Going home

“I like the Rhodesian definition: “Equal rights for all civilized men.”

Except this “definition” of white is a social construct

Then why did you lot want to destroy Rhodesia?

All race and species definitions are social constructs, in that there will always be intermediate cases, always ragged boundaries to any category, yet the differences to which they refer are very real, so they are none of them social constructs. The California spotted owl is much more a social construct than the white race, since spotted owls pay no attention whatsoever to the state boundaries of California, and not a whole lot of attention to the difference between spotted owls and barred owls.

The distinction between wolf and dog is in this sense a social construct, since gene flow continues despite forty thousand years of separation. But wolves really are not dogs, so not a social construct.

As I said, the ragged boundaries of race categories are a problem for you, not us. It is you who have to perform somersaults to define Zimmerman as white.

We don’t want to unite even the French and the Germans, but you want to unite everyone against whites. So precisely defining the white boundary is, as with the Zimmerman case, a huge problem for you, no problem for us. Who is to be punished by affirmative action, who is to be rewarded? We don’t care. Why should we care?

But you need to define whites precisely, because you need to hunt down the last white. So who is the last white? Zimmerman? That is your problem. We don’t care.

Do married couples–a man and a woman–have the liberty to have sex and/or procreate with whomever they want, regardless if the man or woman is of a different race? Yes or no? Why?

Your are talking to the demons in your head. Look up morganatic marriage.

The underlying fallacy is that you suppose that all men and women are equal, therefore inequality has to be created by state policy, so the neoreactionary council of eldar has to decide who gets the goodies, and who gets the short end of the stick.

But in the world, inequality arises naturally, and in the society we intend, the state accepts the outcome. The decision as to who is the kind of person we want in our neighborhood, and whom we do not in our neighborhood, whom we want in our club, and whom we do not, is made in a more diffuse and local fashion, and the state accepts the outcome, accepts enforcement of that outcome, and itself backs with violence enforcement of that outcome.

The country club can exclude Jews, or not, and the Senior secret neoreactionary of eldars will not give them instructions. And if they decide to exclude Jews, they will have to figure out who is a Jew and who is not, a problem that Israel finds notoriously difficult. The Senior secret neoreactionary council of eldars will use state violence to protect their right to do so, but will not try help them figure out who is a Jew.

Inequality arises naturally. Inequality leads to covetousness, covetousnes leads to violence as the inferior try take what is inherently the superior’s. At which point the state needs to violently crush those seeking to use collective action to take what does not belong to them. If X are seeking to take from Y, the state does not need to precisely define the boundary between X and Y, just stop Xs from taking from Ys. It does not need to give Ys what it is that Xs want, nor take away from Xs what Xs covet, so does not need to categorize every last X and every last Y. That is a problem for those who support affirmative action, not us.

The Xs are acting collectively to take from the Ys. The state needs to strike down the collective, which does not include every last X, and probably only includes a quite small number of X.

In a white neighborhood, “black” is going to be someone that those who own a lot of real estate believe lowers property values by his presence.

You need to plan the whole society, so you need to figure out if Zimmerman is white, mestizo, or black. We don’t. We will let society plan itself, – which to those at the very bottom looks like the people at the local country club which may or may not allow Jews, or allow some Jews and not others, and the man who owns a lot of real estate in the neighborhood, planning society.

We will give Zimmerman a medal for defending himself and his apartment complex. We don’t need to figure out his race. You need to figure out his race.

The secret council of eldars does not need to figure out Zimmerman’s race, because it is not handing out every last goody. It is defending people’s rights to hold on to their own goodies, including their right to have a safe and comfortable neighborhood with people in it that do not scare them, their right to have a place where children can wander away unsupervised. Maybe we will not be able to provide that for Zimmerman, but we can make it a whole lot easier for people like him to provide that for themselves.

After the restoration, chances are that the man who owns the apartments will tell Zimmerman “watch out for n*****s, and the distinctly dark skinned Zimmerman will have to figure out who is a n***** and who is not, without the benefit of receiving secret instructions from the secret council of eldar.

In typical Jim fashion, you go on a rant without actually addressing the question. Do white people have the liberty to do what they want with their property, including selling it to black people? Why

The rules against selling it to black people were a workaround because of “equal rights” legislation that effectively privileged blacks over whites, redistributed the value created by whites to blacks.

If certain people are likely to get run out of town, they are not going to buy into town. We don’t need such workarounds.

“So when we run bad people out of the neighborhood, we preserve the value the neighbors have created. When you run white people out of the neighborhood, you destroy the value that they create.”

Who is “we”?

If we continue to pretend to be a democracy with limited franchise, the Town council, which will be dominated by the chamber of commerce, the country club, and major real estate interests, will decide whom they don’t want around. Or we might go straight to neo feudalism, in which case the Lord of the town will exclude anyone he does not like. Consider Dubai for an example of well functioning feudalism. Some types of inferior races (though not blacks) are allowed into Dubai on work permits, but it is up or out. If they are still doing lower class jobs after a being there a while, they have to leave Dubai. Getting an indefinite series of work permits in Dubai is based largely on class, largely on wealth, partly on race, and partly on ill defined and capricious criteria. But for the most part, blacks need not apply. Maybe rich blacks can apply if they are sufficiently rich. The King of Dubai wants people in Dubai that raise real estate values and does not want people in Dubai that lower real estate values.

“I seem to remember a civil war where our current rules were created and enforced at bayonet point.”

you don’t think with Jim’s fantasy “reboot” scenario that his rules would not be “created and enforced at bayonet point”?

The difference is that you guys use bayonets to confiscate and destroy the value that other people create, for example the buildings in our inner cities, in Ferguson and in Baltimore, whereas I propose using bayonets to protect the value that people create, so as to encourage people to create more value.

“The difference is that you guys use bayonets to confiscate and destroy the value that other people create whereas I propose using bayonets to protect the value that people create, so as to encourage people to create more value”

You’re talking gibberish again

Crimestop is making you stupid.

Peppermint:

Yes, I assumed that you had a passing familiarity with Black revolutionary literature, since you’re such a cuck.

Corvinus

What, are you in fifth grade? That word is devoid of any significant meaning.

You use your stupidity as an argument.

Explaining Peppermint’s statement for mere neurotypicals:

You have worshipful and deluded beliefs about blacks, and hateful beliefs about whites. You delight in beliefs that humiliate you and degrade you. Hence the white nationalist analogy of a husband who invites a black man to fuck his wife.

Peppermint assumed that since you hate your own race so much “you’re such a cuck”, you would be familiar with black revolutionary literature, seeing it is one long indictment of how white men are to blame for all black problems. Get it now?