Posted on 08/25/2014 9:46:34 AM PDT by Kaslin
In the wake of the shooting death of a young black man by a white Ferguson, Missouri police officer, it is to no one’s surprise that the usual suspects on the left are screaming “racism” from the rooftops.
Infinitely more disturbing for the lover of liberty is that ever growing legions of “libertarians” are regurgitating this same talking point. Moreover, the libertarian’s obsession with “the State” has endowed him with boundless sympathy for the hordes of violent black criminals that have been violating every principle that he claims to hold sacred while attributing the assault against civilization on display in Ferguson to “the militarization” of the police.
“Paleo-libertarian” and long-standing World Net Daily writer, Ilana Mercer, takes to task Paul Craig Roberts, who recently suggested that “racism” may very well play a role in accounting for why so many whites are inclined to think that the shooting was justified. In her own inimitable way, Mercer puts this line out to pasture by noting it for the “nonsense” and “bullshit” that it is.
There could be any number of reasons for why white Americans are disposed to sympathize with the decorated police officer for whose death the rioters are now calling, Mercer notes. Among such reasons, she remarks, is that these “ordinary Americans who Paul Craig Roberts maligns as likely racists…have simply experienced ‘black crime’ first hand, or are fearful of experiencing ‘black-on-white’ violence in all its ferocity [.]”
Some remarks are in order here.
First, anyone who is interested in thinking clearly and honestly must realize that “racism” is the rhetorical ware of bumper stickers and t-shirts: Because it means—and is intended to mean—all things to all people, it has become meaningless. All that we do know is that “racism” is a dreadful, probably the most dreadfulthing, of which a white person can be accused.
To be called a “racist,” then, is like being called a “creep” or a “jerk,” only much, much worse.
Of course, no one knows why it’s supposed to be so terrible to be a “racist.” In and of itself, a “racist” could signify someone who has a special place in his heart, a certain partiality, toward the members of his own race. Yet such affection for the members of one’s race no more betrays a weakness in one’s character than does a fondness for one’s family or one’s nation.
May not “racism” be the moral equivalent to “family-ism” or “patriotism?”
However we choose to slice and dice this matter, the point is that “racism” is a vapid term that any thoughtful person should’ve abandoned long ago.
But there is another reason why this silly word should never spring from the lips of any self-professed lover of liberty: the word isn’t just silly, it is dangerous.
In fact, “racism” has proven to be more inimical to liberty in our time than has any other.
It is under the pretext of combating “racism,” after all, that freedom of association, private property rights, “’states’ rights”—comprehensively, the principle of “equality under the law”—have been decisively routed. Our national government has all but revoked the federal government ratified by our Founders. To no slight measure, this has occurred in the name of securing “racial equality” (while generating more inequality than ever).
In fueling the notion that, to this day, white America remains consumed by “racism,” self-avowed “libertarians,” whether they realize it or not, hasten liberty’s extinction by exacerbating the steady impulse toward ever greater concentrations of power.
The verdict is unambiguous: Incessant chirping over “racism” is inimical to both good sense and freedom alike.
So no one in the “black community” has a job? If so, how are they able to protest, riot, sit-in, demonstrate and petition 7 days a week?
I get that Jack here is slamming libertarians. And that’s fine. They are at fault.
What I don’t get is exactly how libs are to blame and how exactly they are wrong with respect to Ferguson.
The riots and looting breech the libertarian “fist reaches my nose” rule. The rights of the rioters and looters end, when they actually riot or loot.
A lot of libertarians are just plain anarchists.
CC
So, let me see if I've gotten this correctly:
Jack Kerwick makes a wide-ranging claim about the behavior of 'ever growing legions of "libertarians".
Then he goes on to claim that those same "libertarians" are sympathetic to the violent black criminals who are currently committing crimes in Ferguson.
Then he gives an example of a single person, one Paul Craig Roberts, having made a rather anodyne statement about white people's views of the situation being influenced by "racism".
Hmmm... I guess that this Paul Craig Roberts guy must either constitute an ever growing horde all by his lonesome, or else he must be the (elected? appointed?) spokesman for all libertarians, everywhere. Wow, such a powerful guy that I've never heard of before.
Well, no, I don't see that Kerwick has presented any evidence whatsoever of those 'ever growing legions' that have so disgruntled him, nor do I see that Kerwick has proffered any evidence of those hordes of libertarians expressing sympathy for criminals and thugs. Rather, what I see is a foolish rant by someone who is projecting his hatred of his phony strawman onto all libertarians.
I'm well acquainted with that dishonest type of rhetoric, because it's pretty much an exact duplicate of how typical leftist idiots slander their imaginary Tea Party antagonists with phony outrage at their supposed evil acts.
Jack Kerwick, first heal thyself before you go out campaigning against your imaginary boogeymen and demons.
Let’s see... A thug ASSAULTS someone and gets shot for it.
Pretty much the libertarian ideal is you ask me. It should be irrelevant that the shooter was a cop.
The thug initiated the violence. Absent which, he’d still alive.
Paul Craig Roberts is afforded levels of legitimacy by many conservatives who think he is some sort of conservative oracle. He is nothing of the sort. He’s a demented fool who should have been put on his meds a long time ago.
Ever notice how black racists call themselves “racialists,” which then becomes a good thing? As if adding three little letters changes the essential character of their bigotry...
Good analysis.
i love how these so called experts can cry “Libertarians” and then fail to name more than one “journalist” in their story...
these are the people that are driving wedges, these are the people crying wolf...
these are the true party republicans that do not want to see anyone, other than their “mainstream” gain power...
now what if, just what if, the libertarian wing of the republican party, and the conservative wing of the republican party, joined forces??????
these are the mainstream republicans trying to maintain status quo....
ignore them
PS... i am still waiting to that name or names...
However their view fits into the big picture of what's going on in Ferguson now and why and how the whole commotion started, it is a valid point and a useful contribution to the mix of opinion on the subject.
We can agree to disagree with them about what happened and not try to railroad everyone into expressing the same opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.