Skip to main content

View Diary: Hey You Libertarians! Get Off My Blog. (302 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Small question (7+ / 0-)

    What set of libertarian incentives could have ended Jim Crow Apartheid in the American South?

    The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

    by kingubu on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:05:51 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'd like to add to that (5+ / 0-)

      What part of your libertarianism is going to bring about equal rights for my girlfriend and I?

      The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

      by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:12:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not sure. What discrimination do you face? (0+ / 0-)

        I've probably got a good answer for you.  But need more to go on.

        Results count for more than intentions do.

        by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:30:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, I'm sorry (4+ / 0-)

          You're unaware of the discrimination that gays and lesbians face?

          The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

          by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:59:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  not all "communities" (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kingubu, Philoguy, Balam, BoiseBlue

            welcome all people. The libertarian embrace of "community" is frequently code for keeping the wrong people out.

            And we all know who they are.

            Henry Wallace (1944): "The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact."

            by TNThorpe on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:04:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  To be fair... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VA Classical Liberal

            ... he probably just didn't know you were gay.

            Just sayin'...

            The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

            by kingubu on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:11:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The comment he/she replied to (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kingubu

              Specifically noted that I am gay. And even so, how does that change the question that I posed and the non-answer given?

              The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

              by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:14:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hmmm... (3+ / 0-)

                What part of your libertarianism is going to bring about equal rights for my girlfriend and I?

                You can probably put it down to gender bias on my part but I don't see where that comment specifically mentions that you are gay.

                But, whatever, yeah, libertarianism fails to address minority rights in your case just the same as it does everywhere else. Its a too-clever dormroom ideology that sounds great in the abstract but only leads to epic failure in the real world.

                The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

                by kingubu on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:21:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Again, as noted below (0+ / 0-)

                  You're right, if I don't say "I'm a female" in front of behind that question, it might be hard to decipher. I don't think it takes a lot of common sense, but that's beside the point. Even if I was a male, what makes a married couple more priviledged than a non-married couple?

                  The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

                  by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:28:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Nothing (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    SciVo

                    At least, not to most libertarians (I am not one, btw).  Most either support marriage equality (good) or want to replace all marriages with a private contract system (insane).  I don't think this is an area where libertarians are particularly the enemy.  

                    As far as why unmarried couples are excluded...the government has a rational interest in promoting stable two-partner relationships.  Actually, it is kind of funny, because your question gets at the root of the extreme libertarian critique: the government has no basis for preferring heterosexual or homosexual couples to singles or groups.

                •  But I talked about gay rights in the dang diary! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Alec82

                  I'm on your side Boise.

                  Please read the diary.

                  Results count for more than intentions do.

                  by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 08:36:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I read the diary (0+ / 0-)

                    Why do you think I didn't? You're simple little solution "I don't care what you do" does nothing to advance equal rights. Nothing. That is just plain apathy and it completely ignores the fact that while you don't personally care, a lot of other people do.

                    The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

                    by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 09:31:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  He was probably unaware of your gender (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                VA Classical Liberal, Marja E

                The comment he replied to just described you as having a girlfriend.  I don't know that he was aware you were female.

              •  Actually you didn't say you are gay. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Alec82

                You just said your "girlfriend". I didn't want to assume.

                Please take a look at my direct response to your question.

                Results count for more than intentions do.

                by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 07:04:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  VACL was more likely unaware of your gender. n/t (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VA Classical Liberal, Alec82

            I also believe we must impeach Antonin Scalia for protection from his inhumanity.

            by SciVo on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:12:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Seriously (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kingubu

              You'd have to be pretty dense to not understand what is referred to in that question.

              And even if was too vague for anyone, it's still a legitimate question: Why do married couples get more rights than non-married couples?

              I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer to this from Libs.

              The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

              by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:18:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  State defined marriage is hardly libertarian. (4+ / 0-)

                The right of any consenting individuals to contract as they see fit is a principle generally recognized by libertarians.

