But this is not the only argument he has ever made in this vein. See this transcript of some previously unrevealed comments he made at a college.
OK. Yes, from a purely moral, or dare I say ‘moralistic’ point of view, it wasn’t very pleasant for black people to not be allowed to sit on the front of the bus.
I mean, in fairness, if some people in the USA started banning Jews, Muslims, disabled people, women, or anyone else of that general, y’know, ‘diverse’ type, then I think that would actually be kind of petty and mean-spirited!
Well, from a particular point of view, I guess.
But hey! What can you do! Small government is an absolute; it’s something very concrete and tangible.
But on the other hand, the thoughts and feelings of minority individuals are kind of a fluffy and abstract notion that, well I don’t know about you, but I kind of find it a difficult one to grasp. I kind of have this vague notion or intuition of it, but (speaking purely for myself, of course!) I don’t have any clear picture of it.
So, let’s not be fuzzy and idealistic about this one. I just really wish that instead of taking extreme and one-sided and divisive measures, past governments had found some kind of reasonable compromise.
I mean, they ought to have said:
OK. I know your tender feelings have gotten hurt, and you got annoyed for some reason by what I’m doing. But hey! Shit happens. I’m sure there are plenty of buses.
I mean, most small towns run at least two or three buses a day, so just go and ask the next guy, there’s at least an outside theoretical chance that the driver will let you in.
And if he doesn’t, then just you keep on waiting, and waiting, and waiting.
Or maybe just move across state or something. Well hey, go on! Knock yourself out!
But seriously, if this really means so much to you for some reason, just don’t stop trying until you finally find somewhere you can take the bus.
Individual responsibility, right? Don’t expect the government to wipe your ass, cos it’s a jungle out there, and you need to show some good old-fashioned rose-tinted 18th century self-reliance.
I mean, I’m kind of a little bit sorry I couldn’t help you out this time, but it’s nothing personal. It’s not you, it’s just… your folks, you know?
Maybe the next driver will be very generous in heart, and show more leniency than I have.
I mean, that’s his business, and I’m sure not gonna judge him for taking a more liberal stance. That’s his lookout! If anything happens on that bus, then it’s his problem, right?
But sadly, or more properly, ‘to our undying shame,’ it just wasn’t to be. And for decades now, the economic liberty of bus drivers and bus management folks has been practically non-existent.
Well, sure, there’s a certain degree of equality that has been gained. I mean, I guess you could say, that’s not utterly, UTTERLY inconsequential, in fairness.
But gaining equality at the expense of economic liberty is NEVER justified; under any circumstances whatsoever!
And yet sad to say, there are some rather hidebound and doctrinaire people out there, who think that some small decrease in economic liberty for some other worthy goal like anti-racism is somehow OK in some circumstances.
Well, this is completely unconstitutional! The Founding Fathers believed in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That’s got absolutely NOTHING to do with stopping people from being discriminated against.
Freedom is always of greater value than equality, in all cases; and don’t ever let any rigid, dogmatic idealist ever tell you otherwise!
People who disagree with me on this one are just impractical speculators, and their absolutist thinking is simply incapable of grasping the fine nuances and details of context!
Oh sorry, did you say ‘LGBT discrimination in the workplace?’ Well, I think what I’ve said just about covers every conceivable instance of a conflict between economic liberty and equality. Let’s not overcomplicate things, right?