“he chided libertarians for having been missing in action for the great civil rights struggle of the 20th century, the fight against segregation and racism”
With all due respect to David & his legacy, doesn’t the Civil Rights Act contain several unconstitutional & un-libertarian provisions (hence Barry Goldwater’s opposition to it despite his support for state, local & private desegregation)?
Goldwater himself changed his mind about the Civil Rights act at a later point in his career.
I am not sure which unconstitutional provisions you mean. CRA 1964 certainly flies against the face of orthodox libertarianism.
The ideological belief that a huge swath of American Citizens would/could/should wait for State, local and private desegregation was silly in 1964. Private businesses that desegregated would be boycotted and targeted by vigilance committees dedicated to enforcing Jim Crow norms. Local politicians would be turned out if they dared to suggest desegregation. And the State governments were never going to budge. So a federal remedy to the deprivations suffered by American Citizens was the only rational way to correct the situation.
It is instructive that the bulk of the states that Goldwater carried in 1964 were also carried by segregationist George Wallace in 1968.
Good point. I don't remember David's specific answer to this, but I think, and hope, that it was that there were many good parts of the civil rights struggle, for example, the idea of getting rid of government-required segregation. Milton Friedman, by the way, favored these good parts in Capitalism and Freedom, something for which he often doesn't get credit.
You are proving Jon's point. Libertarians thought there were many good points to the CR struggle but yet Goldwater voted against the CRA because of its ban on private discrimination even thought there was every reason to believe that without that ban white businesses in the South would simply reinvent apartheid. This also was a stark demonstration of how libertarians have consistently prioritized the smaller violation of the liberty that affect private businesses/dominant classes over the much larger ones of persecuted minorities eg the brutal violation of Black rights under state-sanctioned regime of Jim Crow. Till about 10-15 years ago Rand Paul was criticizing CRA on that grounds on Rachel Maddow's show and libertarians didn't start rethinking their opposition to the CRA till about two decades ago. All of this seamlessly led libertarians to prioritize opposition to affirmative action as an important social issues which, in turn, has led them to seamlessly take on a whole host of culture war causes now. Not all of this opposition is wrong but the disproportionate focus on it and insufficient recognition of the freedom-enhanching aspects of many progressive policies has been a huge problem for the movement, causing it to become preoccupied with the leftist enemy and a Trumpist apologist. David I know for a fact was dismayed by all of this
Thanks for the different memories of Mr. Boaz's friends and colleagues.
Those of us who know public figures from a distance rarely get to see the person behind the public face.
It was lovely to get to know him in a different way.
Thanks for the memories.
“he chided libertarians for having been missing in action for the great civil rights struggle of the 20th century, the fight against segregation and racism”
With all due respect to David & his legacy, doesn’t the Civil Rights Act contain several unconstitutional & un-libertarian provisions (hence Barry Goldwater’s opposition to it despite his support for state, local & private desegregation)?
Goldwater himself changed his mind about the Civil Rights act at a later point in his career.
I am not sure which unconstitutional provisions you mean. CRA 1964 certainly flies against the face of orthodox libertarianism.
The ideological belief that a huge swath of American Citizens would/could/should wait for State, local and private desegregation was silly in 1964. Private businesses that desegregated would be boycotted and targeted by vigilance committees dedicated to enforcing Jim Crow norms. Local politicians would be turned out if they dared to suggest desegregation. And the State governments were never going to budge. So a federal remedy to the deprivations suffered by American Citizens was the only rational way to correct the situation.
It is instructive that the bulk of the states that Goldwater carried in 1964 were also carried by segregationist George Wallace in 1968.
Couldn't agree more.
Good point. I don't remember David's specific answer to this, but I think, and hope, that it was that there were many good parts of the civil rights struggle, for example, the idea of getting rid of government-required segregation. Milton Friedman, by the way, favored these good parts in Capitalism and Freedom, something for which he often doesn't get credit.
You are proving Jon's point. Libertarians thought there were many good points to the CR struggle but yet Goldwater voted against the CRA because of its ban on private discrimination even thought there was every reason to believe that without that ban white businesses in the South would simply reinvent apartheid. This also was a stark demonstration of how libertarians have consistently prioritized the smaller violation of the liberty that affect private businesses/dominant classes over the much larger ones of persecuted minorities eg the brutal violation of Black rights under state-sanctioned regime of Jim Crow. Till about 10-15 years ago Rand Paul was criticizing CRA on that grounds on Rachel Maddow's show and libertarians didn't start rethinking their opposition to the CRA till about two decades ago. All of this seamlessly led libertarians to prioritize opposition to affirmative action as an important social issues which, in turn, has led them to seamlessly take on a whole host of culture war causes now. Not all of this opposition is wrong but the disproportionate focus on it and insufficient recognition of the freedom-enhanching aspects of many progressive policies has been a huge problem for the movement, causing it to become preoccupied with the leftist enemy and a Trumpist apologist. David I know for a fact was dismayed by all of this
PS: I myself have been guilty of some of these warped priorities.
Thank you for the tributes. David was a real thing and kept his principles and integrity even when many in his tribe turned to Trumpism.
RIP David and may many of ideas continue living