- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,390
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Government coercion is never ideal, but it can often be required to counterbalance a prior act of wrongdoing.
Libertarians, for instance, support tort liability. If a tortfeasor commits a negligent act, the victim shouuld be restored to the position he would have been in had the tort never been committed. It is legitimate to use coercion to make the tortfeasor compensate the victim.
American apartheid was a tort writ large against the minorities of this country. The effects linger in minority communities to this day. It is legitimate to use coercion to remedy this massive injustice.
Even better is voluntary affirmative action. That's both morally correct and smart selection criteria. But you can't trust everybody to be smart and volunteer to see that, all else being equal, a minority has overcome more than a white person. But you can't trust everybody to be smart voluntarily, just like you can't trust a tortfeasor to voluntarily compensate his victim. Government coercion is necessary to remedy the injustice.
More idiocy. You don't punish innocent people for ANY reason. You don't punish the rich because some people are poor You don't punish good athletes because some people are unable to compete. and YOu don't punish a white guy because someone who had the similar skin color of him bought some black dude from another black dude 300 years ago
besides the welfare programs and the crime committed by blacks against whites have more than made up for things
ask your average black guy where they'd rather be-in NJ or even East LA or say in Equatorial Guinea or the Congo.