Another Paper Insinuates Libertarians are Racists

kkkinbama.jpgOK, this is getting tiresome already. Another newspaper is unfairly trying to tie the Libertarian Party to white supremacist Larry Darby on yet another issue. As I just explained, the Libertarian Party of Alabama rejected Darby very quickly in 2002.

State attorney general candidate Larry Darby wants to protect the Southern culture.

So the Montgomery Libertarian-turned-Democrat has a plan, including declaring martial law, that he says would solve the illegal immigrant problem and re-establish Alabama’s sovereignty.

Darby’s opponent in the Democratic primary is John Tyson Jr. Incumbent Troy King or Mark Montiel will face off in the Republican primary. The primaries are June 6.

Darby began his campaign for state attorney general in 2002, but ended that campaign after a few weeks. He said he now considers himself a “Dixiecrat.”

Trying to run as a Libertarian for a few weeks does not make one a Libertarian candidate. He probably (I have not yet verified the records) paid some party dues at one time, but we can’t force members through lie detectors. This continued mention of Darby as a Libertarian while the local press continues to ignore the real Libertarian candidates (like Nall, who is getting national media attention) has to end. It looks like time to start contacting editors to let them know that we ain’t gonna take this anymore. I’m now embarrassed that I used to write op-eds for The Decatur Daily a few years ago.

I’ll make this clear. While I don’t know if Darby made it to this KKK anti-immigration rally and cross burning, it seems clear that he would support it. Contrast that to Nall’s view, which was ignored by the same media:

On May 1, I spoke at two different immigration reform rallies. One at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa and one at St. Andrews Episcopal Church in Montevallo, AL. As a Libertarian I support the workers who are already here and do not wish to see them targeted by police if all they are doing is working hard and taking care of their families. Being anti-immigrant is Un-American. We need to reform immigration laws and make it a fairer process and then there would not be so many coming across the border illegally.

From her platform:

As the Libertarian party candidate for Governor of Alabama I would like the Hispanic community in Alabama to know that I support a guest worker program. Much of the rhetoric we are hearing with regard to immigration has roots in racism and has nothing to do with money. Of the four solutions that have been put forward, naturalization of Hispanics already inside Alabama who are working and paying taxes seems the only reasonable thing to do. We want people to come here who are willing to work and from what I have witnessed the Hispanics in Alabama do just that.

Since the morons in the press are having problems figuring this one out, I’ll clarify: the Libertarians are the only ones running non-racist platforms in Alabama.

Stephen Gordon

I like tasteful cigars, private property, American whiskey, fast cars, hot women, pre-bailout Jeeps, fine dining, worthwhile literature, low taxes, original music, personal privacy and self-defense rights -- but not necessarily in this order.

  1. Many people and groups I have learned about through libertarian websites and publications, the LP, LP News,etc- have ties or at least appear to be allied with White Supremicist, Anti-Semitic, or other organizations that either blatantly hold such views or are at least questionable. This is not news to me. I would hope libertarians would leave those kooks to the CP.

    I have had people, even relatives, ask me if libertarians were some kind of racists. That made me very sad to say the least, especially since I have a very racially diverse family.

  2. As far as this guy goes, I don’t see how anyone could be less politically attractive. A Democrat racist atheist who supports marijuana but opposes gambling.

  3. Those of us in the Atlanta market are able to listen to Neal Boortz who presents himself as a Libertarian. Because he hosts a talk show he is more in the business of provoking than informing, although he gets credit for the latter more than most. For most of his listeners this man speaks for the Libertarian Party whether or not the party approves.

    With some regularity he talks candidly about social deviants, criminals and others who are simply stupid in terms that skate perilously close to eugenics. We know it is a slow day when he drags out the old “government schools” whipping boy or gleefully tells another story of how someone got killed for making a poor judgement, thus illustrating “Darwin at work.”

    With less than 300 characters left I have no intention of explaining the historic connections between eugenics and racism, but you get the point. If the Libertarian Party wants to shake a racist image, better counseling for talk show hosts would be a good starting point.

  4. Boortz wasn’t our guy that we sent into the talk show field… he was a Republican that decided to join us. We can’t really control him or what he says.

    Anyway, I doubt that Boortz turns too many people off… remember Maher claims the party too, and he’s almost nothing like Boortz. Liberals in the market for talk radio will hear Boortz and be appalled, but realize “Hey, Maher’s a Libertarian too, so they can’t all be like that” and be okay with us. Same in reverse for conservatives.

