Rand Paul, Racism and 1965 Civil Rights Act

[Ben Kenobi]

You should demand a refund.

Ironically, I would agree with you, but not for the reasons you would suspect.

And a lot good it has done for you.

Wasn't worth what I paid or the time spent. I could have spent 4 years being a marxist cheerleader and done just as well. Original thought and research isn't exactly valued.

[Heraclitus]

Well Libertarians do have a point in this case.

Hypothetically if we turned this world into a small government world, if there where vast untapped reserves of Black talented individuals that where unable to get jobs due to White or Oriental prejudices companies that do hire them would quickly out compete other companies.


Unless a racialist company got a monopoly. But even so nongoverment groups would quickly pressure them and give them a bad rap and they would cave. Multinational corporations do many things that people don't agree with but as far as diversity is concerned they know seeming diverse brings in money.

As to public spaces... I can't see a restaurant owner today get much business if he said no White/Gentile/Black/Korean people are allowed. It would be low status to be seen in such a restaurant, people would think you a racist dick.

I think if people really still wanted all White or all Black or all Jewish restaurants/bars they would have found a creative way around this (probably using social networking internet sites to coordinate in a creative fashion) considering freedom of association is still protected (or is it?).

[MrFun]

Holy ****. I just got done reading the batch of posts BK has made; S-T-U-P-I-D.


What I also find disturbing, is that Rand Paul uses the same argument that white supremacists used during the civil rights movement to oppose civil rights legislation. "The federal government has no business interfering . . ." All in the name of preserving white supremacy and Jim Crow.

[MRT144]

Well Libertarians do have a point in this case.

Hypothetically if we turned this world into a small government world, if there where vast untapped reserves of Black talented individuals that where unable to get jobs due to White or Oriental prejudices companies that do hire them would quickly out compete other companies.


Unless a racialist company got a monopoly. But even so nongoverment groups would quickly pressure them and give them a bad rap and they would cave. Multinational corporations do many things that people don't agree with but as far as diversity is concerned they know seeming diverse brings in money.

As to public spaces... I can't see a restaurant owner today get much business if he said no White/Gentile/Black/Korean people are allowed. It would be low status to be seen in such a restaurant, people would think you a racist dick.

I think if people really still wanted all White or all Black or all Jewish restaurants/bars they would have found a creative way around this (probably using social networking internet sites to coordinate in a creative fashion) considering freedom of association is still protected (or is it?).

Why would it inherently go out of business? This is the ****ing fallacy of not enforcing equal rights because "The market is egalitarian" bull****. The market can be composed of actors that have biases that don't result in efficient choices. If a huge portion of consumers are apathetic towards or endorse racism then how will the racist companies face any harm?

If the market is racist, the outcomes are racist. If you live in a society that says all men are equal but you can choose not to serve any person you want, and oh, since the people that are chosen not to be served are predominantly black, then that's completely contradictory.

And floyd, you should be ashamed. One man's freedom ends where another man's begins. Your freedom to be a racist ends where it impacts the rights of people you're racist against. Is the right to refuse service more important than the right to be treated like any other person?

[Ben Kenobi]

All in the name of preserving white supremacy and Jim Crow.

You are aware that it was the same Democrats who passed Jim Crow? Are you calling them the party of white supremacists?

[Ben Kenobi]

The market is egalitarian" bull****. The market can be composed of actors that have biases that don't result in efficient choices. If a huge portion of consumers are apathetic towards or endorse racism then how will the racist companies face any harm?

Which is why the market is egalitarian. If businesses are inefficient, then more efficient ones will replace them. Racism is inefficient. Jim Crow was a method to keep a monopoly situation in the face of competition, not the other way around.

[Dr Strangelove]

The civil rights act may have been well intended, but it's been a cluster**** in terms of bringing prosperity to black people.

Black people are actually worse off since it's passage than they were before.

Sure, if you consider being unable to go to the same stores, restaurants, hotels, schools, neighborhoods, water fountains, voting stations and restrooms as white people being better off. I am old enough to remember the segregated restrooms and water fountains. I remember the son of my Grandmother's maid being arrested for being found in the general area of the murder of a white man. He was held without communication with his counsel, my Grandfather. The police eventually found the murderer, in fact the day after the murder. My Grandmother's maid's son was released 2 weeks later, i.e., once most of his facial wounds had largely healed.
I remember visiting her home with my dad and Grandad the night he was arrested. It was a little "shotgun" shack, not much different from the little cabins built back on the plantations a hundred years before. It was a sort of "mockingbird" like experience.

