Friday, August 30, 2013

Can Libertarians be Racist? (political vs philosophical libertarians)

Alex Merced answers a fundamental libertarian misconception. Can Libertarians be Racist?
Answer: A Political Libertarian (Solely Believing in Small Government) can be, while a Philosophical Libertarian (Believes in Small Government cause of Belief in Individual) can't be

The REAL Reason For The Syrian War

Did the United States set the Assad government up with the chemical attack? Is the entire war being funded by Saudi and Qatar energy interests?

Qatar -- rich and dangerous -- eyes Syria\

Qatar bankrolls Syrian revolt with cash and arms
Taking Outsize Role in Syria, Qatar Funnels Arms to Rebels

Russia Urges Saudis, Qatar to Halt Help for Syria Rebels

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Bryan Caplan - How Libertarian Was the Civil Rights Movement?

Overall, I see the civil rights movement much as I see the Protestant Reformation.  Both attacked blatant injustices, many of them government-imposed.  But the thrust of the Protestant Reformation wasn't separation of church and state.  It was state-mandated Protestantism.  Similarly, the thrust of the civil rights movement wasn't separation of race and state.  It was state-mandated group equality of result.  Whether they're quoting Martin Luther or Martin Luther King, libertarians shouldn't forget these facts.

Read more:

Black History and Liberty

It is remarkable that American libertarians—so often eager to discuss freedom in nearly every conceivable iteration—rarely address African-Americans and the Struggle for civil rights in America. Slavery is long gone, but it is hardly coincidence that the descendants of slaves have accounted for disproportionate percentages of Americans in poverty and incarceration in the 150+ years hence.

Save Emancipation and America’s reluctant recognition of the 14th Amendment by way of Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s, the government has consistently (though not exclusively) been a boot on the necks of African-Americans, hindering progress and true equality. Yet libertarians tend to shrink away from acknowledging race for fear of involving themselves in “identity politics” and thus rarely discuss the government’s legacy of racial oppression.

If libertarianism is to be something more than free markets—libertarianism’s guiding principle is, after all, liberty—then its adherents should recognize that liberty is the end of, not just the means to, a better society. Thus, when looking for people to hold up as exemplars of liberty, we need to stop thinking “Was ______ a libertarian?” and start thinking: Did ________ fight for liberty? Is there something we can learn from him about what it means to be free? What exactly was he fighting againstand what did his denied freedom teach him? What mistakes did he make and what mistakes by others resulted in the denial of his freedom? How did the government fail him? How did society fail him?

Read more:

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Why Libertarians Should Not Support the Confederacy


Why shouldn't libertarians support the Confederacy? In short, because the Confederacy itself was not very libertarian.

In addition to being founded explicitly to protect the slave trade in America, the Confederacy conscripted soldiers, inflated its money supply during the war, and played host to many civil liberties violations. But that's not to say that the Union was much better, as Jason Kuznicki (@jasonkuznicki) explains.

Kuznicki is a Research Fellow at the Cato Institute and is editor of Cato Unbound.

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Walter Williams - Black Self-Sabotage

Walter Williams discusses “black self-sabotage” in his latest column: 

 If we put ourselves into the shoes of racists who seek to sabotage black upward mobility, we couldn’t develop a more effective agenda than that followed by civil rights organizations, black politicians, academics, liberals and the news media. First, weaken the black family, but don’t blame it on individual choices. You have to preach that today’s weak black family is a legacy of slavery, Jim Crow and racism. The truth is that black female-headed households were just 18 percent of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68 percent today. 

In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites. Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden for blacks, most black children lived in biological two-parent families. In New York City, in 1925, 85 percent of black households were two-parent households. A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households. During the 1960s, devastating nonsense emerged, exemplified by a Johns Hopkins University sociology professor who argued, “It has yet to be shown that the absence of a father was directly responsible for any of the supposed deficiencies of broken homes.” 

The real issue, he went on to say, “is not the lack of male presence but the lack of male income.” That suggests marriage and fatherhood can be replaced by a welfare check. The poverty rate among blacks is 36 percent. Most black poverty is found in female-headed households. The poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994 and is about 8 percent today. The black illegitimacy rate is 75 percent, and in some cities, it’s 90 percent. But if that’s a legacy of slavery, it must have skipped several generations, because in the 1940s, unwed births hovered around 14 percent. 

 Disgustingly, black politicians, civil rights leaders, liberals and the president are talking nonsense about “having a conversation about race.” That’s beyond useless. Tell me how a conversation with white people is going to stop black predators from preying on blacks. How is such a conversation going to eliminate the 75 percent illegitimacy rate? What will such a conversation do about the breakdown of the black family (though “breakdown” is not the correct word, as the family doesn’t form in the first place)? Only black people can solve our problems.