    At any rate, it wouldn’t surprise me if this is intentional… the majors realize that third parties could take a big chunk out of their hides, so they’re trying to tar us with the “racist” moniker so we keep looking fringe.

  5. Many people are probably smeared as “racist” who are not. However Libertarians will appear “fringe” as long as they are allied with fringe people and groups, especially those related to “extreme-right” groups with racist ties.

  6. Sorry for being a bit dim, but what has libertarianism got to do with racism? How are people linking the two apart from this man?

    I have libertarian views – for instance, I am against immigration laws. That would be a racist’s worst nightmare.

    Racism and libertarianism are opposites.

  7. Stewart Richards,

    Point taken. I figured as much, and that is reassuring.

    There might be a lesson here, however. One of Boortz’ favorite tail-twisting memes is telling people who want to fly the battle flag of the Confederacy that it is time to get over it. He calls them “flaggots.” (Another backup theme when things get slow…) Anyway, he was quite artuculate a week or two back explaining that when the racist applications of that sacred symbol were being appropriated by the lowest of the low in society, those who now claim to hold it sacred failed to speak up and denounce misuse of the symbol. His point: their failure to speak out caused them to “lose the trademark.” Compare what happened when the Kodak people lost the use of that word by common usage. Same idea.

    It may be time for prominent Libertarians to speak out clearly and forcefully against racism (and/or eugenics?) by way of keeping the image of the party unstained.

  8. Anyone who sees “libertarian” and “martial law” in the same sentence should know something is up.

  9. Our party’s claims to be against racism would be more credible if our platform didn’t call for the right of secession and the right of employers and corporations to discriminate on the basis of race.

  10. More wonderful platform whackiness:

    Individual rights should not be denied, abridged or enhanced at the expense of other people’s rights by laws at any level of government based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. The right of association includes the right not to associate, for exercise of this right depends upon mutual consent.

    Solutions: While we do not advocate private discrimination, we do not support any laws which attempt to limit or ban it.

    Transitional Action: We support repealing any laws imposing discrimination by government, rather than extending them to all individuals.

    that makes it all perfectly clear. :D

  11. Kris Overstreet: Amen, my brother. As soon as I get my signing bonus, I’m going to have my wife contribute $100 to your campaign.

    To be clear: Being anti-affirmative action does not mean one is racist. But being so wholly fixated on the issue certainly implies racism. Like I said in another post, the LP candidate for US Senate in my state makes the NUMBER-ONE issue “racial preference.” My LP is also supporting a bogus “civil rights” ballot initiative sponsored by racist groups to eliminate affirmative action while tricking people into thinking they’re voting to preserve it.

    And of course, the attendees of my convention were 99% white, 97% male. Wonder why? And yet, guess who they nominate for governor? The only Black guy to show up. It seems like insititutions that publicly oppose affirmative action always practice it the most within their own ranks in order to show “they’re not racist.” It doesn’t really fool anyone, though.

  12. Good comments. Interesting thread.
    Inching forward, I see.
    …insititutions that publicly oppose affirmative action always practice it the most within their own ranks in order to show “they’re not racist.” It doesn’t really fool anyone, though.
    Transparent tokenism. Been there, had it up to my ears (against my wishes), and was helpless to change it much. The tail cannot wag the dog. It has to come from top leadership, not because it is politically expedient but because it is the right thing to do.

  13. I’m surprised that Boortz doesn’t fly the confederate flag himself. I think he makes an excellent point on that issue. I might even agree with Boortz around 1/2 of the time. But his attitude is so callous, so ugly. Even when I agree with him, I don’t agree with his tone. And of course on those issues that he’s wrong on–the war, torture, etc.–he’s as wrong as someone can be.

  14. If for no other reason Larry Darby ought to be elected to rid Alabama of that nest of liars and opportunist fear mongers, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

  15. Hey, what’s wrong with the SPLC? They sent me a sweet certificate with a gold star saying that I was a crusader in the war against hate. Just like the one Steve Colbert got (no joke). I give the SPLC mucho props for correctly categorizing the Constitution Party as a hate group. I don’t like how they have “tax protestors” category, but again: Can you blame them? Timothy McVeigh and others fit into there.

  16. I was on Darby’s Atheist Daily News list for about a year. When I wrote a blog post quoting his comments in the e-mail list about the Holocaust and Universism, he e-mailed me personally calling me a liar. He never responded to my questioning of what exactly I had said incorrect.

  17. Adam: I like your slogan… “Fighting socialism, theocracy, and the designated hitter.”

  18. I think that the SPLC reaches when looking for racism and tends to see issues like Gun Rights, Tax Resistance as “far-right extreme” and racist.

