Free Association & Equality Before The Law

Guest Post by The Zman

If you are going to pick one thing that is a must-have for a liberal western society, the most likely choice is equality before the law. Things like free speech, elections and private property are important, but they are dependent upon equality before the law. After all, if the ruling class has privilege over everyone else in the law, that will turn to an advantage in disputes over property, politics and even speech. If you look at the list of “rights” we consider to be essential to a civil society, all of them count on equality before the law.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

Now, simply having equality before the law does not make for a liberal society. In theory, you could have a society with no property rights at all and still have equality before the law. A communist society, in which all property is held by the public and administered by the state, could have legal equality. Similarly, you could have a society with highly restricted speech and still have legal equality, as long as the speech limits were universally applied and enforced. In other words, equality before the law is not enough.

Obviously, equal justice may be a fundamental requirement of a liberal society, but you need other stuff to make it work. Property rights, enforcement of contracts, freedom of expression and the other items we tend to associate with civil liberty. Even though they cannot exist without equality before the law, a liberal society cannot exist without all those add-on items. This is basic civics, so what about the things that must exist in order for a society to maintain equality before the law? What is its necessary accessories?

The correct answer here is freedom of association. After all, you can have equality before the law along with limits on other rights like speech, as long as they are universally applied. Logically, there is no way to evenly administer limits on association, beyond very broad categories like segregation. Even there, the law is forced to treat one group different from others. This is the crux of Brown v. Board of Education. The material equality of education facilities did not alter the fact that segregation treated blacks unequally.

You cannot have equal justice without free association, for the simple reason the law must always put one citizen ahead of another, in order to limit association. Telling the tavern owner he cannot serve Koreans penalizes the Korean,  the tavern owner or possibly the other tavern patrons. It really does not matter who is or is not punished, as the only possible intent of the law is a bias against one group in favor of another group. There can be no equitable reason for placing such limitations on citizens.

This is why America is rapidly sliding away from liberal democracy into something closer to a corporate oligarchy. Once free association was abandoned in the 1960’s, it opened the door to endless meddling by the managerial state in the rights of the citizens. If the people can no longer decide with whom they wish to associate, or not associate, they can no longer have the right to free expression. After all, if you are forcing people together who don’t wish to be together, you better monitor their speech. Otherwise, you get a bloodbath.

Put another way, the reason that Christian bakers are being forced at gun point to bake cakes for people they see as degenerates is the state has no other choice. Once you dispense with freedom of association, you abandon equality before the law. It also means ever splintering minorities are incentivized to demand special privileges from the state, by forcing the court to choose between groups. The homosexual terrorists are attacking Christians, so they can get their group status set above that of Christians.

This explains the fracturing of American public life and the increasing anti-white hostility we see in our popular culture. Once you abandon equality before the law, people rationally seek group identity in order to press for privileges. The arbitrariness of the law creates the appearance of a zero sum game, in which the gains of one group must come at the expense of another. In the increasingly lawless free-for-all that is modern America, the rational thing for non-whites to do is agitate to get their piece of the crumbling white pie.

Of course, the reason America abandoned free association in the middle of the last century was in an effort to accommodate the minority black population. It is also why Continental societies have never bothered with free association. Wherever there are minority populations, the majority will inevitably impose its will on that minority, simply in the course of pursuing its own rational interests. Blacks in America can only be integrated by force, against the will of the white majority. That’s what happened last century.

This is probably why the managerial class has made a fetish of the downstream items we associate with liberal society, like voting, and sacrilized the positions within the political class. Any call to reform the political system and every criticism of the powerful is met with howls about “defending our democracy.” Since we now have an illiberal system, the people in charge have reached their status by illiberal means. Therefore, their legitimacy is not self-authenticating. The hooting about democracy is a defense mechanism.

One of the puzzles the libertarians have never un-puzzled is how a society can go from a non-libertarian state to a libertarian one, without a violent, miraculous blood bath. Even in theory, a libertarian state must be a starting point of a society. Once it transitions from that condition, it can never go back. Something similar is most likely true with regards to free association and equality before the law. Once these are abandoned, the interests opposed to their return grow, making a peaceful transition back to the lawful state impossible.

As a matter of simple logic, a return to liberal society now means revolution.

Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
flash
flash
May 30, 2018 7:24 am

To deny one natural right is to weaken and eventually revoke all. Simply a matter of evolution of oligarchy. The strong defend . The weak obey.

