Proof that libertarianism is racist

Many of us in the Dark Enlightenment are recovering libertarians. Radish has a great post on libertarianism’s race problem.

There’s one aspect of this topic that deserves a bit of extra analysis. It’s possible to logically prove that libertarianism is racist. Here’s my shot at it:

1) Any system which results in “disparate impact” across certain groups is racist.

2) Libertarianism is a system in which no government force will be used to ensure equality across groups.

3) Traits, such as intelligence, athletic ability, etc, vary across groups and the levels of certain traits are highly correlated with outcomes in a world absent government coercion.

4) Therefore libertarianism is racist.

I think point 1) is terrible definition of racism, but it’s the operative one in our society.

Conservatives would do well to recognize that the same chain of logic applies to them. They (and libertarians) would be even more wise to stop discussing racism as if it were defined in a way other than 1). A few decades ago, racism may have been about treating everyone equal, but that ship has long since sailed.

If you follow this logic correctly, you’ll see that all non-progressive systems of government are racist.

15 Responses to Proof that libertarianism is racist

  1. Yes, and this is the main reason why race is important to the reactionary: because “all non-progressive systems of government,” or insufficiently progressive ones, “are racist.” Any bright idea you might have is at most two steps away from “das raciss,” so you better have an answer. (Your bright idea is also probably equidistant from “das sexiss,” etc., but “das raciss” is the progressive weapon of choice.)

    A special case of your proof: Does a libertarian support affirmative action? If yes, what the *#$ is a libertarian? If no, das raciss. QED

    • asdf says:

      This is why people need to actively embrace the term racist. Arguing over whether it does or doesn’t mean #1 is irrelevant, nobody gives a shit about that kind of subtlety for obvious reasons and it immediately puts you on the defensive when you show that a word scares the living hell out of you.

      • Thanatos says:

        Of course that’s the definition the simpletons have. Philosophically, it makes no sense,however.

        Not arguing on behalf of libertarianism,but one must give the devil his due.

        I also strongly agree with embracing the term “racist”. The attitude should be, “Who cares if it’s racist? What difference does that make?”.

  2. asdf says:

    well duh…

    I would take it one step further though. #1 isn’t some accident of history or something society could somehow be argued out of. #1 is a logical result of social game theory that libertarians don’t understand.

  3. asdf says:

    1a) According to Rand, it is entities that act, and every action is the action of an entity. The way entities act is caused by the specific nature (or “identity”) of those entities; if they were different they would act differently.

    1b) It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage — the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry.

    In other words A is A…but genes aren’t genes.

    And lets not forget her treatise on why Native Americans had it coming to them:

    “[The Native Americans] didn’t have any rights to the land and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using…. What was it they were fighting for, if they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their “right” to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or maybe a few caves above it. Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent.” * Source: “Q and A session following her Address To The Graduating Class Of The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, March 6, 1974”

    Really though its a bit to easy to criticize the half baked epistemology of a psychology damaged refuge*. I suppose if her characters stayed out of politics they would be decent enough folks.


  4. Racial privilege is when a person or a group of people get preferential outcomes due to their membership in a racial group.

    Racism is anything that supports racial privilege.

    By ignoring racial privilege to focus on the individual, libertarianism supports racial privilege, and is thus racist.

    Furthermore, a racist is someone who supports racial privilege. This includes most Whites. See this video:

    It’s not enough to feel guilty. You are benefiting from it and if you aren’t actively working to end racial privilege, you are racist.

    So the thing is, if different races have different average characteristics, perhaps racial privilege might be justifiable. Libertarians do not do this. They claim that since they are ignoring racial privilege, it means that they are opposing it, while themselves benefiting from it. This is disingenuous.

    …ask your progressive friend if s/he agrees with this assessment. See also this instruction from the University of Delaware:

  5. Handle says:

    A Gnostic interpretation, from when the progressives need to reconcile a century of futility with the need to keep running the machine:

    God, it seems, is also racist. Or just The Creator (Demiurge) and not the True God who loves us all equally and from whom we’ve become alienated.

    The Racist structure of Humanity is the true Original Sin, The Fall of Creation itself. All morally-enlightened human existence must be dedicated in perpetuity to redemption of this transgression against cosmic equality, to endless conscious interventions, redistributions, and compensations, to achieve a life of social justice – reflecting the state of affairs in our true home and heaven, and not this lapsarian, corrupted domain.

    This temporal reality, with its evil and suffering and biology and genetics and evolution, is meaningless in the larger cosmic scheme of the music of the spheres. Perhaps we will never build utopia or heaven on earth, but we are committed by our faith to the endless, maximum effort to demonstrate our resolute dedicate to the True God, as a perpetual prayer to Him – to make everyone equal as He intended.

    And additionally, of course, to crush all the false worshipers of the Demiurge, who hold the mere imprisoning illusion of Creation – of material nature – as “Truth”, and who believe in ‘natural’ inequality. We will suppress forever their cult of difference, source of all evil, hatred, and wickedness in our world – existing as punishment from on High for slacking from our Holy Task – and thereby, to eradicate racism.

    • asdf says:

      None of us can know God’s will in its entirety. It may be that God wants us to learn how to live in a world where people are not equal in terms of IQ and other things. Perhaps when we get to heaven there will still be hierarchy and diversity, but that we will know how to live with it. And the way we live with it might still be based on love for our fellow man, but not take the form of progressive equalitarianism.

  6. […] ‘Proof that libertarianism is racist’ […]

  7. […] It’s because Libertarianism is Racist.  In three major […]

  8. Gato says:

    Of course you’d LOVE to believe that libertarianism is a system in which no government force will be used to ensure equality across groups. But the truth is libertarianism is a system in which no government force will be used to ensure INEQUALITY across groups.

    Surely if your rely in your own definition of libertarianismo instead of what libertarians really think, you could prove anything you want to.

  9. james says:

    You acknowledge that IQ varies among races and failure to offer preferential treatment through affirmative action is somehow racist..yet you seem to ignore the fact that lower iQ is directly linked to higher crime and lower standard of while affirmative action may benefit a certain segment of society, it clearly harms another.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: