Anarchist Crackpottery

By -
Jeff Tucker today sent out a Facebook post declaring that bad race relations are "overwhelmingly" due to government restrictions.

Tomorrow, expect an update from Jeff as to how original sin was caused by Eden's lacking a free market in fruit.



Comments

  1. Samson Corwell11:56 AM

    If anything, it's the opposite: I think race relations in the South were made much better by the CRA forcing everyone to get along.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ken B12:03 PM

    True, under the proviso that "government restrictions" = history.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown12:43 AM

    I generally agree with you, and if Tucker had meant that racism originated from government, he would be wrong.

    But even non libertarian academics like Michelle Alexander have documented how the war on drugs has lead to mass incarceration, which results in poverty, in the black community.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Jim_Crow

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/science/long-prison-terms-eyed-as-contributing-to-poverty.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    The urban renewal programs of the 60's destroyed thousands of black businesses and redesigned neighborhoods in a manner that eliminated the self policing functions performed by neighbors and stores.
    You acknowledge this.

    http://gene-callahan.blogspot.com/2014/02/why-did-urban-crime-rates-drop-last-20.html

    Walter Williams' the state against blacks is a fascinating examination of the affects of occupational licensing laws and their origins.

    Rent control and zoning deincentivize new apartment construction, while government programs meant to alleviate black poverty, like busing and affirmative action, harmed blacks. Busing removed black control over local schools and was based on the racist assumption that blacks could only succede in an environment with white children, and affirmative action programs placed black students in academic environments that they were not prepared for and that did not prepare them for the world.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/

    A valid criticism is that the government was responding to public opinion, so a reduced government would have made no difference because the dominant attitude is racist. I disagree with this. But thinking that the government played no role in creating racial tension is a notion as utopian and baseless as anarcho-capitalist screeds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah6:31 AM

      "No role"? Who here said "no role"? Anybody? Anybody?

      Not sure who you are addressing, Bob.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In ancapistan, if you have no property, you have no rights

By -
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
Read more

St. Paul and I Agree...

By -
Taxation is not theft: "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." -- Romans 13 The key idea implicit here, and the one that turned me on the subject of whether or not taxation is theft, is that "every soul" owes obedience to the "governing authorities." Now, if that is a debt I truly owe , then, when those authorities levy the taxes they need to do the job of governing, I owe them those taxes, and attempts to collect them certainly do not constitute acts of theft. And obviously it doesn't matter at all, from this point of view, whether or not I "signed" any sort of "social contract." (In fact, the history of political thought since the Reformation can be read as an attempt to find a secular rep...
Read more

Libertarianism and Violence, II

By -
I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
Read more