Does the First Amendment Protect the Freedom of Association?

“Legally, the freedom of association is considered to be a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. In the Supreme Court case of N.A.A.C.P. v. Alabama(1958), a unanimous Court ruled that the NAACP did not have to reveal to the Alabama attorney general the names and addresses of the NAACP members in the state because it would violate the NAACP members’ freedom of association. Writing for the Court, Justice John Marshall Harlan II said in the decision that

immunity from state scrutiny of membership lists … is here so related to the right of members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. [Alabama] has fallen short of showing a controlling justification for the deterrent effect on the free enjoyment of the right to associate which disclosure of membership lists is likely to have….

Freedom to engage in association for the advancement of beliefs and ideas is an inseparable aspect of the “liberty” ensured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Jake
Jake
  flash
May 30, 2018 1:44 pm

If I recall correctly the communist filth known as the Obama Regime were demanding membership lists with information about the personal views and beliefs of said members by the IRS when conservative leaning groups sought 501C3 status.

Anonymous
Anonymous
May 30, 2018 7:45 am

Equality before the law.

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” -Orwell

RHS Jr
RHS Jr
May 30, 2018 7:59 am

It depends on who’s Ass is getting gored by all the government Liberal Bull. Democracy became Liberal Tyranny for Conservative Whites with government Forced Total Integration, which caused the many very negative effects on White Society and the nation that non-Whites had been wisely avoiding. The government also introduced the Not So Great Welfare Society, Race Quotas and then forced LGBTQ perversions on Normal Society. A small percentage of Blacks have become welcome but the huge majority will never be welcome neighbors to most Whites, and vice versa. The Liberal Reconstruction Tyranny that has existed 55 years must be changed to Equal Under The Law and Freedom of Association or there will be a Revolution. The cart was in the ditch and the government threw it into the other side of the ditch. Put it in the middle or pay in blood.

Captain Willard
Captain Willard
May 30, 2018 8:28 am

Zman unnecessarily confuses “freedom of association” here with basic property rights. The Christian baker should serve whom he/she pleases because the baker owns the fricking bakery. It’s that simple.

Libertarians have traditionally started with property rights as the foundation to speech rights because it’s more logical. You cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theater because you’re violating the theater owner’s property rights as well as creating a dangerous public nuisance. Murray Rothbard explains this well in his books. Zman should really stay silent on Libertarian issues because he has demonstrated over and over that he really doesn’t understand them very well. These problems detract from his normally good political essays.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Captain Willard
May 30, 2018 8:51 am

Libertarians should stay silent on Libertarian issues.

One of those better to say nothing sort of things.

flash
flash
  Captain Willard
May 30, 2018 8:58 am

[imgcomment image[/img]

whiskey tango foxtrot
whiskey tango foxtrot
  flash
May 30, 2018 11:01 am

What I wouldn’t give to see this lot roll into Marin County.

FriendsofBill
FriendsofBill
  Captain Willard
May 30, 2018 11:08 am

I’ll see your Property Rights and sell them to Foreigners!
-Just Sarcasm, Cynical Joke, $35.5 Trillion in Foreign Ownership of US Assets & Property is enough all ready.
https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/intinv/intinvnewsrelease.htm (2017, New Release, Table C. Annual Change in the U.S. Net International Investment Position $35.5 Trillion)

Iconoclast421
Iconoclast421
May 30, 2018 10:47 am

You had me at “miraculous blood bath”.

lamont cranston
lamont cranston
May 30, 2018 10:54 pm

Well, William Faulkner was no “conservative”. Ever. But I’m paraphrasing here. He stated that “go slow with integration, you’ve got to take time to raise the intelligence to assimilate”. Fat chance.
In the late 60s Jackson MS my HS (Murrah) had the top academic blacks (2% of students), and they assimilated well, with one exception whom they had no use for (sent by the SNCC). Oh..Murrah’s 98% is still 89% but…black.

One thing to be understood. Medgar & Charles Evers were Republicans. As was MLK. Medgar’s niece
(at HS w/ me) said that the dems murdered her uncle Medgar, period. Both Evers believed that ECONMIC WEALTH would be the only path to proper resolution. How’d that dawg hunt. Byron De La Beckwith was the real thing w/ Medgar, unlike Lee Harvey.