Converation thread

No, libertarians do NOT believe in segregation. Segregation is a system of laws by government designed to separate groups. How does that comport with libertarianism?

I think they're just being consistent with the position of "libertarians can do whatever they want as long as they are not being compelled or compelling anyone else."

So they're not interpreting it as state-ordered segregation, but voluntary grass-roots level instead.

There's no such thing as "voluntary segregation". "Grass-roots" could be people organizing without the government to impose segregation via small arms and clubs, as in the days immediately after Reconstruction, but it's still violence. There's no other way to do it.

"I made this club for my friends only."

Nothing someone else does can compel them to let someone who isn't their friend in the club.

It is a logically coherent libertarian position. Where it breaks down is at scale.

"Segregation" generally refers to scale, public property, civil society, etc. Also, to refer to the South again, when one group has a near total monopoly on "private property", they can create de-facto segregation, which gets in to the inherent coercive nature of "Libertarians"/

Small scale examples of segregation exist all over right now. Go to any university campus and you can find [ethnic minority] club and such. Capitalism, at least as intended, is primarily incentive based as opposed to coercion-based. There is no system that is free from force.

You say that about Capitalism but history shows otherwise. In the South, one group owns almost all the property because of a systematic campaign of murder, kidnapping, and genocide. All "private property" everywhere has similar history, just usually further back in time.

The only crappy things that have happened under capitalism were because the society was insufficiently capitalist.