Theme: Governance

—“I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be ethnic separation in propertarianism? Please answer honestly.”— Tyler Granberry

No. Period. Honestly, Truthfully. (I will get a ton of sh-t for saying that from the WN crowd.) There is a right of voluntary DISASSOCIATION as well as ASSOCIATION meaning everyone can create new identitarian neighborhoods, villages, cities, counties, sure, because under P we can’t prohibit that VOLUNTARY association and Disassociation. Just as we can’t make bakers bake cakes they don’t agree with. Just like we can’t prohibit men from forming men’s clubs again. Just like we can’t prohibit people from forming their own group banks, own group biases. In other words we end INVOLUNTARY integration at the local level. (If you know your history, and if know the failure of force integration pretty much everywhere except the military, the 60’s destroyed the formation of the african american middle class and elites. That said, P constitution proposes a (libertarian) COMPROMISE that if unmet, escalates to POLITICIDE against the left and the use of undermining by competing ideologies, philosophies, religions and interest groups. It converts the left wing immigrant cities into city states, and removes the government from social policy, and restores it to an insurer of last resort. I suspect that we will see the formation of a small number of local polities that like the amish, the evangelicals, or the white nationalists, want to maintain cultural isolationism by a majority middle class. But the state cannot interfere eithe way. I expect that we will have major cities maintain the high and low versus the middle. I tend to look at black-white relations in the south, vs the north and the differences are rather obvious. Family is family in the south. Politics and political parties and ideology in the northeast. And hostility in southern california and new york. What we DO threaten is an escalation IF left and right cannot pursue their separate political interests in their local polities. In other words, if the left resists we promise to escalate. I think I’ve said it as political separation is a good thing, politicide is a good thing at the federal level, ethnocide if it escalates, and genocide if it escalates, so let’s do the ‘everybody wins’ scenario and devlove the ‘imperial’ federal government’s rule over other than conflict in property between the states to state, city – state, county, local level. And get out of the business of coercing each other. But you can search my ten years of posts on P and the site and all you’ll see is libertarian solutions and “I don’t do racism, I do classism, and it’s class sizes that cause the problem not race, and if we can produce commons and rules and norms suitable to our populations we will all stop having conflict over them.” Ie: it worked in the past just fine. It will work now just fine. people are the same the world over in this regard.

—“I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be ethnic separation in propertarianism? Please answer honestly.”— Tyler Granberry

No. Period. Honestly, Truthfully. (I will get a ton of sh-t for saying that from the WN crowd.) There is a right of voluntary DISASSOCIATION as well as ASSOCIATION meaning everyone can create new identitarian neighborhoods, villages, cities, counties, sure, because under P we can’t prohibit that VOLUNTARY association and Disassociation. Just as we can’t make bakers bake cakes they don’t agree with. Just like we can’t prohibit men from forming men’s clubs again. Just like we can’t prohibit people from forming their own group banks, own group biases. In other words we end INVOLUNTARY integration at the local level. (If you know your history, and if know the failure of force integration pretty much everywhere except the military, the 60’s destroyed the formation of the african american middle class and elites. That said, P constitution proposes a (libertarian) COMPROMISE that if unmet, escalates to POLITICIDE against the left and the use of undermining by competing ideologies, philosophies, religions and interest groups. It converts the left wing immigrant cities into city states, and removes the government from social policy, and restores it to an insurer of last resort. I suspect that we will see the formation of a small number of local polities that like the amish, the evangelicals, or the white nationalists, want to maintain cultural isolationism by a majority middle class. But the state cannot interfere eithe way. I expect that we will have major cities maintain the high and low versus the middle. I tend to look at black-white relations in the south, vs the north and the differences are rather obvious. Family is family in the south. Politics and political parties and ideology in the northeast. And hostility in southern california and new york. What we DO threaten is an escalation IF left and right cannot pursue their separate political interests in their local polities. In other words, if the left resists we promise to escalate. I think I’ve said it as political separation is a good thing, politicide is a good thing at the federal level, ethnocide if it escalates, and genocide if it escalates, so let’s do the ‘everybody wins’ scenario and devlove the ‘imperial’ federal government’s rule over other than conflict in property between the states to state, city – state, county, local level. And get out of the business of coercing each other. But you can search my ten years of posts on P and the site and all you’ll see is libertarian solutions and “I don’t do racism, I do classism, and it’s class sizes that cause the problem not race, and if we can produce commons and rules and norms suitable to our populations we will all stop having conflict over them.” Ie: it worked in the past just fine. It will work now just fine. people are the same the world over in this regard.