Is Libertarianism Racist?

… a question taken verbatim from a short, but perfect, Foseti post (from 2012).

(XS misses that guy.)

Anyone looking for a primer on how the hyper-liberal right goes dark will find it there. ‘Perfect’ means it can’t be improved upon.

Don’t miss Handle’s comment, which fills out the party-political dimension.

ADDED (Park MacDougald):

If it sounds strange to say that libertarianism is “white,” well, it’s still true. Libertarianism is, empirically, really goddamn white, and some have suggested that that may not be a coincidence: That is, libertarianism makes assumptions about what’s normal for everyone on the basis of the white experience. Normally, that’s a point made by the left as a criticism, but the whiteness of libertarianism is increasingly accepted by post-libertarian reactionaries like Moldbug as a badge of honor. It could also indicate a wider trend in the future, if a combination of demographic changes and political projects to “make whiteness visible” lead more white people to think of cultural values like individual rights as tied to whiteness, rather than as universal principles. Certainly Trump’s brand of nationalism seems to rest on doing something similar with the idea of “America,” abandoning any pretense to a creedal idea of national identity in favor of one based on race. These trends could well produce, among whites, more conscious anti-racists and conscious racists at the same time.

ADDED: CATO dissents.

June 12, 2016admin 24 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction


24 Responses to this entry

  • Is Libertarianism Racist? | Alt-Right View Says:

    […] Is Libertarianism Racist? […]

    Posted on June 12th, 2016 at 7:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • smg Says:

    Nature is a racist bitch.


    Posted on June 12th, 2016 at 7:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Libertarianism is “racist” because “racist” is a binary whereby one is either “anti-racist” or “racist.” Since libertarianism is not “anti-racist,” it must be “racist.”

    Needless to say, this shows you how the word “racist” lost all meaning.


    Edenist whackjob Reply:

    “Racism” is a linguistic straitjacket, in that it shuts down rational thought. Try debating whether Dalai Lama is racist, and watch the syntax errors pile up in the other guy’s brain. It’s the opposite of Dennett’s intuition pump – it’s an intuition prison.


    Brett Stevens Reply:

    “Are potatoes racist?”

    Tomorrow at The Guardian.


    Posted on June 12th, 2016 at 7:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • Jehu Says:

    Racist means helps or doesn’t hurt non-elite white people. That’s the functional definition that an alien would infer.
    Thus of course having a relatively open society where most people are left to succeed or fail on their own is ‘racist’, because it is mostly white people that prosper in such environments.


    Posted on June 12th, 2016 at 9:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • Froude Society Says:

    Hmmm… I wonder what “the hyper-liberal right” manifested into when it went “dark”…. Surely, whatever it is, it is “‘perfect'” without a shred of hyper-liberal memes remaining.


    Posted on June 12th, 2016 at 10:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • cyborg_nomade Says:

    which means libertarianism is not effectively racist.


    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 12:36 am Reply | Quote
  • Foseti Says:

    Don’t miss Reason’s reaction to the latest events:

    Has it been taken over by Alt-Right trolls? Does it matter?


    Seth Largo Reply:

    I got a brief talking-to from academic colleagues for tweeting the relevant stats to someone parroting this nonsense within hours of the tragedy.

    “This is no time for statistics” were his words, I believe.

    I’m as anti-state as it gets, but even I think that, along with building roads and keeping out suicidal jihadists, the state has a legitimate role in making sure blood donations don’t have AIDS in them.


    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 12:44 am Reply | Quote
  • michael Says:

    Well DUHHHH niggers spics bitches fags etc are stupid but theyre not so stupid to think a level playing field would be good for them. This is why an ethno state is the foundation of any civilization.Niggers etal are at a triple disadvantage first they are not selected for the environment of a European civilization, Second they can no longer live as they are selected for, third hey can not find workarounds geared to their strengths and weaknesses because its a one size fits all situation. suppose niggers have a 85 IQ but are performing at rate predictive of a 75 IQ because of other traits. In a multicultural society they cant tailor workarounds like say corporal punishment and a 356 day school year that might actually have them punching above wieght. In their own nations they might do better still designing the entire nation to compete differently with the world. who knows whats possible.


    michael Reply:

    well obviously jim crow more or less accomplished this for them and they did perform much better probably all time nigger performance record at least since colonialism. But obviously that wasnt sustainable because as thatcher paraphrased a lefty would rather everyone were poorer if equal-er


    Seth Largo Reply:

    Admin, why hasn’t this thing been banished to the outer darkness? I’m not saying there aren’t legitimate points buried somewhere in his word vomit, I’m just saying I’m done picking through his vomit to find them.


    admin Reply:

    Been thinking along similar lines recently …

    Grotesque Body Reply:

    In his defence, the form is matched perfectly to the content and vice versa.

