[I] hate discussion of race really, but since my position is somewhat novel, I feel the need to vent my frustration at what I see as a the result of a series of mainstream errors that attempt to justify democracy by criticizing the natural and unavoidable behavior of man. Instead of truthfully addressing the issue, we lie and try to convince each other of the lie. It doesn’t work. Religion works because you can’t see any evidence other than people’s behavior. Criticisms of race don’t work because we can always see evidence of group behavior.
Race: Demonstrated behavior in favor of kin selection; most commonly performed as some form of ostracization by means of (a) physical and legal, (b) boycott of commerce and cooperation, (c) gossip and ridicule.
So, the whole debate over race is a dishonest postmodern byproduct of the fallacy of democracy. People will never stop favoring kin selection in politics or any other walk of life. Race is extremely valuable to the middle and lower classes, even if almost entirely irrelevant to the upper classes. The margins will always interbreed because it’s to their status advantage if not their offspring’s.
THE PROBLEM IS DEMOCRATIC JUSTIFICATION OF EMPIRES
Democratic empires like the USA and Europe are a catastrophe that makes hostility between of families with different abilities, needs and wants. Representative Democracy is an obscurant technology similar to overloading in rhetoric, pooling and laundering in money and finance, platonism in mathematics, and morality in politics. Democracy obscures, and justifies, because it is only possible to employ in the consideration of particulars, and NOT in the consideration of sets of decisions. Especially when the particulars within each set of decisions provides incentives for corruption, contrivance, and deceit.
There isn’t necessarily any problem with direct democracy on normative matters, and economic democracy on investment matters. There just isn’t. The problem with direct democracy is no longer one of practicality, but one of the impossibility of common interest.
THE PROPERTARIAN ARGUMENT:
The only material difference between the races is the rates of reproduction of the underclasses. This problem was solved in the west by marriage, manorialism and harsh winters if not plagues, and in the east through starvation and political killing of even the most marginal of malcontents. It was marginally solved by the hindus via the caste system, while muslims, and africans had no means of solving it at all. Thankfully, in modernity it can be solved through redistribution in exchange for one child limits, rather than through starvation and extermination. We can pay people NOT to commit the crime of parasitic reproduction, rather than punish them and the innocent for parasitic reproduction.
The only significant political difference between races is merely one of distributions.
Without this difference in distributions, we would have very few political problems between the races of man.
(NOTE: I suppose I should diagram this argument as a set of demand curves for desirability as mates, group insurance value, and IQ/Impulsivity. I haven’t really spent much time demonstrating propertarianism using Austrian ‘triangles’ – or, more appropriately: multi-dimensional demand curves. But the world needs such a thing. And needs it desperately.)