Right Wing Discussion Thread X: Pol's closed

[The Parkus Empire]

People should be free to sell their labor across state boundaries = / = abolish all borders anarchy kyahahahaha

Abolish the sovereignty of all peoples muahaha, only for profit has rights!

[Darussalam]

You aren't even the good kind of Hoppean ancap, you're that discount store brand :^]

Hoppean ancap is crypto-Maoism anyway

People should be free to sell their labor across state boundaries = / = abolish all borders anarchy kyahahahaha

Abolish the sovereignty of all peoples muahaha, only for profit has rights!

When NIMBY is nation-wide we praise it and call it "sovereignty"

[The East Marches II]

You aren't even the good kind of Hoppean ancap, you're that discount store brand :^]

Hoppean ancap is crypto-Maoism anyway

Alright, them's fighting words.

The words of the Prophet Al-Hoppeyyun (PBUH) shall not be contradicted.

[Minzerland II]

If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?

TEM would be Germanicus, ridiculously pragmatically brutal to his enemies yet super lenient towards his own. Also I can completely hear him agreeing with "The only way we're going to win this war is by killing *all* of the Germans. =^^^^)"

UMN is Constantine the Great, ready to enforce morality and authority under an autocratic reign.

Sanct is Septimius Severus, the aggressive conqueror and rejuvenator.

Benuty is Joesphus, the esoteric academic.

Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist

Lumi would be Antoninus Pius due to being the nice one who is inexplicably not a complete bastard but still here.

North Davincia would be Crassus. The richest man in Rome seldom needs introduction.

Parkus would be Cato the Younger.

I'm the Brothers Grachhi because I'm coming for your toothbrushes I'm Trajan because I want to rule the W O R L D and damn the cost I'm Julian because I support THE COMMONS and REPUBLICANISM and have facial hair

I can only be one Roman, Marcus Favonius; because I'm not quite made of the stuff Cato was.

[Northern Davincia]

Hoppean ancap is crypto-Maoism anyway

Alright, them's fighting words.

The words of the Prophet Al-Hoppeyyun (PBUH) shall not be contradicted.

Count me in this brawl.

[Benuty]

If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?

TEM would be Germanicus, ridiculously pragmatically brutal to his enemies yet super lenient towards his own. Also I can completely hear him agreeing with "The only way we're going to win this war is by killing *all* of the Germans. =^^^^)"

UMN is Constantine the Great, ready to enforce morality and authority under an autocratic reign.

Sanct is Septimius Severus, the aggressive conqueror and rejuvenator.

Benuty is Joesphus, the esoteric academic.

Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist

Lumi would be Antoninus Pius due to being the nice one who is inexplicably not a complete bastard but still here.

North Davincia would be Crassus. The richest man in Rome seldom needs introduction.

Parkus would be Cato the Younger.

I'm the Brothers Grachhi because I'm coming for your toothbrushes I'm Trajan because I want to rule the W O R L D and damn the cost I'm Julian because I support THE COMMONS and REPUBLICANISM and have facial hair

Josephus, it fits perfectly.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?

TEM would be Germanicus, ridiculously pragmatically brutal to his enemies yet super lenient towards his own. Also I can completely hear him agreeing with "The only way we're going to win this war is by killing *all* of the Germans. =^^^^)"

UMN is Constantine the Great, ready to enforce morality and authority under an autocratic reign.

Sanct is Septimius Severus, the aggressive conqueror and rejuvenator.

Benuty is Joesphus, the esoteric academic.

Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist

Lumi would be Antoninus Pius due to being the nice one who is inexplicably not a complete bastard but still here.

North Davincia would be Crassus. The richest man in Rome seldom needs introduction.

Parkus would be Cato the Younger.

I'm the Brothers Grachhi because I'm coming for your toothbrushes I'm Trajan because I want to rule the W O R L D and damn the cost I'm Julian because I support THE COMMONS and REPUBLICANISM and have facial hair

I’d say this is surprising accurate.

[Northern Davincia]

If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?

TEM would be Germanicus, ridiculously pragmatically brutal to his enemies yet super lenient towards his own. Also I can completely hear him agreeing with "The only way we're going to win this war is by killing *all* of the Germans. =^^^^)"

UMN is Constantine the Great, ready to enforce morality and authority under an autocratic reign.

Sanct is Septimius Severus, the aggressive conqueror and rejuvenator.

Benuty is Joesphus, the esoteric academic.

Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist

Lumi would be Antoninus Pius due to being the nice one who is inexplicably not a complete bastard but still here.

North Davincia would be Crassus. The richest man in Rome seldom needs introduction.

Parkus would be Cato the Younger.

I'm the Brothers Grachhi because I'm coming for your toothbrushes I'm Trajan because I want to rule the W O R L D and damn the cost I'm Julian because I support THE COMMONS and REPUBLICANISM and have facial hair

Josephus, it fits perfectly.

Crassus FTW
He quite literally did nothing wrong (Optimates are incapable of wrongdoing).

[Crazed Pirates]

Josephus, it fits perfectly.

Crassus FTW
He quite literally did nothing wrong (Optimates are incapable of wrongdoing).

[Herskerstad]

In that case Ya'll need Sulla. :' )

[Conserative Morality]

Josephus, it fits perfectly.

Crassus FTW
He quite literally did nothing wrong (Optimates are incapable of wrongdoing).

Gotta admit, starting Rome's first fire department as an incredibly profitable venture is impressive on two levels.

[Herskerstad]

Crassus FTW
He quite literally did nothing wrong (Optimates are incapable of wrongdoing).

Gotta admit, starting Rome's first fire department as an incredibly profitable venture is impressive on two levels.

And fire insurance venue as well entirely incidentally.

No matter, it's not like someone as rich and powerful as him would need the help of Armenians.

[Aillyria]

If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?

TEM would be Germanicus, ridiculously pragmatically brutal to his enemies yet super lenient towards his own. Also I can completely hear him agreeing with "The only way we're going to win this war is by killing *all* of the Germans. =^^^^)"

UMN is Constantine the Great, ready to enforce morality and authority under an autocratic reign.

Sanct is Septimius Severus, the aggressive conqueror and rejuvenator.

Benuty is Joesphus, the esoteric academic.

Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist

Lumi would be Antoninus Pius due to being the nice one who is inexplicably not a complete bastard but still here.

North Davincia would be Crassus. The richest man in Rome seldom needs introduction.

Parkus would be Cato the Younger.

I'm the Brothers Grachhi because I'm coming for your toothbrushes I'm Trajan because I want to rule the W O R L D and damn the cost I'm Julian because I support THE COMMONS and REPUBLICANISM and have facial hair

Omg, this is so true...lol

[Northern Davincia]

Crassus FTW
He quite literally did nothing wrong (Optimates are incapable of wrongdoing).

Gotta admit, starting Rome's first fire department as an incredibly profitable venture is impressive on two levels.

And people say that private fire departments don't work.

Gotta admit, starting Rome's first fire department as an incredibly profitable venture is impressive on two levels.

And fire insurance venue as well entirely incidentally.

No matter, it's not like someone as rich and powerful as him would need the help of Armenians.

>Armenians
>help

Choose only one.

[Balkanized China]

RWDT, Whats your preferred form of tax plan? I think I'm a bit of a mix between Ross Perot's lowering taxes on small business and Eisenhower's spending cuts and high taxes for the rich. But I'm also pretty interested in a Huey Long like system, though I do find it a tad too radical for the first damn million of a person's salary to go untaxed and for there to be a max salary of 6 million. But the idea of a large portion of the average person's salary going untaxed while keeping very high taxes on the rich is appealing to me. I'm pretty sure I'd prefer what you might call a right wing progressive tax. High Taxes on the Rich, low on small business and the middle class, and the poor deserves every penny they earn. On one hand I think such a system could reunite both the market skeptic republicans and social democrats in theory, but in practice I'm afraid it'll be a tad bit too far right and I'm worried about that.So I'd love to hear some critiques and get some help forming such a tax plan.

[The Parkus Empire]

Anyone read this book? It sounds good.