    SVErshov Reply:

    if you try to export modern educated people into artificially taylored for them libertarian structure you get utopia. if you try to enforce libertarian structure into some territory you get functional natural selection, not utopia.

    as some one said, maybe R.Nozick, not sure, – that would be nice if have large scale libertarian project already running, then we can verify our theorisings. well, I can go with definition of libertarian country as strong local communities and minimum government interferance into local affairs.

    for example madagaskar fit perfectly into this description. if people engage in trading slaves or sale their children into slavery goverment do not interfer. if people suffering with famine government do not interfer. if people start fighting each other, government sent army, kill all of them and burn their villages to the ground.

    that kind of functional libertarian structure Europe may get soon.

    Grotesque Body Reply:


    SVErshov Reply:

    Robert Nozick, ‘Anarchy State and Utopia’

    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 1:15 am Reply | Quote
  • Walter Oleg Says:

    There was a recent Bilderberg meeting in Germany but for some reason the SJWs weren’t there protesting the “white privilege” of the guests? I discuss this here:


    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 1:49 am Reply | Quote
  • Dale Rooster Says:

    “So, logically, the real definition of “racist” is “not helpful to the Left”. If you’re not 100% in favor of the leftist worldview and agenda, you’re unavoidably and inevitably “racist”, no matter how anti-discriminatory or colorblind you are, what you do, or why you do it.

    Until the right finds a way to stop playing with this stacked deck and neutralize the potency of this rhetorical distortion, then it’s going to lose. By semantic definition, it cannot win”

    Yep. The only way to beat racism accusations is to reply, “Yeah, so what. I’m racist.” Neutralization is stalemate. Then advance: “Let’s talk about racism. Let’s talk about HBD, etc.” Prog brain frizzle fry mental break down foaming at the mouth follows.

    An analogous situation occurs when an-caps try (in good faith) to discuss things with an-coms (majority of anarchists).

    Talking over one another–Plato had a word for this I believe, but I don’t remember what it is–is a language game in which to two teams are attempting to play by different rules. It’s a total waste of time. The civil war that exists on the Right is between those who realize that playing this game (democracy) is a silly waste of time and those who don’t.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    I’d go further. Engaging in dialectics where ‘racism’ comes up at all is a Leftist tactic. Punching your enemy in the face because he’s your enemy is the Right way to do things.


    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 3:51 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    in some sence rasism relegate to fascism

    in ‘Anatomy of fascism’ ROBERT O. PAXTON wrote: ‘Deeper preconditions of fascism lay in the late-nineteenth-century revolt against the dominant liberal faith in individual liberty, reason, natural human harmony, and progress. Well before 1914 newly stylish antiliberal values, more aggressive nationalism and racism, and a new aesthetic of instinct and violence began to furnish an intellectual-cultural humus in which fascism could germinate.’

    following similar ontological pattern question can be formulated as, – can (in modern situation) racism serve as a component for germinating ground of libertarianism.


    admin Reply:

    Sadly, it seems to propel people more easily towards authoritarian mercantilism.


    SVErshov Reply:

    that of course not a guarantee libertarian society from developing racists tendencies and conflicts on that ground. what ‘might lead to the formation of subgroups who might fight among themselves and thus cause the breakup of the association.’ R.Nozick Anarchy, State and Utopia.

    resolution may depend on what would be the policy of dominat force, on that territory, in case of conflict between members. choices are wide, from not intervene at all, to ‘gentle’ proposal to solve their differences by themselves . imo such destructive tendencies have to be recognised and pushed to climax quickly. ‘function[ality] can be pushed’


    Posted on June 13th, 2016 at 5:36 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment