- 27 Oct 2011 15:16
#13820362
Typically speaking, the critique goes the other way around. Progressives will be presented in the light of advocating government intervention in the way of reverse racism and projecting utility preferences a la taxes and subsidies to homogenize people under the guise of civic nationalism.
However...
...there's a stranger predicament at hand.
Bouncing off the WW2 thread, let's say by some miracle that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan decided to let cooler heads prevail. Let's say that some how, over the long run, both countries decided to tolerate and embrace one another.
How could this possibly happen?
The only way I can see it is if somehow, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan actually embraced free labor, (semi)free markets, and possibly even migrant subsidies in a mutated form of multiculturalism.
The reason for this is you have to consider the possible forms of internal social hierarchy: populist militarism versus establishment elitism.
In militarist context, people would call each other pathetic and cowardly in pursuit of social hierarchy and political positioning. As such, the only personalities who actually make it to the top are those who would be willing to behave aggressively. Eventually, this aggression could not be internalized anymore against inferior subjects, and the strength of the other side would become too apparent and attractive to be ignored.
I call militarism populist because an aggression based culture would imply not only macroscopic preservation of the folk community, but also how those who rise up will constantly be aggressive out of fear of falling through the cracks back down to the bottom (where everyone indeed is willing to behave aggressively to rise to the top anyway).
In contrast, elitist context would apply eugenics not just externally, but internally as well. That is as time goes by, we would see a spreading of biodiversity within the German and Japanese ethnic groups themselves.
In turn, the elites of both races would realize that if evolution is indeed the primary objective, it would no longer be valuable to remain ethnically loyal. Instead, those who have established themselves on top of both societies would have to have the chance to intermingle. Likewise, the populace of both societies would have to prove themselves in competition with the other.
Establishments don't like warfare though (which really shouldn't be a problem here because hey, we're talking about a peace scenario, right?) or at least not total war. As a member of the establishment, you want to preserve your position, but wars put that position at risk in the way of having your very endeavors physically destroyed. The only reason you would want to conduct a war is because economic competition by itself is already a risk (for example, consider the British East India and South Africa Companies, and the Dutch West Indies and East Indies Companies), so war would tie your competitors into the same boat in daring them to risk their own endeavors.
Therefore, the German and Japanese establishments would have to pursue some sort of economic equality based policy. By equality, I mean the establishments would have to spread the wealth among themselves as well as give their own populaces a chance to intermingle. One, this allows both the establishments and populaces to come up with new genetically superior combinations, and two, it prevents both the establishments and populaces from becoming complacent.
As a libertarian, I really don't like this, but if the establishments DON'T do this, they'll be required to put up with the genetically inferior and gross masses which runs counterintuitive to the original ubermensch goal fascism set out to achieve.
However...
...there's a stranger predicament at hand.
Bouncing off the WW2 thread, let's say by some miracle that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan decided to let cooler heads prevail. Let's say that some how, over the long run, both countries decided to tolerate and embrace one another.
How could this possibly happen?
The only way I can see it is if somehow, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan actually embraced free labor, (semi)free markets, and possibly even migrant subsidies in a mutated form of multiculturalism.
The reason for this is you have to consider the possible forms of internal social hierarchy: populist militarism versus establishment elitism.
In militarist context, people would call each other pathetic and cowardly in pursuit of social hierarchy and political positioning. As such, the only personalities who actually make it to the top are those who would be willing to behave aggressively. Eventually, this aggression could not be internalized anymore against inferior subjects, and the strength of the other side would become too apparent and attractive to be ignored.
I call militarism populist because an aggression based culture would imply not only macroscopic preservation of the folk community, but also how those who rise up will constantly be aggressive out of fear of falling through the cracks back down to the bottom (where everyone indeed is willing to behave aggressively to rise to the top anyway).
In contrast, elitist context would apply eugenics not just externally, but internally as well. That is as time goes by, we would see a spreading of biodiversity within the German and Japanese ethnic groups themselves.
In turn, the elites of both races would realize that if evolution is indeed the primary objective, it would no longer be valuable to remain ethnically loyal. Instead, those who have established themselves on top of both societies would have to have the chance to intermingle. Likewise, the populace of both societies would have to prove themselves in competition with the other.
Establishments don't like warfare though (which really shouldn't be a problem here because hey, we're talking about a peace scenario, right?) or at least not total war. As a member of the establishment, you want to preserve your position, but wars put that position at risk in the way of having your very endeavors physically destroyed. The only reason you would want to conduct a war is because economic competition by itself is already a risk (for example, consider the British East India and South Africa Companies, and the Dutch West Indies and East Indies Companies), so war would tie your competitors into the same boat in daring them to risk their own endeavors.
Therefore, the German and Japanese establishments would have to pursue some sort of economic equality based policy. By equality, I mean the establishments would have to spread the wealth among themselves as well as give their own populaces a chance to intermingle. One, this allows both the establishments and populaces to come up with new genetically superior combinations, and two, it prevents both the establishments and populaces from becoming complacent.
As a libertarian, I really don't like this, but if the establishments DON'T do this, they'll be required to put up with the genetically inferior and gross masses which runs counterintuitive to the original ubermensch goal fascism set out to achieve.
______________
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.
- By Unthinking Majority
- By wat0n
- By Rugoz