    However, it is interesting to note some of the connections between HATE groups and noted racists(KKK,Identity,etc) and a lot of the lobbying group “friends” of the LP such as GOA/Gun Rights/militia-types, FIJA, Tax Resistance groups,etc.

    Politics makes strange bedfellows. Anytime you work with others in agreement on a single issue(not saying that’s good or bad, just an observation), especially those seen as “anti-government extremist”, you endup involved with a lot of nuts,racists,etc.
    One man’s right to bear arms for defense and protection from opression is another’s opportunity to shoot immigrants at the border. Some see jury nullification as a chance to send a message about stupid drug laws. Others see it as way to “legally murder” members of certain races and “take the law into their own hands” for racist/fundamentalist whacko reasons.

  19. If you read any of the SPLC lists of racists/extremists you will see a LOT of mentions of past LP candidates, spouses of past LP candidates and members, LP defenses of Timothy McVeigh types, people who plotted to blow-up government buildings, rob, and murder people,etc.

    Prominent LP candidates have been very “friendly” with neo-nazi nuts, appeared on joint campaign flyers,etc.

    “Guilt by Association” is one thing. If you happened to be in the same room as Pete Peters one time, that’s one thing. If all your best friends are members of the KKK, Identity, NA, that’s another.

    If you are a Libertarian and when you first meet someone you make it a point to tell them you are Pro-militia, against affirmative action, dont believe in driver’s licenses or taxes and print your own money,won’t join the NRA because “it’s too liberal”, are a big supporter of “states rights”(wink wink),etc- People might stick an extremist/nut/whacko/racist label on you. Just Saying…

  20. I agree 100% with graham.

    I will make it a point to be a militant anti-racist as long as I live. I will give no one cause to assume I’m a right-winger just because I’m anti-state.

  21. “And of course, the attendees of my convention were 99% white, 97% male. Wonder why?”

    I think a large part of it has to do with a) most people in American politics are white males, b) I think libertarians are more educated (often self-educated) than most and white people are less likely to live in neighborhoods the gov has destroyed, thus making education easier for us, and c)we’re often portrayed as a little racist.

    Affirmitive action is by definition racist and sexist; if you think discrimination will solve any problems you can at least call it what it is.

    Libertarianism is the only political philosophy that is consistent with individualism, which is the only realistic alternative to racism, sexism, etc. It’s one thing to be “anti-racist” but it’s quite another to advocate a philosophy that attacks the dumb collectivist premises that racism rests upon. Not to mention that libertarians want to get rid of the problems that affirmitve action seeks to solve.

    /too late to spellcheck

  22. Most of my black friends in Atlanta tended to not really give a shit about politics in general. They knew shit was fucked up, but from their perspective there isn’t a lot they can do to fix big government when they still have to worry about shit like “driving while black.”

    There are several aspects of this country’s justice system which is also intended to turn the screws to the poor of this country as well.

  23. Simply put: I don’t care what color (or sexual orientation, etc) the person standing up beside me is when tyranny wants to put a boot on my face.

  24. Mr. Worden: My position is this–I do not feel it is appropriate for the state to show racial preference. Then again, as a libertarian, I do not feel it is appropriate for the state to be doing anything wherein it has the opportunity to show any types of preference. I do not, however, feel that civil rights laws that bar racial discrimination in public accomodations and employment are an abridgement of “property rights.” And furthermore, while I think that racial minorities and women deserve a “protected class” status in such matters, I, as a white male, am not offended if a private employer wants to show preference–by his or her own perogative, not government decree–for establishing a diverse workforce. Diversity does have its benefits; read the pro-free markets Wisdom of Crowds, or just know that it may be easier for a business to transact with members of target communities if they have members of those communities in their employment. My position is therefore, not “collectivist.”

  25. I might as well out myself right now as a former activist member of the Green Party while a bit younger who fell out with that philosophy when I began to have a greater appreciation of decentralization, the government’s illegitimacy of authority, and the non-aggression principal; i.e. the Greens claim to be “non-violent,” and yet if you don’t comply with their big government wishes, they would have men with guns come to your home and take you away = hypocrisy.

    That said, yes, my Green Party experiences were nearly as white, though not even close to equally male. I’d estimate 90% white, but about 45% or more female. Mr. Worden’s first two reasons for the overrepresentation of whites and males holds up, somewhat, in this case as well, but the third impression–that Libertarians are a bit racist–is not present among the Greens and is a little bit deserved by Libertarians for two reasons: 1) Their bedfellows, and 2) The emphasis on issues.

