General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Libertarian Plea to Bring Back Jim Crow: An Oxymoron by a Regular Moron
By William K. Black
Quito: April 7, 2015
My April 4, 2015 column discussed the Wall Street Journals express endorsement of a right of merchants to discriminate against groups they detest. I explained that the WSJ was adopting the position of Richard Epstein and quoted Epstein about the policy question he found to be a very hard question. That question was voluntary hereditary slavery hes in favor of it as a right essential to liberty. But he admits that he finds it very hard to justify the impact of the voluntary contract of slavery on the externalities and yes, he is talking about children as commodities. I quoted the passage from Epsteins famous defense of discrimination in his book Forbidden Grounds to show how zany the policy views are that emerge like mold spores as soon as one endorses discrimination by merchants against groups they despise as a means of increasing liberty.
I also noted that, according to conservatives, every leading candidate for the Republican Partys nomination for the presidency rushed to embrace the right of merchants to discriminate in the Indiana Act as originally passed. I stressed that the Indianas Act allowed merchants to discriminate against any group blacks, Jews, women wearing immodest dress, LBGT, or Latinos as long as the merchant phrased his bigotry as a product of his personal religious views. Republican Party strategists try valiantly every couple years to wean the Party from hostility to women and minorities, but the fear of losing in the Republican primary to someone to ultra-right has so terrorized every major Republican candidate for the presidential nomination that they keep on taking symbolic and substantive actions that constitute revealed prejudices. That same dynamic explains the Indiana legislatures Republican members votes and Governor Mike Pences original enthusiastic support for authorizing merchants to discriminate on the basis of factors such as race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation. It is odd that a law that would allow a merchant to discriminate against customers on the basis of their religious beliefs could be labeled a bill protecting religious freedom. One might hope the media would point this out in their articles and on radio and television rather than parroting the original Indiana Acts oxymoronic title.
I explained that this fear of the primary opponent from the ultra-right was acute in Indiana because the most respected Republican Senator, Dick Lugar, was annihilated in the primary by a loon. The loon was so extreme (describing women who were impregnated by their rapists as receiving a gift from G-d), that he lost in the general election even though Indiana is an infra-red state. The true gift that keeps on giving in terms of U.S. presidential elections is the Republican Partys palpable hostility to enormous numbers of Americans. Mitt Romney even gave these people a number he said that it was his job if elected not to represent the 47% of Americans.
My April 4 column was responding to the WSJs claim that such discrimination by merchants represented dissent and that liberals (by which they meant often conservative major business leaders) were acting outrageously because they did not tolerate such dissent. The great thing about the modern WSJ is that it only takes a few hours to start crazy and then spin into full zany. Sure enough, by April 6, 2015, William McGurn (WSJ alum gone even wackier as the New York Posts editor), had written in the WSJ calling for libertarians to go full-Epstein and endorse merchants right to discriminate against groups they despise.
in full: http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2015/04/the-libertarian-plea-to-bring-back-jim-crow-an-oxymoron-by-a-regular-moron.html