Sunday, May 15, 2011

Libertarians Я Dumb

Good old Ron Paul.

Linking to mikey even though he uses that crappy comment form.
Posted by Substance McGravitas at 9:27 AM

10 comments:

mikey said...

Oh sure.

Link to the smart and thoughtful post.

Shouldn't there be SOME benefit accrued from just being FIRST?

May 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

I've been thinking about what to say at mikey's post.

Probably something along the lines, "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The libertarians ignore the fact that individuals and corporations can be dangerously corrupt.
~

May 15, 2011 at 2:40 PM
Substance McGravitas said...

I think what it boils down to for me is that it isn't really a libertarian argument, it's ONLY a racist argument. I mean, the only negative result posited is that black people would have to be served. That does not change anybody's business one iota: you still ladle the same hash.

May 15, 2011 at 2:59 PM
tigris said...

Did black restaurant owners have the right not to serve whites? Because I'm guessing no.

May 15, 2011 at 4:09 PM
Smut Clyde said...

In NZ law, if you advertise as a restaurant or corner store or whatever then you're deemed to be offering a contract: "Pay me money and I will feed you". If you renege on the offer because you don't like the colour of a prospective customer's skin then it's a breach of contract and financial remedies apply. SO the question of whether restauranteurs
have a right to be racist doesn't even arise.

Do libertarians see 'enforcing contracts' as a legitimate function of the State, or is it something that can be left to the Free Market?

May 15, 2011 at 4:54 PM
Substance McGravitas said...

That's a pretty reasonable way of looking at it. I suppose another solution is to gouge out the eyes of business owners.

May 15, 2011 at 5:18 PM
tigris said...

So apparently the Paul's are anti-abortion, too? Requiring a business(which is, as one of Delong's commenters points out, a government-created legal construct) to serve all customers equally is outrageous, but forcing a real actual human being to carry a fetus to term regardless of her desire or ability is A-OK.

May 15, 2011 at 5:19 PM
Substance McGravitas said...

It is a funny thing that these libertarian positions coincide so well with the doctrines of fundamentalist Christianity and Republicanism.

May 15, 2011 at 5:21 PM
tigris said...

I'm opposed to extraneous apostrophes inserting themselves in my comments. GRRRRR.

May 15, 2011 at 5:21 PM
Smut Clyde said...

Laws forcing someone to provide services to keep someone else alive are a form of slavery, unless the first someone is a mother or a pregnant woman.

May 15, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)