[Ben Kenobi]

I remember visiting her home with my dad and Grandad the night he was arrested. It was a little "shotgun" shack, not much different from the little cabins built back on the plantations a hundred years before. It was a sort of "mockingbird" like experience.

I'm sure. I guess that's way worse then growing up without a dad, getting involved in running drugs at 14, and dead on the streets by 18.

But then that's just me.

[KrazyHorse]

Why would it inherently go out of business? This is the ****ing fallacy of not enforcing equal rights because "The market is egalitarian" bull****. The market can be composed of actors that have biases that don't result in efficient choices. If a huge portion of consumers are apathetic towards or endorse racism then how will the racist companies face any harm?

They'll face harm because less racist companies will hire black people at a more efficient point on the wage productivity continuum. Duh.

If the market is racist, the outcomes are racist. If you live in a society that says all men are equal but you can choose not to serve any person you want, and oh, since the people that are chosen not to be served are predominantly black, then that's completely contradictory.

No, it's not (necessarily). Start thinking before you speak.

And floyd, you should be ashamed. One man's freedom ends where another man's begins. Your freedom to be a racist ends where it impacts the rights of people you're racist against. Is the right to refuse service more important than the right to be treated like any other person?

[vulgar libertarian] There us no right to be treated like any other person by any actor other than the government[/vulgar libertarian]

I agree with the civil rights act in general, but most of the condemnations of the rand paul position in this are piss-poor.

[ShaneWalter]

They'll face harm because less racist companies will hire black people at a more efficient point on the wage productivity continuum. Duh.

If the market is racist, the outcomes are racist. If you live in a society that says all men are equal but you can choose not to serve any person you want, and oh, since the people that are chosen not to be served are predominantly black, then that's completely contradictory.

No, it's not (necessarily). Start thinking before you speak.

And floyd, you should be ashamed. One man's freedom ends where another man's begins. Your freedom to be a racist ends where it impacts the rights of people you're racist against. Is the right to refuse service more important than the right to be treated like any other person?

[vulgar libertarian] There us no right to be treated like any other person by any actor other than the government[/vulgar libertarian]

I agree with the civil rights act in general, but most of the condemnations of the rand paul position in this are piss-poor.

If a high enough percentage of the population is racist, is it not possible that any gains from being able to hire black people for lower wages would be negated by lost revenue? I thought that was his implication by saying "if the market is racist".

[KrazyHorse]

If you hadn't noticed, his statement was about producers, not consumers. The condition he required from consumers was merely that they were not actively anti-racist.

The civil rights act regulates producer behavior. Also, other than in client facing roles consumer preferences are unlikely to be very strong.

[KrazyHorse]

dp

[MRT144]

They'll face harm because less racist companies will hire black people at a more efficient point on the wage productivity continuum. Duh.

If the market is racist, the outcomes are racist. If you live in a society that says all men are equal but you can choose not to serve any person you want, and oh, since the people that are chosen not to be served are predominantly black, then that's completely contradictory.

No, it's not (necessarily). Start thinking before you speak.

And floyd, you should be ashamed. One man's freedom ends where another man's begins. Your freedom to be a racist ends where it impacts the rights of people you're racist against. Is the right to refuse service more important than the right to be treated like any other person?

[vulgar libertarian] There us no right to be treated like any other person by any actor other than the government[/vulgar libertarian]

I agree with the civil rights act in general, but most of the condemnations of the rand paul position in this are piss-poor.

Or not. Like I said KH, people don't always make choices for optimal outcomes based on biases.

[OzzyKP]

I remember the son of my Grandmother's maid being arrested for being found in the general area of the murder of a white man. He was held without communication with his counsel, my Grandfather. The police eventually found the murderer, in fact the day after the murder. My Grandmother's maid's son was released 2 weeks later, i.e., once most of his facial wounds had largely healed.

We haven't come all that far yet on this count...

[KrazyHorse]

Or not. Like I said KH, people don't always make choices for optimal outcomes based on biases.

You twit, I already explained to you that EVEN BIASED businesses will hire those discriminated against so long as they are less biased than their peers.