Walter Block Responds to a Critic Who Calls for His Removal as Loyola Professor

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxx@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tue 5/12/2015 11:30 AM
To: wblock@loyno.edu; locander@loyno.edu; pres@loyno.edu
Subject: Walter Block

My name is xxxxx, and I am a Loyola graduate from 2004 (B.A., History). This morning's Times-Picayune/nola.com article on Dr Block's loss in his libel lawsuit against the New York Times contained some of the most hideous facts I've ever encountered about an academic, and that's saying something.

First, I'm happy that Dr Block's frivolous and self-serving lawsuit was dismissed. Not only did the Times not libel him, it actually did him a favor by not printing his actual quote. Had they done so, they would have outed Block as an idiot as well as a racist.

In his original comments, Block glibly glossed over the fact that, while slavery was compulsory, it was also dehumanizing, exploitative, murderous, soul-sucking, built an economy on the backs of the poor, and grossly stunted the development of huge chunks of an entire continent, which afterward, in a related note to slavery even as slavery technically ended around the world, had to endure the subjugation of racist and underhanded colonial powers eager to perpetuate the same type of exploitation, just not calling it slavery.

(If you can tell, I also posted my disgust in the nola.com comments to the article this morning).

Listen, I don't care what Loyola does with this man. But I will add my voice to chorus of people who are guessing that he should not be a university economics professor.

XXXX

----

-----Original Message-----

From: Walter Block

Sent: Wed 5/13/2015 1:16 PM

To: XXXXX; wblock@loyno.edu; locander@loyno.edu; pres@loyno.edu

Subject: RE: Walter Block

Dear XXXXX:

Thanks for your letter. Are you still located in New Orleans? If so, I invite you to come to my office and talk to me about this. If not, I would be glad to discuss this issue with you via email. It is important that justice be done on this matter (well, on every other matter too).

I intend to blog this conversation. May I have your permission to use your name? Otherwise, I'll keep you anonymous, even though you do copy others on this.

Here is my first reaction to your letter.

I am and always have been, well, at least since I became a libertarian in 1963, a bitter opponent of slavery. But precisely WHY is this "curious institution" an abomination? Is it because the slaves picked cotton? No; lots of people pick cotton voluntarily. Is it because the slave ate gruel, lived in shacks, sang songs. No, lots of people do these things voluntarily. Is it, even, because the slaves were whipped? No, again. Sadists beat masochists with the consent of the latter, so that cannot either pinpoint the particular evil of slavery.

What then is the EXACT PRECISE REASON why slavery is disgusting and evil and malicious? It is because the slaves were FORCED into this situation. In order to prove this, in my interview with the NYTimes, I proposed a hypothetical situation: suppose, just suppose, work with me here, that, somehow, for some weird reason, people VOLUNTARILY agreed to engage in a situation just like the one that actual slaves were FORCED to undertake. That is, they were whipped (remember the masochist), ate gruel, sang songs, picked cotton, lived  in shacks, etc. Would this be so bad? Would this even remotely approach the situation of slavery? OF COURSE NOT. Why not? Because these people did so VOLUNTARILY. Would this be a bit weird? Well, yes, of course. But would it be a horror, compared to slavery. No. It would be, in the words I  used in my interview, "not so bad." I go further: it would constitute an interaction between consenting adults, and, at least under the libertarian law, would not be considered criminal.

Let me try another one on with you. You graduated from Loyola University. Therefore, since we promote "critical thinking" I'm sure you'll appreciate this one. Well, maybe.

Why are the Nazis quintessentially evil. Is it because they have the swastika, do the goose step, move their arms in the hiel Hitler salute, wear black leather boots, come from Germany? NO, no, no, no, no and no. These are only the superficial accoutrements of Nazism. The real reason the Nazis were an abomination, the only reason the Nazis were an abomination, was because they violated the libertarian principle of non initiation of violence. That is, the initiated violence against innocent  people. Now, suppose, work with me again on this, please, there were a group that featured the swastika, the goose step, the hiel Hitler salute, black leather boots, came from Germany, etc. But these people never, ever, not once, initiated violence against innocent people. I would of course find this group obnoxious (only because of association in my mind with real Nazis), but, compared to real Nazis, I would find this group "not so bad." Again, I go further. While I supported the Nuremberg trials which condemned actual Nazis to death, would these "Nazis" be engaging in criminal acts. No. Of course not. Hey, shouldn't a civilized society have room for weirdos?

If you disagree with this, I would be glad to hear your reasons.

Also, back to the slavery issue. As evidence that I  abhor slavery, I have a paper trail of publications favoring reparations  for slavery, from the great grandchildren of slave owners, to the great grandchildren of slaves. I could hardly have written this if I  thought that actual slavery (not the hypothetical variety mentioned above) was "not so bad."

Alston and Block, 2007; Block, 1993, 2001, 2002; Block and Yeatts, 1999-2000

Alston, Wilton D. and Walter E. Block. 2007. “Reparations, Once Again.” Human Rights Review, Vol. 9, No. 3, September, pp. 379-392; http://tinyurl.com/2b75fl

Block, Walter E. 1993. “Malcolm X,” Fraser Forum, January, pp. 18-19; http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5361.aspx

Block, Walter E. 2001. “The Moral Dimensions of Poverty, Entitlements and Theft,” The Journal of Markets and Morality, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 83-93; http://www.acton.org/publicat/m_and_m/2001_spring/block.html; http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=922087; http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marketsandmorality.com%2Findex.php%2Fmandm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F587%2F577&ei=lBn9UuLIOtDOkQe1toHwBw&usg=AFQjCNF2MZ5XoFKKMF5UcOfOT5Kv-HQgZA&sig2=VVYWZhyl0ZmAWRAKXtkxWw

Block, Walter E. 2002. “On Reparations to Blacks for Slavery,” Human Rights Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, July-September, pp. 53-73;
http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/reparations_slavery.pdf

Block, Walter E. and Guillermo Yeatts. 1999-2000. “The Economics and Ethics of Land Reform: A Critique of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace’s ‘Toward a Better Distribution of Land: The Challenge of Agrarian Reform,’” Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Law, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 37-69; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/ethics_land_reform.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

Walter E. Block, Ph.D.

Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics

Joseph A. Butt, S.J. College of Business

Loyola University New Orleans

6363 St. Charles Avenue, Box 5, Miller Hall 318

New Orleans, LA 70118