                Running against Herb "WIRETAP" Kohl in 2012. $1/year. Cash preferred.
                Masel4Senate 1214 E. Mifflin, Madison, WI 53703

                by ben masel on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:35:55 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  That may be true (0+ / 0-)

                  But it's certainly not in any libertarian that I've known.

                  The vote is "Basic Democracy #1". YOU must preserve it. -edscan

                  by BoiseBlue on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:41:54 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Wisconsin's LP convention voted unanimously (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    VA Classical Liberal, Alec82, Marja E

                    to oppose the silly marriage Amendment on the ballot here in '06. 99 to 0.

                    Running against Herb "WIRETAP" Kohl in 2012. $1/year. Cash preferred.
                    Masel4Senate 1214 E. Mifflin, Madison, WI 53703

                    by ben masel on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:50:56 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Are most of the libertarians you know in Idaho? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    VA Classical Liberal, Marja E

                    Because there are some westerners who I would describe as anti-state who are also incredibly bigoted.  The vast majority of self-described libertarians I know are absolutely opposed to sodomy laws, marriage restrictions, efforts to push homosexuality out of sexual education, etc.  I haven't really known an anti-gay libertarian.

                    My uncle, a small l libertarian and a big R Republican, likes the idea of same-sex marriage precisely because he hopes it will result in the government getting rid of state sanctioned marriages.  It is a pipe dream of his, but there you have it.

              •  You may owe me an apology. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Marja E

                There are many reasons a male/female couple could be descriminate against.

                South Carolina took 103 year to recognize my sister's "one man/one woman" marriage just because too damn many idiots don't like her husband's skin.

                Results count for more than intentions do.

                by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 07:11:43 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  I was unaware you are gay/lesbian. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Alec82, Marja E

            If I was short in my answer, it's just because I was having trouble keeping up with the comments.  Didn't know if you were gay, inter-racial (my family situation) or what.

            With that in mind, my libertarianism will help you in two ways.  I already said in the diary, that your sexuality is none of my business and I've written here here about what libers think is the right policy on gay marriage/rights.  If more people thought like this, you would many fewer problems.

            The other way is simple profit.  The company I work for offers full benefits for domestic partners.  It's one of the more progressive companies there is.  And we do it because gays/lesbians are a very important source of talent and creativity.

            We can't afford to ignore you.  We need you and we reward you because of that need.

            Somewhere in here I talked about Jackie Robinson and the US military's integration of blacks.  I've lost track of all the threads, but the same point applies.

            Results count for more than intentions do.

            by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 07:02:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Most libertarians... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VA Classical Liberal, SciVo

        ...support marriage equality, although there are undoubtedly many who would prefer to remove government recognition of marriage.  How in the hell that would be accomplished without creating an unmitigated disaster is beyond me.

      •  What part lof Authoritarianism has brought you (0+ / 0-)

        equal rights?

        Running against Herb "WIRETAP" Kohl in 2012. $1/year. Cash preferred.
        Masel4Senate 1214 E. Mifflin, Madison, WI 53703

        by ben masel on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:30:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Good question. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SciVo, Marja E

      Part of the answer is exactly those incentives that really did end Jim Crow.  Libertarians are not universally opposed to government action.

      Especially when it is mis-use of government that is causeing the problem!

      The other part is pure personal profit.  As much as progressives may be suspicious of greed and profit, it can work social good.  Jackie Robinson cracked the MLB color barrier because he was just too damn good to pass up.  Despite owner collusion to keep "coloreds" out of MLB, one of them broke ranks because Jackie was a pure 100% star.

      Integration of the US armed forces, mass black employment in manufactoring and other things are also examples.

      Results count for more than intentions do.

      by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:35:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, no. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Philoguy, Balam, SciVo, TNThorpe, Junah

        Yes, its true that the Civil Rights movement used economic pressures to increase the impact of their initial protests, but it took Federal legislation and the power of law (acting against the popular will of the states, incidentally) to finally break Jim Crow's hold.

