That may or may not be true. However the assertion that Hoppe would be deported back to Germany under his own system, assuming he has real estate in Nevad which is almost certain, is factually wrong. If people want to argue against Hoppe they should at least get there facts right.
Of course, but in order for there to be human biodiversity and diverse cultures, there also have to be relatively exclusive breeding patterns and discretely maintained cultures. These are the safe harbors for people that civil rights laws seek to take away, in the government’s quest for a uniform polity with no competing loyalties.
I consider you people a scar on the face of liberty.
Example: Someone hears that Brainpolice is a member of Mises.org forum. He then concludes that he is either an anarchist or minarchist; probably the former. He could join Mises.org to find out for sure but he’d rather watch TV. Finding additional information costs. You may argue that empirically this is, in general, rather small however it does not deny it exists.
Where have I actually said that? Under a natural dynamist society there would be different areas of different levels of homo/hetergeneity; smaller places more homogeneous and cities more heterogeneous. I believe that mine, and I would Byzantines, is that there is more heterogenity under the current statist system than there would under a purely private property society.
Isn’t “you people” a collectivist term?!!!
One can likewise nitpick about the mere usage of the term government, society, nation and so on. You know what’s meant.
You’re Jewish and I’m not. Does your genetic exclusivity sicken you? Does it sicken you that there is a discrete Jewish culture that has been vigilantly defended for 5,000 years? These things are part of who people are.
But I don’t complain about using them.
That’s not what I meant. I know he won’t be deported under his own system and I never made that assertion. I was talking about a hypothetical scenario where nativist attitudes become so rabid that all sorts of people get deported. It’s not a serious critique of Hoppe but rather a random tangent that popped into my head, though I do have some serious problems with Hoppe.
Of course you do, because you’re a permanent leveller.
This isn’t a coherent arguement that exclusivity is efficient or desirable.
Quite the contrary, a statist society involves forced homogeneity. That’s what the elimination of competition does. Free competition creates more heterogenity. Free competition is pluralism. Statist systems are an attempt at a fixed homogeneity.
No problem. I just find many people attacking Hoppe without actually understanding what he’s arguing for which is what I thought you were doing.
Oh yea, here we go again with this “leveling” buzzword. “How dare you oppose racism and plutocracy, you social leveler!”. I’d rather be a “leveler” than a conservative apologist for racism, nationalism, corporatism and theocracy, who hides under libertarian rhetoric.
The burden of proof is on the anarchist…
What does it really matter? I mean if you’re both anarchists, and neither of you will use coercion to forcefully enact your own wishes of the market…
What genetic exclusivity? To use the convenient national labels, I’m German, Russian, Lithuanian, Polish and Slovenian. But none of this really identifies me as an individual, they are only vague generalities. They in no way inherently imply anything about me other than perhaps a few superficial physical traits. I could really care less about Israel and the Jewish religion. My culture is not dictated to me by circumstantial and superficial identities that I did not choose for myself. My culture consists of and is influenced by a plurality of things and is a product of my experiences as an individual, not something that is 100% predetermined for me by labels, biology, territory, and so on.
I reject the polylogist and fatalistic premise that merely being born into a particular territory or a particular family entirely predetermines my ideology, preferances and traits. I identify as an individual, I don’t allow groups to identify me for me. I am myself, and it would be erroneous for me to identify with something that is external to myself (I.E. groups; others) as if it was myself. But I suppose a thick kind of individualism is something that racialists don’t easily grasp.
I don’t trust the racialists to consistantly remain voluntaryists when it comes down to the nitty gritty.
Good one. I’m finding this very interesting. Not terribly surprised that my last post was ignored.
You also identify as Jewish, if I recall prior posts correctly. And shouldn’t you not even be using such terms if you believe we’re all just individuals?
I don’t identify as Jewish, I am identified by others and by Jewish law as Jewish. Of course, I reject Jewish law and am an atheist. I usually use the term “allegedly Jewish” because I think the term is very vague and is often applied to what amounts to European muts with little to no real Ahskenazi blood.
That objection was addressed in an edit to the post. They are convenient labels, vague generalities and I don’t particularly attach much significance to them. They’re just convenient for the purposes of communication. The objection is semantic or nitpicky. You know what’s meant.
All it means is that I have ancestors who lived in those particular nation-states. Other than that, it doesn’t necessarily describe me as an individual or say anything significant about me (or the ancestors for that matter) aside from geographic coincidences/circumstances.