Often when an individual brands a political opponent as a racist, it is a subtle admission that an argument cannot be won when focused solely on policy. The most recent such accusation of racism has come from both the left and the right towards a friend of the liberty movement, Jack Hunter.
This, of course, is a political maneuver to attempt to damage Hunter's former employer, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, in his political career and potential run for the presidency in the future. The establishment left and the right is increasingly threatened by the libertarianism advocated by Hunter, and, more importantly, by the potential for the libertarian-leaning Paul to gain increasing political power.
But is this charge an accurate one? When examining the case against Hunter, you find that much of it relies on his pro-secession and anti-Lincoln views — neither of which make him a racist. While the mainstream narrative would have you believe that if you don't support Lincoln, you may in fact be a racist, what isn’t taught in schools is that Lincoln himself was a blatant racist who supported deporting and colonizing blacks. In a debate with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln stated:
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races — that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.