Would be pretty easy to fund if you thew in affirmative action and "diversity" programs... and *I* have certainly been exposed to black culture.
I think collective entities are fine, so long as they are organic (i.e. not legislated or compulsory). If the collective entities or practices are entirely voluntary, then there's nothing "anti individualist" about them. The libertarian party, or any political party is a collective entity... It's when we have collectivism legislated or made compulsory that we have problems. If collective organizations are voluntary, there's no violation or denial of individual rights. In fact, long before the welfare state voluntary collective efforts moved mountains. Private charities, etc. Jim Crow was a violation of individual rights. A private owner of a given store/diner/club/apartment building etc deciding that he only wants to accept the patronage of members of a certain ethnic or racial group(or on any basis, however irrational or objectionable anyone else my find it), well, that's entirely his business, and to deny said owner that right, is a violation of that owner's own individual rights. Don't you think? Seems to me all this anti "racism" hysteria is far more collectivist in nature...
In thinking about this topic, it seems that all the greatest entities who have accomplished the greatest feats, and made the greatest strides in terms of advancing civilization have mostly been voluntary collectives. It's when we try to legislate collectives that they become maladaptive. From charities, to research foundations, to universities, to corporations, ad infinitum. Our army is currently a voluntary collective. Even thought it doesn't currently reflect this fact, our very government is supposed to be a voluntary collective; Magna Carta- governance at the consent of the governed, and the very foundation of classical liberalism/libertarianism. Perhaps one of the greatest contributions of what is arguably the most grand collective in history: Western Civilization... I think collective entities are fine, even necessary; so long as they are voluntary...
Only individualists are able to recognize unpopular truths. Human differences are scientific, empirical facts. Does seeing reality make one hate others? Does being cognizant of the truth make one a collectivist? I do not think so.
Mumbo jumbo. There are differences, yes. Do they make a difference? No. Unless we enable them, unless you enable them.
You're almost there phenomena, just let it out, it will feel better than all this libertarian stuff you are pretending to be. <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UE5Z09nYOK0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yes of course... It's all just a big conspiracy... I'm just PRETENDING to be a libertarian (despite having been politically active in libertarian causes on and off since I was 16 years old)..... It's just part of the big conspiracy to keep the black man down!! Yes, indeed, anyone in favor of individual liberties, and freedom of association might as well throw on some sheets and start burning crosses, because the only reason to support individual freedoms is because you hate black people!! Good thinking... it's starting to be less of a mystery why that whole airforce pilot thing didn't work out...
Didn't try for the Air Force. I am nearsighted. Not a big deal, just the way it is. Like I said, I had an array of options. And yes, you are pretending. U advocate the curtailing of the liberty of others. Liberty is not liberty( unless he doesn't want you there), liberty is liberty, period. That is why the guardians of the Constitution have had to step in time and again against your types. Soon you will be telling me that slavery is an individual right to those that can afford it. And that separate but equal was actually a good thing.
One more thing, as I pointed out before, I have never mentioned black people, that seems to be your issue. As I have stated consistently before, it is not mine. U are type that true libertarians really don't like, it is the reason Ron Paul can't get traction. The abolition of Jim Crow is an infringement of rights? Crazy. Greyhound is a private company, so, according to your logic they had the right to separate water fountains? Really?