Reason Mag is guilty as sin for what they did in bringing up these Ron Paul Newsletter issues. But Reason Mag and beltway libertarians are guilty for something even worse: accepting Political Correctness & Multi-Cultural sensitivities as valid, as something as a given, as “correct”, as a part of libertarianism.

As a long time reader of the Ron Paul newsletters all those years, I can tell you this, Reason Mag was NO help at all in the battle that ensued between THE NEW REPUBLIC (TNR) a neoliberal mag, and The Ron Paul Newsletters. TNR shouted "Racists" and RP newsletters shouted back "Socialists".  The RP newsletters where NEVER about political correctness let alone being PC.  They called a spade a spade each and every time, hence why I love it. 

Reason Mag on the other hand swallowed the PC Multi-cultural sensitivity thing hook line and sinker.  And to prove their PCness, they "outed" the RP newsletters as "racists" among other name calling. The truly despicable thing is this. "Reason" refused to be reasonable and discuss what “is” and what is not “racist”. Just because the RP newsletters refused to jump up and down and be "for" the black agenda, "for" the gay agenda, and "for" the jewish agenda, does not mean that lack of jumping is “evidence” for racism or what have you.   Yet Reason’s PCness along with the liberal TNR takes the lack of jumping as evidence of racism.   But the truth is, such “for” political agendas are really about legally gaining special rights, whereas libertarianism argues there is but one right, individual rights. 

The worst think Reason did was trotting out select sentences completely out of context and lay them out as evidence, all without any reasonable discussion.  “Guilty” pronounced Reason.

Well not so fast. Take this juicy quote in 1992: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be."  Reason failed to ask back then, failed ask NOW, and fails to ask period, "is that racist?"  Sure sounds like it, if you do not think and apply reason. It sure sounds like it because the liberal PC police have hammered on this for two decades.  But the clear answer is it is not racist if we define our terms:  Racism:  The disparagement of an ethnic group's negative characteristics and it’s those negative characteristics that justify the call for legal discrimination.  Notice that simply being a part of an ethnic group with some negative characteristics (real or imagined) is not enough by itself to “be racists”.   So the comment, “Dam you English guys have bad teeth” is not racists, it is a negative generalization that may or may not be true, that is all.  

So what did Hitler say and the KKK say that is so “racist” then?  Hitler said essentially said this; 'Jews were cockroaches because of this and this character trait and so should be legally exterminated and not allowed to legally mix into the "pure" Aryan bloodline.'  The KKK makes the same racist claims, 'these black traits of this and this are negative that we need to legally separate from them'. 

Now that is a strong definition of racism, but we must use it because a much wider definition, a PC definition, results in worries over who is "offended".  Moreover, such worries of "causing offense" become a social free speech constraint.  Indeed the 1st amendment is clearly under attack from the PC police. “Hate Crime” laws are really “thought crime” laws.   “I stabbed my neighbor 50 times in the chest as I screamed out loud … a) “I just couldn’t stand that bitch anymore!”; b) “I just couldn’t stand that black bitch anymore!”, c) “I just couldn’t stand that jewish bitch anymore!”; d) “I just couldn’t stand that lesbian bitch anymore!”…… are all irrelevant thoughts, or at least should be irrelevant to the law.  

This national acceptance of the PC MC police wide definitions of terms has made companies had to go back and rewrite whole policy manuals for fear of "causing offense" and thus being open to the charges of racism, antisemitic , sexist, anti-gay, etc.   The Beltway libertarians, who accept PC MC at face value and allow these terms to go undefined and unchallenged, have become a part of the problem for libertarianism in general. 

Now let’s go back to that assumed "racist" quote that then neoliberal rag TNR and REASON trotted out. "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be."   Now, is running fast something negative to black teenagers character? No. Is it saying its genetic? No, not enough is said either way, genetic vs cultural.  Is it offensive to black robbers?  I must scratch my head on that one and say they would not be offended, but proud of the fact how fast they are. So who is offended? Most of all, did that statement or others call legal discrimination based upon these (positive?) characteristics?  No, that statement did not do that, thus it’s not "racists".  Now is it a bigoted comment? Perhaps it is, only more context will tell.  But since when could we not be free to be biased?   If that’s the case, what are Americans laughing at when comedians point out our biases?   Aiming to be a ‘perfect people’ is a fools dream that only….hold it, hold it,… racists dream of.

Notice that if it is racist to say "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be." then it would be equally racist to say "If you have ever been chased by a middle-aged white cop, you know that after 50 yards you are home free".  Neither statement is "racists', that is, if you do not accept the PC "multi-Culturally" sensitive definition of those terms.  Again, libertarian Reason has long since accepted those terms, but the RP newsletter and its lew Rockwell brand of libertarianism SPECIFICALLY did not.  In so doing, the Beltway libertarians “outed” the other as bigots, (as if we all must think a certain way and do not have that right), as sexist, (as if we all must think a certain way and do not have that right) as homophobes (as if we all must think a certain way and do not have that right), as anti-Semitic, (again as if we all must think a certain way and do not have that right? – since when must we like a certain faith?)   Most of all, since when do we have to “like”?   Freedom is simply freedom to be, to do and to hold.    Libertarianism does not say one must “like”, just RESPECT.   Libertarianism (should not care) about feelings, beliefs, or politeness, just RESPECT.   As in the respect the other’s equal right to his own Life, Liberty, and Property (justly & fairly acquired of course).   

Sadly, the beltway libertarians have not rejected PC MC definitions and joined in the battle with the rest of us in the libertarian R3VOLution who have.  Indeed, we like calling a spade a spade, moreover, we do not have to even "like" the spades, we JUST HAVE TO SUPPORT THEIR LEGAL FREEDOM TO BE, TO DO, TO HOLD.  It is this freedom that allows all of us to laugh with black comics in my favorite '90's show "In Living Color".  Political Correctness be dammed is what Reason Mag should be saying.   Reason should be attacking The New Republic for its political correctness and its wide and vague definitions of racism.  Reason, (not Treason) should be on the TNR attack and asking, “What, you want a perfect person?  It matters nothing if Ron Paul likes gays or hates them, likes jews or hates them, likes blacks or hates them.  The only question is, does he RESPECT THEIR FREEDOM?”   But Reason does not say that, but it should.   It’s a freedom that allows real breathing, whereas the liberal  PC police gives us a straight jacket knot on our collective tongues for fear of "offending" someone.  That is what Reason Mag is guilty of, joining in with the liberals and completely failing to take on the TNR's attacks on libertarianism through the PC MC angle. Their first victim may be Ron Paul, but not if the libertarian R3VOLution can help it. 

With us its always win-win…

Mr. Treg D. Loyden,

All Cash Real Estate Investor & Assoc. Broker

SOLUTIONS REAL ESTATE

2353 E Baseline Road

Gilbert, AZ 85234

480-967-4100 office

480-907-1120 fax

http://www.CommercialREOexperts.com/