Jess asks for a distinction:
Again, considering we’re at an impasse over interpretation of one key issue, I invite you to consider that we probably agree more than we disagree. However, just as you claim to be a libertarian, while advocating a lesser citizenship for half the populace, I can claim to be a libertarian while advocating an end to established bigotry.
Sure, quite possibly. However, the difference between what I’m advocating and what you’re advocating is that voting is not, and has never been, a right. Furthermore, a universal franchise is completely at odds with freedom and libertarianism; the masses, especially the female masses, will vote for the security and chains every single time. This is why the Founding Fathers severely restricted the franchise, and despite that, the free Republic was lost within 88 years.
At some point, theory has to admit its flaws and bow to the reality of history.
In like manner, the only established bigotry is that created by government, generally by the same democratic means of enshrining the masses’ momentary feelings into law. The absurdity of citing Jim Crow as a justification for government is profoundly stupid – not that Jess did – considering that Jim Crow was a government establishment in the first place! In fact, those laws were passed specifically in order to control the behavior of the non-bigoted masses.
The absurdity of Jess’ position here is that the government that can legally ban bigotry is a government with the power to legally impose it. In a system with the universal franchise that Jess favors, the law will favor bigotry or anti-bigotry depending on the current mood of the people, which, as can be seen in US history, is subject to fairly rapid change. History does not move in only one direction.
Meanwhile, an individual practicing his right to free association affects only those who interact with him, moreover, his actions are in keeping with liberarianism as he exerts no government force on others. The same is obviously not true with the government imposing its momentary anti-bigotry on the entire populace. A genuine libertarian will support another individual’s choice to be bigoted, however distasteful to him those beliefs might be; merely substitute speech or religion for bigotry and the truth of the matter should be obvious.