Business Insider OP ED: Peter Schiff: More Racist Economics From A Libertarian (and Rand Paul)

[Madison320]

https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-schiff-more-racist-economics-from-a-libertarian-2011-10


"It is a scam because fostering racism is racism. If you set up racist policies you are fostering racism. Most normal people understand that, but Libertarians are far from normal. I have discussed the racism of Rand Paul and of Murray Rothbard. There is a pattern emerging here."

"The logic of the Libertarians is what places them into the box of fostering racism. The logic is that it is somehow immoral for a government to force relationships in the public sector. They cannot see the difference between public and private relationships. Making voluntary relationships in public institutionalizes racism."

This is the part that really pisses me off. What he's really saying is that it's ok for the government to initiate violence on business owners but not on him by calling private businesses "public". He would wet his pants if the government enforced the same laws on him. And to add insult to injury he almost certainly believes in forcing business owners to FUND the govt that is initiating violence upon those same business owners in the form of progressive taxation!!!

Why would anyone, in their right mind, want to own a business?

[Danke]

2011, hopefully he/she has learned something since then.

[Brian4Liberty]

2011, hopefully he/she has learned something since then.

He "retracted". Not really...


In trying to ferret out the doctrine of the libertarians, it is important to understand that these are not normal people. They are abnormal, eccentric in their thoughts. That doesn't mean you can't like a libertarian, that you cannot communicate with a libertarian.
...
Technically, you could foster racism without being racist, appealing to some other higher calling. That is what Schiff and others appeal to, a higher calling of liberty that makes the need for laws against racism unnecessary. Even if I give them the benefit of the doubt, it is a hard rationale to accept. But let's just say that their fanaticism is so focused, so pure that this higher freedom aspiration were true.

Even if this passion for liberty above the fray of racial debate were true and they really were not racists in their own minds, the libertarians believe that racism is a civil liberty. Got that? Racism is a civil liberty to the libertarians. That is the higher calling they appeal to!

If that is not technically racism in their minds, surely they could see that racists cannot be entrusted with a civil right. Racism does not rise to the level of a civil right. It is a perversion of liberty to be racist. Racism is NOT A CIVIL LIBERTY any more than murder or mayhem is a personal liberty.
...
More: https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-schiff-is-not-technically-racist-but-believes-racism-is-a-civil-right-2011-11

[acptulsa]

If that is not technically racism in their minds, surely they could see that racists cannot be entrusted with a civil right. Racism does not rise to the level of a civil right. It is a perversion of liberty to be racist.

And reverse racism? Is it a civil right, or a perversion of liberty?

If the answer is, reverse racism is different, then what I want to know is, how can you believe racism and reverse racism are fundamentally and morally different without being racist?

[dannno]

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/heroes-and-villians/images/9/98/Scarecrow.jpg/revision/latest/top-crop/width/360/height/450?cb=20190501063556


The main issue is that when he talks about how libertarians do not advocate business owners act racist, even though they should be allowed to, he does not mention the economic impact to the business of not allowing certain races, and what type of economic opportunity that allows for others who are not racist to step in and serve everybody.

[acptulsa]

The main issue is that when he talks about how libertarians do not advocate business owners act racist, even though they should be allowed to, he does not mention the economic impact to the business of not allowing certain races, and what type of economic opportunity that allows for others who are not racist to step in and serve everybody.

Clearly that's not his main issue. His main issue is that "racists cannot be entrusted with a civil right", and if you think otherwise, you are "abnormal, eccentric in your thoughts."

Therefore, clearly, his main issue is making tolerance as intolerant as possible. That's a handy position to hold--if you're trying to paint liberty as a bad thing and stir up a civil war.

[Madison320]

The main issue is that when he talks about how libertarians do not advocate business owners act racist, even though they should be allowed to, he does not mention the economic impact to the business of not allowing certain races, and what type of economic opportunity that allows for others who are not racist to step in and serve everybody.

I'm more concerned with the moral issue vs the economic one. I believe the important point is that there's no such thing as a "public" business. A business is just an extension of the business owner and he should have the same rights as everyone else. There shouldn't be a law that says "a business can't discriminate". There should only be a law that says "an individual can't discriminate". "An individual can't discriminate" law would be a bad law but at least it would apply to everyone. That would keep bad laws from passing in the first place if everyone had to live by them.