        The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

        by kingubu on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:44:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, Federal Legislation. I agree. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SciVo, Marja E

          Libers are not totally opposed to Federal Government.

          In the case of Jim Crow laws, it was a serious mis-use of government power (and a violation of libertarian principles) that caused the problem.

          In that case, federal intervention was totally appropriate.

          Results count for more than intentions do.

          by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 05:52:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The problem though, IMO, is that... (5+ / 0-)

            ... you are engaging in post facto rationalizations.

            Take the libertarian principles you've laid out-- limiting the role of the government to "what it does well", for example-- and pretend that it it 1961: how do you get to the Civil Rights Act? By my understanding, you don't. If fact, just the opposite.

            Libertarian principles would demand that the Federal government stay out of the fight and that, if the Blacks in Mississippi don't like the way things are, they are free to move elsewhere.

            The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

            by kingubu on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:09:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VA Classical Liberal, Marja E

              ...they certainly would demand that the government stay out of the private market.  As far as state sanctioned discrimination, they tend to be broad constructionists when it comes to categories protected by the 14th amendment.  Indeed, they would probably expand it to include substantive economic rights.

            •  Agree with King (0+ / 0-)

              after all, the levers of power in the state or some backwater county are closet to the people, even if they're 3/4 crackers

            •  The Non-aggression Principle (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kingubu

              Sorry if I'm getting incohernt here, but this is the most discussion I've ever caused on dKos.

              The Jim Crow laws (and slavery before that) are the worst examples of using government to deprive people of their liberty.  This is anathema to libertarian thought.

              We trace our roots back to the 18th century philosophers who started the abolitionist movement.  Adam Smith is best known for "Wealth of Nations", but his prior book "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" was devoted to slavery, dignity and other issues progressives care about.

              Results count for more than intentions do.

              by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 07:17:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, you're dodging. (0+ / 0-)

                I didn't ask you what libertarians believe, I asked you what they would do. I sought a remedy and you offered philosophy; this is why libertarianism fails.

                When confronted with corruption, degradation, and abuse libertarianism says "well, it shouldn't be like that" and stops there. It avoids discussing solutions because talking about solutions requires talking about the means and the power to achieve those solutions and that's when the cracks begin to appear in the perfect abstract intellectual edifice.

                The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

                by kingubu on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 04:51:01 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Fair point. (0+ / 0-)

                  That's part of the negativity problem I write about.

                  Here's what we would do.

                  1. Stop the harm state and local government is doing.  In this case it was a perfectly legit to use federal force to stop the institutionalized racism of the south.
                  1. Integrate government programs.  The armed forces, mortgage programs, education, etc.
                  1. At a personal level, provide a good example. March, violate back of the bus rules, hire qualified blacks.  Not every effective remedy must come from the government.  A big part of our philosophy is that we, as individuals, can change the world by ourselves.

                  Results count for more than intentions do.

                  by VA Classical Liberal on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 07:13:58 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh, I agree...Oswald is an example (0+ / 0-)

                    Not every effective remedy must come from the government.  A big part of our philosophy is that we, as individuals, can change the world by ourselves.

                      of someone who changed history, however, I would challenge you to show me an instance in which an individual made a significant change in the world by themselves.  And even in the case of Oswald, he had to have someone willing to sell him a rifle through the mail.  
                      This idea of the "individual person" is where the problem arises.  Even Joshua Slocum, who sailed solo around the world, depended on suppliers along the way to sell him stores...a sale predicated on the recognization of a common currency.  

                    ...Former candidate for Congress.

                    by Steve Love on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:23:20 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Hear! Hear! (0+ / 0-)

                    Indeed it is one thing to offer a theory and diagnosis of the past and another thing to engage in action and be future oriented.  

                  ...Former candidate for Congress.

                  by Steve Love on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:12:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  But the Civil Rights Act? (3+ / 0-)

            Correcting discrimination in the private market? Most libertarians oppose those laws.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site