Patrick Byrne

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

I have proposed an alternative paradigm: Yes slavery & discrimination are part of our history, but post-Civil War, Blacks endured and progressed until Socialism arrived. Let us not double-down on it. All replies welcome, but I'll focus on any from @Turner_1603 and @DrIbram . — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

1) Replace the tax code and social safety net as it exists with something elegantly simple: a flat tax married to a negative income tax (the latter of which is now called "UBI"). This would provide a far more effective social safety net for the same price. 2) School choice. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Whereas a better approach would be to revisit the decisions of 1965 onwards. My hero (genuflect) Milton Friedman foresaw all this would happen. He proposed two solutions: https://t.co/b3HeiBMbS0 — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

And now what I hear from Democrats is: "Let us double down on Socialism!" Thus, the essence of @DrIbram 's theory: "You can either be anti-racist or racist; Anti-racism = pursuing equity; Equity is reached through socialist policies; Thus you can be socialist or racist. QED" — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

The federal government is happened. Johnson's "Great Society" happened. 100,000 federal agents were hired to convince Blacks to split up so moms could get welfare (which was promoted as reparations). Know-it-alls with big ideas is what happened. Socialism is what happened. https://t.co/wuIRWZN3Md — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

In 1960 Black labor force participation was HIGHER than White. Black out-of-wedlock births (21%) were LOWER than White (23%). I haven't done the math, but my sense is if nature had run its course these issues would have washed out of society by 1990. So what happened? — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

The great tradition of Black excellence went on. Progress was slower than it would have been absent discrimination, but continued in the face of Progressive opposition. Then came the "Golden Age" from Brown v Board to Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which revived Reconstructionism). — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Nonetheless, Black progress continued, albeit it more slowly than it would have otherwise and more slowly than for otherwise similarly-situated immigrants (e.g., Irish & Italians). By the 1920s a small Black middle class emerged (that is why race riots [e.g. Tulsa] began). — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Reconstruction was rolled back. Gains made by the Civil War (Amendments 13, 14, & 15) became legal formalities, replaced by near-replacements for slavery (e.g., sharecropping). The military & civil service, which had become integrated, were re-segregated (by Wilson). — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Then came Progressivism, an aim of which was to get government big enough to protect Whites from Black competition. That was a pillar of unionization & minimum wage laws. That is why the Confederate Statues went up under Progressives and why the KKK reached its peak under Wilson. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

I must note that, if you agree with what I have written so far, everything evil was Democrat, and anything good was Republican. Democrats were the party of "Injun'-killing" and slavery. Republicans, the party of abolitionism, Lincoln, and Reconstruction. Trigger warning: https://t.co/eb7Hdh8Aiw — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Has my account been roughly fair so far? — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Then Reconstruction. Things were looking up. 22 (?) Blacks got elected to Congress. But they got stymied by laws such the "Slaughterhouse Cases" ("you can't be Black and be a butcher"). SCOTUS allowed them and, in 1893 came "separate but equal." Thus arose the Jim Crow South. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Lincoln is critiqued for not being AS abolitionist as Frederick Douglass would have wanted. He was a politician, he said things some places & other things other places. But on balance, we fought a Civil War over slavery (as @DrIbram acknowledges). Lincoln led it. That counts. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

So aside from minor-to-medium quibbles, I concur with BLM re: 1619-1860: Yes slavery was 1 of our 2 great crimes; yes it was hell on earth; no the Revolution was not fought over it; yes it became a significant (5%) part of GDP; yes it spurred our economy but not uniquely. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

- While it's fair to say that slavery-cotton spurred development of transport & capital markets, it was not UNIQUE in that regard. For example, Irish & Chinese labor built railroads. Do they get credit for everything that happened on railroads? No. Lots of factors contributed. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

So to this point, my view and BLM/1619 doctrine ROUGHLY line up. Exceptions: - I don't think the Revolution was fought in any meaningful way to preserve an institution that was .5% of GDP. While the 1619 Project originally claimed otherwise, but has retreated from that claim. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Along the way, slavery/cotton contributed significantly to broader US progress. Cotton as a commodity was traded on Wall Street, spurring development of capital markets. The cotton was transported to mills in Manchester, England, spurring development of railroads & shipping. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

For comparison, the automobile industry reached 5% at its zenith in the early 1970's.Thus, it is definitely fair to say that slavery became a substantial part of US GDP by the time of the Civil War. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

At the time of the American Revolution, slavery represented about .5% of GDP. But with the "Cotton Engine" (1793?), slavery became much more profitable, and exploded. As I recall, it grew steadily through the next five decades so that it became about 5% of US GDP. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

The history of slavery was also reprehensible. 10.5 million Africans were enslaved in the ATLANTIC slave trade. 6 million were taken to Brazil. 320,000-340,000 came to the colonies that became the USA. cf. WEB Du Bois, later endorsed by Henry Louis Gates of Harvard. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

The genocide of Native Americans was reprehensible. One should note that the bulk of those killed died from contact with germs Europeans brought (being farmers). Just as Han Chinese did in Asia. Just as the Bantu did in Africa. (see "Guns, Germs, & Steel") — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

First, the really easy stuff: the two great stains on the honor of our country are how we treated the Native Americans (I suspect we reduced their population 95%), and our history regarding Blacks (slavery and thereafter). — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

I have previously offered to give a BLM audience a talk entitled, "I took the BLM Ideological Purity Test & Scored 41%: Let's Discuss". It has not happened yet. So let me start by getting out of the way the easy stuff, where @turner_1603 and I may agree. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

Yesterday I wanted to see what would happen if I did not debate, but just responded "Racist!" to ideas I oppose (like Lefties do). Few understood. But somewhere in the morass I heard from @Turner_1603 regarding race, and he seemed reasonable. I elevate and restart here. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

@oppys_ipad Then why send them to Jamaica? "Later"? Lincoln (unlike Douglass) was not PERFECT on the matter. He was a politician, who say things and compromise. Still, he was the LEAST compromising of the political class. Give him that. Anyway, we digress. I will focus on @Turner_1603. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

@UnconventlReasn That is a smart question. I concede that. It was a confusing moment, and Byrd overreacted. But that is why there is a doctrine and training covering escalation of force. PS Per the later interview, the Members had already been cleared from the chamber. — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

@EsmeLuluBean @Turner_1603 @LakotaMan1 Agreed — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

@LadyLibertyII Proud of it, https://t.co/wIFTp17xfl folks have not figured this one out, have you. Let's skip the the punchline: I was the red sparrow. I was reporting to James Comey & John Brennan on it. Get it? — PolitiTweet.org

Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne

@yuantipuree Is calling peolpe, "racist!' a third grade retort? I always thought so too, but it has been standard doctine for the Left. Are you suggesting that they are ALL third graders? I think this is rather racialist of you. — PolitiTweet.org