    Sorry to be typing so much, but…

  26. … I think this is important.

    I am not arguing any negative stated above about affirmative action. What I am arguing is the fact that the LP makes such a prominent issue of it when there are 10,000 things of much greater importance. Making such an issue of it cannot help but imply racism.

    Here is an injustice: Not only can a minor not open a brokerage account, but if the parent is to open a custodial account for the minor, options cannot be traded within that account under any circumstances. The injustice! A 16-year-old of sound mind and body cannot speculate in the options market. Shouldn’t he or she be able to? Shouldn’t his or her mother or father or other custodian at least be able to enter options trades that the young man or woman wishes to exercise?

    Now how would it look if an LP candidate made the #1 issue of his campaign this issue? Like they were fixated on the financial markets… When a candidate or party make such a prominent issue of affirmative action, it looks bad.

  27. “the LP makes such a prominent issue of it when there are 10,000 things of much greater importance.”
    I agree that there are much more important things to worry about and I would probably be a little suspicious of someone who made it his #1 issue. That, however, doesn’t change my thoughts on the issue. I also would certainly oppose any law restricting affirmitive action in the workplace, as it is the employer’s choice.

    I also agree that diversity has benefits, but find it hard to believe that there is significantly more diversity of opinion between races than there is between individuals within each race. Gender might be a different case but AA isn’t the answer.

    Regarding women in the LP, I think part of that is the idea of “not letting anyone tell me what to do” is culturally thought of as a more masculine thing, plus our (sometimes deserved) perception that libs only care about ourselves probably puts off more women than men. It’s certainly an interesting problem.

  28. And yeah, L’s should be careful about bedfellows. Unfortunately I think alot of racists like much of what we say – at least until they hear that we want the “subhumans” to be free too.

    All that being said, I’m only blabbering so much because I happened to have a lot of thoughts on this issue that I didn’t think were addressed. If the LP changed its official position on AA I wouldnt mind nearly as much as I would if it changed its position on war, drugs, guns, immigration, eminent domain, or plenty of other issues.

  29. There are too many issues in this thread to parse out any single one for cogent analysis.

    1.) We might do well to be less concerned with racists in the LP than with respectable libertarians who have taken up the anti-immigration banner.

    2.) Affirmative action is the use of force designed to make white males feel good about themselves.

    3.) The Southern Poverty Law Center was so thoroughly discredited by the end of last century that it is quaint to read someone defending a fascist organization. Run “Alexander Cockburn” and “Morris Dees” through your Google.

    4.) Concern with “bedfellows” is so intellectually lazy that it deserves no response save maybe a few lines from Van Morrison, “Bared my soul to the crowd eh but oh what the cost/Most of them laughed out loud like nothing’s been lost/There were hypocrites and parasites and people that drain/Tell me why must I always explain…”

  30. I agree with Osama Bin Laden on at least one issue, but would I stand next to him in protest? No. Nor would I stand with the KKK, even if they do oppose the welfare state. I don’t consider that to be “intellectually lazy.”

    I’m not asking the LP to change its position on affirmative action. I would like it, perhaps, if the issue was ignored altogether. I would also like it if the LP dropped any official protest of the Civil Rights Act. Most of all, I’m asking that candidates not focus their campaign on these issues, even if they have perfectly non-racist arguments in defense of their positions.

    I don’t care enough about the SPLC to Google them. I don’t go looking for boogeymen in the anti-racist community, nor do I search out “counterfacts” on the holocaust. That’s just me.

    I agree that anti-immigration activists within the LP an anethma. As are war hawks and “pro-lifers.” But while I disagree, I will consent some respect for each of these positions–but never for the racist.

  31. While Undercover Anarchist is “respecting” anti-immigration activists and war hawks, I think I will go about fighting racism the old fashioned way–living a ethicially just life without the benefit of being white or male or using the force of the state to impose my will.

  32. Wow, I’ve never been criticized for being “too respectful” before. Thanks, Ms. Keaton! And to be clear, I hate war and I am 100% pro-immigration… I just hate racism more.

  33. Libertarianism is a very limited philosophy. Like Communism, viewed falsely as an opposite, its only real concern is economic. And like Communism, culture, the longevity and continuance of a nation are outside of its considerations. If ones interest is purely selfish and fiscal and he is unconcerned with the continuance of Western civilization, even a few generations after his death, then it’s a wonderful ideology. Best of all, it doesn’t even require courage however proudly one regards himself an “anarchist.”