Not sure if it’s because he’s a libertarian or if it’s because he’s Jewish (a bit of both, I presume), but the “just move to another patch” thing really strikes me as the weakest link in it all. I don’t like that this whole system is predicated on people moving to and fro wherever they like on a whim.
People should have a connection with their land, and they should live and die there, if they can. It’s one thing to settle an empty frontier for your home country, it’s another to move back and forth all throughout an existing country. My family has lived in my home state for as long as white people have been in this state, and it troubles me to see native Oklahomans displaced not only by foreign immigrants, but by rootless Texans and other people from all across the country who only came here for a job.
This patchwork thing is an interesting system, but it doesn’t seem very good at making a country. Between the trampling around the countryside and the generally over-optimistic assumptions about human nature, I don’t rate it very highly, even if Yarvin is a creative thinker. I think, for all the things he’s trying to do with his system, a plain monarchy would do most of them anyway and still be more well-rounded.
>What happens if one corporation just starts buying everyone else up? Yarvin provides a weak way around this, basically stipulating in the charter of a patch that it won’t engage in this behavior…
i imagine it could be like the medieval italian city states that were held in some sort of power balance until the french intervened
I was with the guy until he said that instead of a beautiful aryan monarchy, we should just let amazon govern everything. Fuck no! What's even the point of politics if castles and regalia aren't being used. Seriously, regalia isn't just peak fashion, it's the only managerial outfit that's acceptable. It's against human nature to avoid precious metals, and I blame the great destruction of aesthetics to whatever faggot invented the suit & tie. There should be committees to force every head of state to dress like they're being coronated and every office to look like the wario world cover art (also get rid of desks, a throne is all that is needed). And I'm only half joking!!!
If your ideology lacks heraldry, regalia, castles & thrones then you're the political equivalent of someone who supports the flat corporate artstyle & the existence of minimalism. The presidential suit must DIE!!!!
Not sure if it’s because he’s a libertarian or if it’s because he’s Jewish (a bit of both, I presume), but the “just move to another patch” thing really strikes me as the weakest link in it all. I don’t like that this whole system is predicated on people moving to and fro wherever they like on a whim.
People should have a connection with their land, and they should live and die there, if they can. It’s one thing to settle an empty frontier for your home country, it’s another to move back and forth all throughout an existing country. My family has lived in my home state for as long as white people have been in this state, and it troubles me to see native Oklahomans displaced not only by foreign immigrants, but by rootless Texans and other people from all across the country who only came here for a job.
This patchwork thing is an interesting system, but it doesn’t seem very good at making a country. Between the trampling around the countryside and the generally over-optimistic assumptions about human nature, I don’t rate it very highly, even if Yarvin is a creative thinker. I think, for all the things he’s trying to do with his system, a plain monarchy would do most of them anyway and still be more well-rounded.
>What happens if one corporation just starts buying everyone else up? Yarvin provides a weak way around this, basically stipulating in the charter of a patch that it won’t engage in this behavior…
i imagine it could be like the medieval italian city states that were held in some sort of power balance until the french intervened
No more boob breaks??? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I was with the guy until he said that instead of a beautiful aryan monarchy, we should just let amazon govern everything. Fuck no! What's even the point of politics if castles and regalia aren't being used. Seriously, regalia isn't just peak fashion, it's the only managerial outfit that's acceptable. It's against human nature to avoid precious metals, and I blame the great destruction of aesthetics to whatever faggot invented the suit & tie. There should be committees to force every head of state to dress like they're being coronated and every office to look like the wario world cover art (also get rid of desks, a throne is all that is needed). And I'm only half joking!!!
If your ideology lacks heraldry, regalia, castles & thrones then you're the political equivalent of someone who supports the flat corporate artstyle & the existence of minimalism. The presidential suit must DIE!!!!
This is really quite stupid
My criticism or the book?