At least Ebeling uses the proper original definition of racism: not merely that race is responsible for making one person inferior to another in certain inborn dispositions (while perhaps making him superior to him in other such), but a conjunction of this assertion with the further political proposal that “inferior” races must be for reasons of their very inferiority exterminated or enslaved; as Ebeling writes,
A classical liberal or libertarian is not true to his own principles and their defense, if he remains silent in the face, for instance, of a Nazi arguing the inferiority of Jews, blacks or Slavs, and that as “sub-humans” they should be enslaved or eradicated for the good of some “master race.”
The first part of this injunction is false. Anybody can proclaim anybody’s inferiority as loudly as he wants. He may be shunned by polite society if he is too rude or vain, but could he be on occasion right? Surely, a book like Why Race Matters by Michael Levin, even if one finds himself in disagreement with it, has a place on every libertarian’s bookshelf.
The second part is very true. The law of comparative advantage (or of association) has undermined any economic justification for racism thusly understood. Christianity has further defended the universal brotherhood of men and Fatherhood of God. But any call for violence, promoted by whatever arguments, is to be condemned. Not just racial violence.