This is the second in a series of articles. Rothbard was a racist and he was one of the most influential people in the libertarian movement. Since Ron Paul is running for president people need to know the dark underside that will always be with libertarian thought.
Exposing the Racist History Of Libertarianism And Murray Rothbard
By bgamall4 Follow Tue, 4 Oct 2011, 7:59am 15,635 views 208 comments
Watch (1) Share
Quote
Permalink Like (1) Dislike (1) « First « Previous Viewing Comments 9-48 of 208 Next » Last » See most liked comments
« First « Previous comments Next comments » Last »
|
Premium member bgamall4 is moderator of this thread. |
Follow
Befriend
2 threads
1,645 comments
bgamall4 says
So how many black women have you had intercourse with? How many white women have you had intercourse with? How many asian women have you had intercourse with? How many hispanic women have you had intercourse with?
Now, how many black men have you had intercourse with? How many white men have you had intercourse with? How many asian men have you had intercourse with? How many hispanic men have you had intercourse with?
If you refused any one of them or failed to serve them all according to the population demographic ratios, aren't you racist, sexist and discriminator based on sexual orientation?
What you have come up here regarding Rothbard, Gary (the racist sexist and orientation-bigot scamster), is little more than a smear campaign.
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
Wow, Reality, the law applies to commerce and interstate trade and the like. Who you want to roll in the sack with is not covered by the law. I hope you knew that!
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
thunderlips11 says
I will look into this. Thanks.
Follow
Befriend
2 threads
1,645 comments
bgamall4 says
The law does not apply when labeling people racist. One can disagree with laws without being racist. If you think any desire for the freedom of personal choice is racist, why aren't you racist, sexist and committing orientation-bigotry for desiring personal choice during "association" in the sack ?
You know damn well Rothbard is a strong believer and advocate for personal liberty; i.e. antagonistic to all laws and all state power that discriminate against individuals based on whatever characteristics. He is also correct in recognizing that laws forcing certain personal behavior on the other hand would only back-fire and cause additional friction between different (what are essentially self-identified) groups.
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
One can disagree with laws without being racist, but one cannot disagree with the civil rights act of 1964 with regard to the mandatory serving of people in a restaurant and not be racist. Rothbard was a racist, and as I pointed out, he wanted a separate nation for blacks, voluntary separation, and balked only because he didn't want to pay foreign aid!
Rothbard was a jackass. Grow up and see the real world man. You know and I know that anyone can hide racism behind the doctrine of voluntary separation.
And that is exactly what Rothbard did. Personal liberty is just another excuse for his perverted soul to be perverse.
Follow
Befriend
2 threads
1,645 comments
bgamall4 says
Just because you say so? Then I hereby declare you a racist, sexist and homophobic (or heterophobic) bigot for refusing to have intercourse with anyone asking you to pull down your pants.
No he did not; you misunderstood the sarcasm in his writing. BTW those exact positions were what Abraham Lincoln wanted, and Lincoln wasn't joking about using federal resources to send all blacks back to Africa. Ever heard of Liberia?
Rothbard did not advocate any government policy to expatriate blacks. As a civil libertarian, he was against government surveillence against black nationalists (who wanted to have their own nation) then in vogue in the 60's and 70's. That was entirely consistent with his life-long view that individuals have the right to voluntarily secede from their government overlords. If he denied that right to blacks, that would be racist. He did not; he was very consistent in recognizing the same individual right of self-ownership for individuals of all races.
Voluntary separation is exactly what you are doing when you refuse to procreate with a member of another race.
You are a moron if you can not see the position of opposing state enforced anti-misogyny laws while allowing people to individually voluntarily decide whom they want to have intercourse with.
You are the perverted one by your own standards, for refusing to have intercourse with all comers.
Heck, we don't even know what Rothbard's own sexual preference is or how he would personally run a restaurant; he was merely suggesting that people should have the freedom to choose with whom to have intercourse with, sexual or social, when using their own resources and on their own private property.