At the core of Deneen’s critique is what he sees as a liberal redefinition of the ancient and medieval concept of freedom, or libertas. The ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as the medieval Christians, understood freedom as the learned ability, cultivated through discipline and education in virtue, to properly govern one’s self. The freedom to do what one desires is a false freedom, in this view, because the world is limited but our desires are not, so that in pursuing them we ultimately become their slaves. Becoming free, then, is the process of achieving mastery over our “base” impulses. There is a circularity, too, between good politics and good individual conduct. A society can only govern itself well if it comprises self-governing citizens, and citizens can only learn self-government within a well-governed society.

or Deneen, liberalism’s big innovation was to reject this classical understanding as unrealistic, unscientific, and oppressive. Seeking a more scientific basis for politics, liberals and proto-liberals such as Locke and Hobbes stripped humanity down to its bare essentials — self-interested individuals unmarked by culture or history. Writing in a religiously divided and perpetually warring Europe, they argued that civil peace could be assured by allowing individuals to pursue their private interests free of the irrational restrictions imposed by custom, religion, and popular prejudice, with the modern state there to prevent them from taking advantage of one another. Freedom, that is, was redefined from self-government to lack of external restraint — a notion that was extended to the natural world, where humans, now armed with reason and modern science, no longer faced nature as a fixed limit on their desires, but something to be conquered and transformed. To legitimize the whole structure, liberal theorists projected this state of affairs back into a “state of nature,” a mythical past in which individuals had come together and consented to be governed out of their own shared self-interest.

But while liberalism presented itself as a scientific description of reality, it was, for Deneen, from its beginning a project to transform the world. Humans, for instance, are not naturally isolated individuals. Everyone is born into a specific time, place, and cultural tradition which, however restrictive, is also the source of their identity and connection to other people. Yet modern liberal society, through the action of both the state and the market, erodes these “natural” social bonds, creating in their place the cultureless, isolated individuals that liberal theory claimed to find in the state of nature. And as individuals are stripped of the cultural norms that formerly governed social conduct, the resulting anarchy requires the state to step into the breach by threatening to punish those who violate the rights of others — retroactively coming to play the role that, in Hobbes’s story, it was consciously and consensually created to fulfill. The general trend is that people are freed from old restrictions only to be subjected to the more abstract, alienating powers of capitalism and bureaucracy. Yet liberal ideology masks its own origins, presenting as natural conditions those that is has in fact created.

This conspiracy is one in which both American progressivism and conservatism are implicated.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/ ... sm-hotter/

[The Parkus Empire]

RWDT, Whats your preferred form of tax plan? I think I'm a bit of a mix between Ross Perot's lowering taxes on small business and Eisenhower's spending cuts and high taxes for the rich. But I'm also pretty interested in a Huey Long like system, though I do find it a tad too radical for the first damn million of a person's salary to go untaxed and for there to be a max salary of 6 million. But the idea of a large portion of the average person's salary going untaxed while keeping very high taxes on the rich is appealing to me. I'm pretty sure I'd prefer what you might call a right wing progressive tax. High Taxes on the Rich, low on small business and the middle class, and the poor deserves every penny they earn. On one hand I think such a system could reunite both the market skeptic republicans and social democrats in theory, but in practice I'm afraid it'll be a tad bit too far right and I'm worried about that.So I'd love to hear some critiques and get some help forming such a tax plan.

Scrap property taxes, replace with progressive poll tax. Scrap income tax, replace with tariffs. Our entire tax system is bloated and indefensible, regular people literally have to hire a professional to do the paper work for their taxes. This is not acceptable.

[Tekeristan]

RWDT, Whats your preferred form of tax plan? I think I'm a bit of a mix between Ross Perot's lowering taxes on small business and Eisenhower's spending cuts and high taxes for the rich. But I'm also pretty interested in a Huey Long like system, though I do find it a tad too radical for the first damn million of a person's salary to go untaxed and for there to be a max salary of 6 million. But the idea of a large portion of the average person's salary going untaxed while keeping very high taxes on the rich is appealing to me. I'm pretty sure I'd prefer what you might call a right wing progressive tax. High Taxes on the Rich, low on small business and the middle class, and the poor deserves every penny they earn. On one hand I think such a system could reunite both the market skeptic republicans and social democrats in theory, but in practice I'm afraid it'll be a tad bit too far right and I'm worried about that.So I'd love to hear some critiques and get some help forming such a tax plan.

Scrap property taxes, replace with progressive poll tax. Scrap income tax, replace with tariffs. Our entire tax system is bloated and indefensible, regular people literally have to hire a professional to do the paper work for their taxes. This is not acceptable.

A progressive poll tax?
I mean, I can gather what that is, but my question is more why than what.

[The Parkus Empire]

Scrap property taxes, replace with progressive poll tax. Scrap income tax, replace with tariffs. Our entire tax system is bloated and indefensible, regular people literally have to hire a professional to do the paper work for their taxes. This is not acceptable.

A progressive poll tax?
I mean, I can gather what that is, but my question is more why than what.

