Gay men disgusted by lesbian sex

[Al B. Sure!]

It really doesn't matter if countries with everyone of the same ethnicity got along and countries that were more diverse had internal strife....

the point is that all that would mean is that people are ****ing stupid and want to fight over differences. The point is that Heraclitus is taking what has happened for what OUGHT to happen. There is absolutely no reason why humans should fight over ethnic differences. Just because they have doesn't mean it's the way humans ought to behave.

Hera always wants humans to be better but he insists on them always being tribal, racist *******s.

[Heraclitus]

But people of different ethnicites do have reasons to fight over goverment policy for starters, because there exist real differences in values, cultures and genes. The ideal policy or environment (even in absence of direct interaction with other ethnicites, so I'm not nesecarily talking about exploitation here) for each ethnicity differs!

The best possible society for the average Rwandan to live under is not the best society for a Singapore Chinese to live in! And this is ignoring differences in how they even value "best" beyond just material well being and good health. There are real conflicts of interests, so there must be real conflicts be they cultural, economic or violent. The only way to supress them is to empower a rootless elite united behind a universalist ideology to rule over the empire.

[giblets]

That's no different from the fact that since different individuals have different values and preferences, the ideal policies for each individual is different. I think the answer is to look for a system that does a fairly good job of letting everyone pursue their particular interests, not to attempt to build a society of clones.

[Heraclitus]

I'm not arguing to build a society of clones. I'm arguing for a pluarlity of volunatrily formed societes coupled with a guarnateed right to leave a particualr society (but not right to enter any society one pleases without permission of people in that society).

[giblets]

I don't see how that's any different from the status quo.

[Heraclitus]

No obligations towards other societies beyond non-interference.

[Heraclitus]

Hera always wants humans to be better but he insists on them always being tribal, racist *******s.

What is racist about having a immigration policy that serves existing citizens first? What is racist about letting people to associate with whomever they like in private life?

[Al B. Sure!]

Quit the act. We all know that you're using code-words

[giblets]

No obligations towards other societies beyond non-interference.

?

[Heraclitus]

Quit the act. We all know that you're using code-words

Then please translate them! I sure don't realize I'm using them.

[Heraclitus]

I don't see how that's any different from the status quo.

You don't seem to see that under my formulation there are no international barriers in place to form purley monoethnic societes if the people involved choose to do so. Also secession is not frowned upon as long as enough people decide for it in a democratic manner.

[giblets]

Secession? Hell no, if people don't like it here they can leave.

[Kidlicious]

No, I don't believe it.

You are elevating the art of seeking offence to a new level.

You're being a bit thick headed. He was trying to help you not offend people.

[Kidlicious]

The rule of some ethnicites over others and keeping diverse people together by censorship and foce, for buisness and goverment interests candied over by a obligatory universalist state sponsored ideology seems as good a definiton of empire as any other.

You really need to shut up with this crap.

[Heraclitus]

That's no different from the fact that since different individuals have different values and preferences, the ideal policies for each individual is different. I think the answer is to look for a system that does a fairly good job of letting everyone pursue their particular interests, not to attempt to build a society of clones.

Yes but how does society deal with this? First off we allow the state a monopoly on violence to suppress violence among individuals. Secondly with the exception of all but the radical left, we accept that individuals have different drives, abilities and desires. We all agree that fundamentally we deserve legal equality and on the margins we even redistribute wealth a bit. However we accept massive material inequality because we know the market just doesn't need everybody equally and sure as hell can't pay everbody equally for their different services and products. Also some people sit in the oval office, others clean streets and we are fundamentally ok with that.

Yet any statistical differences that show up among ethnic groups, must be because of evil rassism or past injustice deserving reparations! I reject this pseudo Stalinist forced equality that squashes individual achievement indirectly because of some statistical pattern observed among millions.

I also reject a empire where some ethnic groups rule and eventually out compete others.

I'm a comunitarian anarchist. I don't think we need a society to manage different ethnic groups, like we need a society to manage different people to work together. What we need are many different societies. I propose that global voluntary Balkanisation is achievable and desirable since it will allow more freedom and the ability for humanity to experiment with many different kinds of laws, evolutionary strategies, economic policies and values without it being a simple Darwinian race kept at bay by unlimited sovereignty of a territory whose preservation is the only admissible and legal goal of any transcontinental or even global bodies beyond trade.