Just for the record, in case you think I too am hiding racism behind voluntary association, I have dated girls of all colors, even experimented with homoeroticism when young. So there!
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
If you repudiate the notion of voluntary association with regard to public accommodations we can talk.
Follow
Befriend
3 comments
I think you should look further into this before throwing the racism smear around. From his excellent 'ethics of liberty' -
"We have indicated above that there was only one possible moral solution for the slave question: immediate and unconditional abolition, with no compensation to the slavemasters. Indeed, any compensation should have been the other way—to repay the oppressed slaves for their lifetime of slavery. A vital part of such necessary compensation would have been to grant the plantation lands not to the slavemaster, who scarcely had valid title to any property, but to the slaves themselves, whose labor, on our “homesteading” principle, was mixed with the soil to develop the plantations. In short, at the very least, elementary libertarian justice required not only the immediate freeing of the slaves, but also the immediate turning over to the slaves, again without compensation to the masters, of the plantation lands on which they had worked and sweated. As it was, the victorious North made the same mistake—though “mistake” is far too charitable a word for an act that preserved the essence of an unjust and oppressive social system—as had Czar Alexander when he freed the Russian serfs in 1861: the bodies of the oppressed were freed, but the property which they had worked and eminently deserved to own, remained in the hands of their former oppressors. With the economic power thus remaining in their hands, the former lords soon found themselves virtual masters once more of what were now free tenants or farm laborers. The serfs and the slaves had tasted freedom, but had been cruelly deprived of its fruits."
I have read the article you linked to and it is pure buncombe. He gets even basic facts wrong - it really IS a smear. Even a sort of novice libertarian scholar can see past it... my goodness what a poorly researched article. I really... It was one of the worst things I've ever read in a supposedly professional outfit.
Follow
Befriend
3 comments
To be honest, it just sounds like people don't like the ideas of libertarianism, so they dismiss them at a glance and then use anything, anything they can get ahold of to try to discredit those that espouse such views. Do your research - if you really don't want less government, then I don't think you're doing your cause any good in the long run, because any open-minded person is going to think you're opportunistic and that's never a good selling point for any philosophy. Not trying to be mean or disrespectful, just some honest advice.
Follow
Befriend
3 comments
"Rothbard was a racist, and as I pointed out, he wanted a separate nation for blacks, voluntary separation, and balked only because he didn't want to pay foreign aid!" - this is a misunderstanding on your part. He would have opposed all foreign aid, because such aid becomes rife with political opportunism and strings attached; the risk of abuse is very high (look at the middle east). Here is a much more balanced article, if you are interested in such things. http://jacksharkey.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-i-am-libertarian-part-iii-ku-klux.html
Follow
Befriend (1)
247 threads
4,683 comments
Why is it always White people accusing "White" people of being racist?
Do you know why? Because black people are too busy being human with their own opinions about not only Whites but all races different than them, to go calling the kettle black. American blacks don't even relate to Jamaicans, or Haitians for that matter, and visa versa. If either one of those ethnicity's were White, they would be racist of the highest order according to White Liberals.
Why is it only "White" are called racist?
Ever notice when a Hispanic is labeled a racist, someone says "But he's Spanish" and then whole affair is dropped?
I'm sorry you guys are White, you'll get over it eventually.
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
Murray Rothbard, a libertarian Jew, and student of Ludwig von Mises - Austrian Jew who fled the Nazis is a racist anti-semite?
That's what you claim in the article you linked to.
No mental institution can help you.
For the rest of us - libertarians treat people as individuals, not groups (races, etc.) - hence by definition libertarians can't be racists.
Also, libertarians believe in property right and nonviolence, hence the owner of the property may do as he wish with his property. That's not racism - it's private property.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
It seems ridiculous that a business would refuse paying customers purely on the basis of skin pigmentation, but...
Should a private business be forced to do business with someone simply because of a government mandate? It's kind of the same thing with smoking bans. Why is the gummint telling private businesses what to do? Nobody is forced to go to a restaurant or bar that allows smoking, save for maybe the employees. Of course if they hire smokers, then there's no problem. ;-)
With public schools, it's different of course. It's a public enterprise paid for by tax dollars. They can't deny access to anyone living in that school district that paid taxes to support the school.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Did you grow up in the South?