Private property, not voting, is the fundamental basis of liberty, especially when so many people can vote. I would consider a freeholder of the Middle Ages whose property is immune to the power of the sovereign, to have more liberty than some homeless guy in the streets who can vote. Property tax is an absolute travesty because it means your property is never secure, you must have government printed cash constantly in order to be able to retain it, or else they can take it away.

[Tekeristan]

A progressive poll tax?
I mean, I can gather what that is, but my question is more why than what.

Private property, not voting, is the fundamental basis of liberty, especially when so many people can vote. I would consider a freeholder of the Middle Ages whose property is immune to the power of the sovereign, to have more liberty than some homeless guy in the streets who can vote. Property tax is an absolute travesty because it means your property is never secure, you must have government printed cash constantly in order to be able to retain it, or else they can take it away.

I can the virtue that lines the idea - this is mine and no other shall infringe - but we got differing basis for it.

[The Parkus Empire]

Private property, not voting, is the fundamental basis of liberty, especially when so many people can vote. I would consider a freeholder of the Middle Ages whose property is immune to the power of the sovereign, to have more liberty than some homeless guy in the streets who can vote. Property tax is an absolute travesty because it means your property is never secure, you must have government printed cash constantly in order to be able to retain it, or else they can take it away.

I can the virtue that lines the idea - this is mine and no other shall infringe - but we got differing basis for it.

So you support property tax? I can't. My mother lost her land and home, which were completely paid off, and become homeless due to property taxes she couldn't afford in her state of poverty. Property taxes actively persecute any economy outside of capitalism. If you are a farmer living with your family, making very little in cash but otherwise self-sufficient--you do not have this right. In the early days of America, when property was widespread (every soldier who served in the Revolution was given one hundred acres), most of the economy was not in finance, but in home production and gifts and community.

[The Parkus Empire]

Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism

[The Parkus Empire]

Urged on by a powerful ideological and political movement, George W. Bush committed the United States to a quest for empire. American values and principles were universal, he asserted, and should guide the transformation of the world. Claes Ryn sees this drive for virtuous empire as the triumph of forces that in the last several decades acquired decisive influence in both the American parties, the foreign policy establishment, and the media.

Public intellectuals like William Bennett, Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, Michael Novak, Richard Perle, and Norman Podhoretz argued that the United States was an exceptional nation and should bring "democracy," "freedom," and "capitalism" to countries not yet enjoying them. Ryn finds the ideology of American empire strongly reminiscent of the French Jacobinism of the eighteenth century. He describes the drive for armed world hegemony as part of a larger ideological whole that both expresses and aggravates a crisis of democracy and, more generally, of American and Western civilization.

America the Virtuous sees the new Jacobinism as symptomatic of America shedding an older sense of the need for restraints on power. Checks provided by the US Constitution have been greatly weakened with the erosion of traditional moral and other culture.

[Tekeristan]

I can the virtue that lines the idea - this is mine and no other shall infringe - but we got differing basis for it.

So you support property tax? I can't. My mother lost her land and home, which were completely paid off, and become homeless due to property taxes she couldn't afford in her state of poverty. Property taxes actively persecute any economy outside of capitalism. If you are a farmer living with your family, making very little in cash but otherwise self-sufficient--you do not have this right. In the early days of America, when property was widespread (every soldier who served in the Revolution was given one hundred acres), most of the economy was not in finance, but in home production and gifts and community.

On the other hand, you had rampant land speculation back when. Today you tend to have land being held, not developed, or held empty (I.E companies holding build lots and houses to raise the price of other ones- lowering the supply). There are practices that jump about such. Sorry to her about your mother. :/ Property taxes are levied at the local level.

[The Parkus Empire]

On the other hand, you had rampant land speculation back when. Today you tend to have land being held, not developed, or held empty (I.E companies holding build lots and houses to raise the price of other ones- lowering the supply). There are practices that jump about such.

Land speculation was rampant back then because land was the major source of wealth. The ruling class were landed gentry or plantation owners (who relied on slaves precisely because everyone else tended to have land and had no interest in working someone else's). Now the major source of wealth is finance, not land, so it's another ballgame. And speculation is just as rampant, it's just moved to much more fungible objects.

Sorry to her about your mother. :/

God's will, but the point is that no one can own their own land anymore, our homes and land are no longer inviolable. People can be deprived of their property without due process.

Property taxes are levied at the local level.

As are poll taxes.