They forgot to include the word Federal.

boo hoo

manifold · #3 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 10:58 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

They forgot to include the word Federal.

boo hoo

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

Ravi · #4 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 11:24 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by manifold

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

They forgot to include the word Federal.

boo hoo

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

**JBeukema** · #5 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 12:18 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by JBeukema

Who pays?

Who builds it?

Who owns it?

Who maintains it?

Quote: Originally Posted by Dude

Nobody

And that's why only retards are libertarians.

This thread is complete.

.

Quantum Windbag · #6 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 01:00 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

Quote: Originally Posted by manifold

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

They forgot to include the word Federal.

boo hoo

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

Most libertarians actually support the federal governments authority to enforce the constitution, which specifically prohibits states from making Jim Crow laws. If the federal government had done its job there would have been no Jim Crow laws, and no one would be able to now claim that most libertarians supported them. I used to wonder why both parties are unable to man up and admit when they are wrong, now I know it is becasue they simply are never wrong.

Ravi · #7 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 01:04 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

Quote: Originally Posted by manifold

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

Most libertarians actually support the federal governments authority to enforce the constitution, which specifically prohibits states from making Jim Crow laws. If the federal government had done its job there would have been no Jim Crow laws, and no one would be able to now claim that most libertarians supported them. I used to wonder why both parties are unable to man up and admit when they are wrong, now I know it is becasue they simply are never wrong.

Does that mean Rand Paul is actually not a libertarian? If so, how could he object to the CRA if it did away with Jim Crow laws?

Quantum Windbag · #8 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 01:14 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

Most libertarians actually support the federal governments authority to enforce the constitution, which specifically prohibits states from making Jim Crow laws. If the federal government had done its job there would have been no Jim Crow laws, and no one would be able to now claim that most libertarians supported them. I used to wonder why both parties are unable to man up and admit when they are wrong, now I know it is becasue they simply are never wrong.

Does that mean Rand Paul is actually not a libertarian? If so, how could he object to the CRA if it did away with Jim Crow laws?

I am pretty sure that if you check you will see that Paul won the Republican primary in Kentucky, not the Libertarian one. Take any issues you have up with him and his positions with the Republicans, not me.

Oddball · #9 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:07 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

Quote: Originally Posted by manifold

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

They forgot to include the word Federal.

boo hoo

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

"Probably"??

Care to back that up with anything other than your clearly bigoted surmise?

NYcarbineer · #10 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Dude

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

Quote: Originally Posted by manifold

Fascinating rebuttal. You clearly pwned the duder on this one.

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

"Probably"??

Care to back that up with anything other than your clearly bigoted surmise?

Do you support state's having the right to segregate? If yes in some cases, list the cases.

EriktheRed · #11 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:16 PM

This is a better representation:

The lesson of Rand Paul: libertarianism is juvenile - War Room - Salon.com

Dante · #12 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:16 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Dude

Looks like we've had a whoooole lotta that there "misrepresentin" thing going on around these here parts, too.

Quote:

The editors of the New York Times misrepresent libertarianism by way of Rand Paul and his statements about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, saying:

Quote:

"As a longtime libertarian, he espouses the view that personal freedom should supersede all government intervention. Neighborhood associations should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, he has written, and private businesses ought to be able to refuse service to anyone they wish. Under this philosophy, the punishment for a lunch counter that refuses to seat black customers would be public shunning, not a court order.

It is a theory of liberty with roots in America’s creation, but the succeeding centuries have shown how ineffective it was in promoting a civil society. The freedom of a few people to discriminate meant generations of less freedom for large groups of others.

It was only government power that ended slavery and abolished Jim Crow, neither of which would have been eliminated by a purely free market. It was government that rescued the economy from the Depression and promoted safety and equality in the workplace."

Let’s start with the most obvious canard, which is the proposition that Jim Crow had anything to do with free markets. They were called “Jim Crow Laws“, not “Jim Crow Markets”, the obvious reason for which is that separate accommodations were mandated by state governments, not organically grown in some mythical garden of free association rights. Indeed, the entire reason for the corrupt deal behind the presidential election of 1876 was to throw the South’s support behind a president who would end Reconstruction.

It was government–in this case, the state governments in the South–that imposed Jim Crow, and government that forced private companies to impose the desired restrictions on blacks. If government intervention was required to [abolish] Jim Crow, that was only because governments had imposed it in the first place....

Misrepresenting Libertarianism | Questions and Observations

Stop whining. We've all been exposed to the dis-ease of libertarian lunacies.

We have all heard the "free markets would get rid of racist businesses' arguments.

Libertarians are

Ravi · #13 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:27 PM

How many Libertarians does it take to screw in a light bulb? None. The Market will take care of it.

Oddball · #14 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:28 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by EriktheRed

This is a better representation:

The lesson of Rand Paul: libertarianism is juvenile - War Room - Salon.com

Wowzers!...The Fabians at Salon smear libertarians?!?!??

Stop the presses!

Ravi · #15 (**permalink**) 05-24-2010, 02:29 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by NYcarbineer

Quote: Originally Posted by Dude

Quote: Originally Posted by Ravi

His C&P is a non sequitur.

Not to mention that Rand Paul, and most libertarians, are probably supportive of a state's right to enact Jim Crow laws.

"Probably"??

Care to back that up with anything other than your clearly bigoted surmise?

Do you support state's having the right to segregate? If yes in some cases, list the cases.

Don't expect an answer.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Oddball For This Useful Post:
Big Fitz (05-24-2010), boedicca (05-24-2010), Oscar Wao (05-24-2010), xsited1 (05-24-2010)

The Following User Says Thank You to Ravi For This Useful Post:
Old Rocks (05-27-2010)

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ravi For This Useful Post:
Dante (05-24-2010), EriktheRed (05-25-2010), Old Rocks (05-27-2010)

The Following User Says Thank You to Oddball For This Useful Post:
SuMar (05-27-2010)