Where I came from, it was "separate, but unequal". It was not a question of a person being denied access to one market, and another one across the street no problem. People trying to minimize it always pick the trivial examples.
Oh sure we loan money here, but not to black people, why don't you try a loan shark. Yes you can go to school, but not the good well-funded ones. You can't live in this part of town because this real estate agency only shows houses to white folks. I watched the Klan march down my street the first time an African-American family moved in. It was having someone die because the closer hospital didn't accept coloreds. There's a lot more to it, than just where you sit on the bus or at the drugstore counter, those were just visible EXAMPLES that stuck in our memories.
Numbskulls like the Libertopians who minimize the need for the Civil Rights Act frankly weren't living in the middle of why it was needed.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Vicente says
No, I did not. Also, most of the civil rights stuff was over by the time I was born (the 1980s).
Vicente says
Well I specifically said that public schools should never be allowed to refuse service to anyone, since it's a public enterprise.
Vicente says
Probably true. Like you say, theory is one thing, reality is another.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Why should a private school be allowed to discriminate if public schools cannot? We allegedly live in the Land of Opportunity where everyone gets the same shot at the brass ring.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Vicente says
According to the Wiki article, he did NOT die because the hospital refused to give him proper treatment because of his race. He did lose his job because of his stance on blood transfusions between races though, which is a damned shame.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Vicente says
Private schools "discriminate" all the time. For example, if you cannot afford their tuition, you cannot attend. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but that's the way it usually works. Are you referring to racial discrimination, specifically?
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
wthrfrk80 says
I had remembered that as a "fact" probably from watching MASH, but deleted it quickly I hate having any posts with factual errors. Original text was removed from that post in minutes, you were watching this thread like a hawk.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Vicente says
Must have been a lucky hit on my part.
It's ashamed that some of these urban legends get passed on by tv...don't the producers care to at least get their facts right?
I wouldn't have been all that suprised if the story turned out to be true though, based on the kinds of things that went on in the south in his day.
Follow
Befriend
3 comments
I'm a card carrying libertarian. and our party isn't Racist, your acuasion is insulting. It's also not very well thought out, and all circumstantial.
with your line of thinking, Anyone who believes in any social program at all (even paid college for soldiers) is a hard core socialist right?
you are abstracting the Idea that government shouldn't tell businesses how to run their businesses, into stating the entire party, and the parties official stance is racist.
This is all due to you not aggreeing with the political ideas of Ron Paul, but you are unable to challenge his ideas intellectually, so instead you result to a smear campaign.
you Sir, Are either Dishonest (you know the libertarian party isn't racist , and racism is against our principles) or you are an Idoit (if you Truely believe what you wrote) , and you are what's gone wrong with our political system.
What's wrong is that either Ignorant people are doing all the talking, Or you are intentionally lying (my bet)
But don't take my word on it (and definitely don't take bgamall4's word for it either)
www.lp.org
Follow
Befriend
19 threads
1,534 comments
Los Angeles, CA
OP needs a day job. I'm pretty sure 'defeating Ron Paul' is a pointless waste of time. Why don't you pick up garbage off the street or learn a new skill instead of looking back into history and passing nonsense judgements. (George Washington was racisit!!!!! )
idiot
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
Alex Rademacher says
Not all libertarians are racist, but virtually all libertarians, real libertarians, at least believe that racism is a civil right. They believe in the inherent goodness of man. Sort of stupid don't you think?
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
CaptainShuddup says
Two reasons:
1. Libertarianism has pushed deregulation of the financial industry, especially in the UK.
2. Libertarians have massive influence because they can point to their promotion of "freedom" and "liberty", until one realizes just what they mean. It is not clear to the average Joe what they mean. I know what they mean. They mean racism should be a civil right and they mean banks should be predatory in an atmosphere of deregulation.
