Decentralization as Imperatice [was: The Libertarian As Conservative]
zen at freedbms.net
Tue Mar 26 21:49:37 PDT 2019
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 12:17:03AM +0000, coderman wrote:
> > "decentralized abuses. Which could be, and used to be, worse."
> > what is he talking about? He's talking about nothing - it's just retarded handwaving on his part.
> more assuming on my part, but for sake of argument, consider that Portland could conceivably be segregated today.
> that is a centralized correction to a a decnetralized (local) issue. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/
> again: this is a cop out. in the modern age communication deems the backwards views of white nationalist assholes as such.
> these views are backward in both the modern centralized, and decentralized model.
> communication is the key!
The right to communicate freely, within the bounds of our capacity,
is indeed foundational to our existence.
The right to exercise our will to explore the creation of
communities, again within the bounds of our capacity, is similarly
foundational to that which makes life worth living.
"Backwards white nationalist assholes" founded and built America.
Feel free to literally live amongst whom you please.
But seriously, to what end does anyone denigrate the alternative
choices of others?
Why not honour individual self expression?
Or would you have the current centralised government coerce
households in Western lands to alternative between one "white"
household, and one "non white" household? Or perhaps 3 non white
households for every one white household?
Should we organise this on a street by street basis, or perhaps allow
a little more flexibility - perhaps on a block by block basis - or
would this lead to "white nationalist asshole" streets?
This is actually a serious question.
More information about the cypherpunks