Rockwell a Minarchist?

[Bostwick]

@Brainpolice

It’s irrational and counterproductive.

Let me know when you start your anti-gambling crusade.

[Juan]

@Jon Irenicus

Well what is irrational about it?

Racist ‘theories’ are as rational as polylogism - In a word, racism is nonsense.

[Physiocrat]

@Juan

@Jon Irenicus

Well what is irrational about it?

Racist ‘theories’ are as rational as polylogism - In a word, racism is nonsense.

Well not as much nonsense as the term racism itself. I have continually exposed that word as meaning nothing; the only coherent definition of it is you believe one race to be morally inferior to another viz. they deserve less legal rights than yourself. This is accused of defining out of existence but no-one has ever put a contrary definition which stands up to scrutiny.

[Jon_Irenicus]

Yeah, and of course, they’re also irrelevant to what I said.

-Jon

[majevska]

@Juan

@Fred Furash

Mizrahi jews look a lot like the Arabs in the middle east (I often can’t recognize the difference),

So, ‘genetically’ they are the same race, or almost the same race, right ?

while Ashkenazi jews look different enough (2000 years of intermarrying with caucasians)

Which means that ‘genetically’ they don’t have a lot of ‘jewish’ genes, correct ?

Still Byzantine believes in something called the jewish race, wich I suppose, includes both Mizrahi & Ashkenazi Jews ? Racist nonsense I say.

Not that this point is really so relevant… but I believe Jews are genetically closest to modern day Iranians; they’re practically identical. Of course there is a lot of intermixture and what happened with Ashkenazi is, a good chunk where the children of converts and never had any Jewish blood. Judaism is hard to define, it tries to be a race, religion, nation, etc. all at the same time.

[Juan]

Iranians are actually Persians. Their language belongs to the indo-european family and their ‘ethnic background’ is caucasian.

[DennisLeeWilson]

@ViennaSausage

@Libertas est Veritas

Does it matter?

Seriously, I hate these threads. It’s kind of like watching a bunch of kids trying to ram a square peg into a round hole. Accept that in reality one’s thought processes can’t be labeled simply with ancap/minarchist/left/right/up/down.

I hate threads that hate threads;). (Does that mean I hate my own thread?)

IMHO, it matters to the extent of developing my own understanding of libertarianism and Austrian Economics. Granted, a label does not necessarily define an individual, but individuals do define labels. Labels appear useful in the capacity of mental heuristics conveying information. Labels may appear accurate, but the precision is in the details. I posited the initial question because Rockwell’s cited writing, while eloquent, whispered ancap, but screamed minarchy.

How about “screamed mini-statism”?

For “understanding” and “TRUTH IN LABELING” about “minarchy”, see the discussion thread that I started on this subject at

Minarchism or ministatism?

Minarchist?? Actually ministatist is more appropriate! When I first encountered the made-up word “minarchist”, I had difficultly understanding what it meant. It certainly was not glaringly obvious. Eventually it became clear that most writers meant a person or position advocating some form of limited state. Yesterday while reading an article by Mark Davis at http://www.strike-the-root.com/81/davis/davis1.html I discovered what minarchists have been trying to obfuscate with their made-up word, …