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
AlexS says
That some libertarians were Jewish seems contrary to what most Jews believe. Most Jews are not for racism or for making racism a civil right.
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
Vicente says
Well said. Libertarians are corrupt to the core while wrapping themselves in a false piety. Their religion is self, and their piety is junk.
Follow
Befriend (14)
748 threads
2,572 comments
63 male
Las Vegas, NV
bgamall4's website
Premium
JohnathanH says
Libertarians always say that. But Peter Schiff does not dispute my saying he believes racism is a civil right. He did take issue with my contention that he is a racist.
For some, it is a difference without a distinction. But I take Schiff at his word. Instead of being a racist he is just a kook!
Don't tell me you are superior intellectually. Sometimes I wish Mises and his cronies had labored under Naziism because they adopted some of the agressiveness of the Nazi's, and believe they are intellectually superior.
But it all boils down to assumptions, and we know what assumptions the libertarians have. One is that the invisible hand of self interest works to the good of society as a whole. The housing bubble and opposition to the Civil Rights Act both prove libertarians don't have a clue.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Yes that's the main downfall of Libertarianism. It assumes humans are "basically good." If humans are "basically good", then why do we need any kind of government at all?
It's an assumption at the core of all kinds of hair-brained ideologies. Many of said ideologies have massive body-counts.
That's what happens when you have too many ivory-tower academics with too much time on their hands.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
bgamall4 says
Godwin's Law strikes again!
Follow
Befriend (4)
328 threads
913 comments
I'm not a Racist or Bigot. I don't like anybody. ROFL
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
bgamall4 aka Gary Anderson:
If you look a dictionary definition of word bizzaro - it will have your writings and your picture. Calling a jew who fled the nazis -Ludwig von Mises - "elitist with fascist tendencies", or claiming that libertarians, who are against the groupthink, racist is that - BIZZARO.
Mises was the exact opposite of elitist - he was poor all his life, even though he worked into his 90s, and wrote, and taught, and promoted the Austrian school of Economics. His treatise "Human Action" quoting the Wall Street journal - "must be on the desk of every thinking person". Mises is the Mozart of Economics.
Also, Fascism is when state controls the means of productions - and Libertarians and anarchists are exactly the opposite. Per definition - liberals (who want taxation and regulation on business) are Fascist, but Mises and libertarians are the exact opposite of fascism.
So, to conclude - since you promote fascism, that is government control and redistribution - you are fascist. Fascism also comes with lies, propaganda, racism, and anti-semitism.
As far as Ron Paul is concerned - the modest country doctor, who read Mises and Rothbard, and considered them and Burt Blumert (also a jew) - his mentors, and who promoted Martin Luther Kings believes of non-violent resistance - calling him anti-semite and racist is beyond sick.
here:
Gary Anderson - you are on the record lying and distorting the truth.
Follow
Befriend (1)
247 threads
4,683 comments
bgamall4 says
1)It feels good
2)It panders the black vote
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
AlexS says
I think you'd better check your dictionary it's defective. That's not what any source I've referenced says about fascism.
Libertopians deny the possibility of Robber Barons and monopolies, or they excuse them as necessary consequence not to be regulated.
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
Vicente - here is from definition of Fascism: "Fascism advocates a state-controlled and regulated mixed economy..."
That is, unlike Socialism, Fascism does allow for private property and means of production, though it has full control as to taxing and regulating it.
Examples of Socialist countries today: Cuba, North Korea, maybe few more, but there are hardly any socialist countries left.
Examples of Fascist countries: USA, Canada, France, Germany, etc. - pretty much most of countries in the world today are Fascist.
That's regarding your dictionary comment.
Regarding your Robber Barons and monopolies, I do see that you are a product of publiK eduKation system. Another word you read government lies in government textbooks.
Vanderbilt lowered the prices of shipping by a factor of 40. Rockefeller lowered the prices of kerosine (oil) by a factor of 50. Carnegie dropped the price of steel by so much, that country could build up steel skyscrapers and railroads. They were industrial geniouses who enriched the human kind. Or as you call them "Robber Barons".
The only monopolies possible are Government monopolies. Post Office. Central Bank. AT&T (prior to deregulation). Pentagon. Teachers Public Union. PubliK EduKation. and so on.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
AlexS says
They also engaged in all kinds of exploitation of workers and turned many cities into hellholes so bad, no sane person wanted to LIVE there and thus suburbs were born. I find it ironic that Libertopians spend so much energy throwing stones at the Federal Reserve and loving Robber Barons, when you look at who attended the Jekyll Island 1910 meeting that led to the 1913 creation of the Federal Reserve.
The Robber Barons of today:
What do guys like this produce? Factories, jobs, steel for buildings, new inventions or medicines? Seen any Blankfein libraries in your town?
BACK on the topic.....
If y'all think Civil Rights Act is such an anachronism and we can just strike all such legislation, go ahead. Propose it, enact it, and let's all watch Jim Crow spring back to life. I'm from Georgia and I know that in places like where I grew up they wouldn't need much excuse.
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
Vicente: "They also engaged in all kinds of exploitation of workers and turned many cities into hellholes so bad, no sane person wanted to LIVE there and thus suburbs were born."
As I said, I won't be able to turn around the years, dozen of years of brainwashing you received in Government Schools. But sane person would ask - why would everyone take up a job with Robber Barons instead of just working elsewhere?
The reason is apparently because working for Robber Barons was better than other alternatives. People didn't really have good work conditions in 18th and 19th and early 20th century.
But government sKools don't teach that, instead they spread lies, propaganda, and smearing about "robber barons" who enabled us to produce oil, steel, transportation so cheaply that it became available to the masses and raised the living conditions of americans.
As far as Jamie D. and Lloyd B there - they are no Robber Barons - they are useless, worthless money changers, with strong government connections, who depend on constant government bailouts to stay affloat. They are worthless rent seekers, their business models don't work, and they, and their organizations would have been through bankruptcy and liquidation decades ago - only if this country had real Capitalism.
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
Vicente, let me remind you, Jim Crows, Segregation, and all other niceties where the product of Federal and State Governments. Blaming anti-government Libertarians for Government racist laws is ridiculous.
So, if you want to talk racism, slavery, discrimination - you talk Government.
If you want to talk individual equality - you talk Libertarians.
But again, obviously you are a product of Government Edukation, Government Brainwashing, Government Propaganda, and Government Lies.
Follow
Befriend (1)
1 threads
284 comments
Here is a timeline of Racism in this country (for people like Gary Anderson and Vicente)
Federal and State Governments create Slavery, Racist, Discrimination Laws.
Libertarians oppose and want laws repealed.
In 60s Federal and State Governments, instead of just repealing their racist, horrible laws, pass new laws to force integration and force people to behave 180 degree opposite from just yesterday. Then government take high roads and claim everyone who doesn't conform 100% that very minute with how they live or who they associate with is ... racist...
The only racists are Government and demagogues who defend Government, and those who shove reverse discrimination and quotas down our throats.
Martin Luther King would be appalled today of all the government edicts, and quotas, and laws, and all the cheap apparatchiks and opportunists taking advantage of this horrible situation, that government is responsible for to begin with.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
AlexS says
Bzzt wrong. Dutch traders brought the first slaves to Jamestown.
"Hey hear you are stuck with mere indentured servants. Here try these slaves on for size, oooh doesn't that feel nice?"
My history says there was no USA at that time. AFAICR these Dutch traders were not under orders of the Queen of England or anything, they were just being enterprising capitalists. There wasn't a law AGAINST it, so..... in grand Libertopian style they got away with. And thus indentured servitude was largely sidelined by much cheaper slavery.
After the Revolution, the Constitution later codified into the Constitution and Federal and state laws what had been the custom for a long time. Feel free to search up a bunch of web stuff and try to refute me I'm going from memory trying to resist the urge these days to "prove" every last thing.
Follow
Befriend (12)
140 threads
1,355 comments
Emeryville, CA
AlexS says