sovereignty and minorities

[Luis]

Forum members:

National sovereignty today does not embrace racial and ethnic minorities. There are four secular dimensions that one needs to consider: economic, political, social and cultural. Minorities do not have cultural sovereignty let alone the other three.

If minorities were offered cultural sovereignty in return for supporting the Presidential candidacy of Ron Paul and opposing the North American Union I am certain that many members of those minorities would respond favorably.

As a patriotic and knowledgeable American with limited financial resources I support Ron Paul.

I oppose the North American Union in principle but as a Spanish American I would more actively and enthusiastically do so if cultural sovereignty for Spanish Americans was in the offing.

I have seen nothing in the Ron Paul campaign literature that addresses the subject or the issue of cultural sovereignty for minorities.

Regards,
Luis

[norak]

No imaginary group gets sovereignty. Libertarianism treats us all as individuals.

[Mini-Me]

Luis, here's a quote that may be helpful:
“The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can’t tolerate a libertarian community.”
– David D. Boaz

The main idea behind Ron Paul's message is that he wants government to just leave us alone. In other words, he wants to reduce government to its original limited Constitutional role. The less the government interferes in your life (through taxes, ID cards, "licenses" for this, that, or the other thing), the freer you will be to live your life however you choose, and that includes forming economic, political, social, and cultural communities with whomever you choose to run however you choose. This is the advantage of decentralized government: Instead of having a one-size-fits-all monolithic national (or God forbid, one-world) government, decentralization allows like-minded people to come together and run their communities however they see fit, without an overbearing federal government to tell them what to do and how to do it. That's the beauty of freedom :)

However, you are correct that you will not find any Ron Paul literature directly addressing "minority groups." Under libertarian philosophy, the individual is the smallest minority, and viewing people collectively based on arbitrary similarities like ethnic heritage is an unfair generalization. The whole point is that it doesn't matter what it is that makes you different or makes you want to associate with people that are like you in some way (whether it be through sharing ethnic heritage or simply through sharing a love of cake and ice cream); rather, in a free society, people are free to associate with whomever they choose and live their lives however they choose (so long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others).

[Luis]

No imaginary group gets sovereignty. Libertarianism treats us all as individuals.

Spanish Americans are not an imaginary group. That you would think so shows how effective the ethnicide is. Most Spanish Americans are cryptos. That is how they deal with Black Legend propaganda and the Tree-of-Hate.

[Truth Warrior]

Think "individual" NOT "collective", please. :) Collectivist, group-think, herd-mentality is a big part of the problem that's created this whole mess.<IMHO>

[Luis]

The main idea behind Ron Paul's message is that he wants government to just leave us alone... .

I understand what you are saying and I understand Ron's message but libertarianism cannot operate in a vacuum. The context is the group known as "Americans". And are not Ron Paul's supporters a group? Humans are social beings. The most basic human social identity is ethnic identity.

Americans are a peculiar people in that respect. They tend to dismiss ethnicity as a factor and substitute race in its place if at all. I remember reading somewhere that Americans are the people most addicted to joining groups. In the absence of a strong sense of ethnic identity they seek multiple group identities, business and personal.

Yeah, its a paradox, the paradox of Manifest Destiny with its dark side, the culturally-ingrained and collectively-enforced policy of cultural destruction of ethno-racial minorities. See "Ending the Cultural Genocide" posted twice, once under "Hot Topics" in "General Politics and Other" and again in "General Politics and Other".

Thanks for your very thoughtful response.

[Luis]

Think "individual" NOT "collective", please. :) Collectivist, group-think, herd-mentality is a big part of the problem that's created this whole mess.<IMHO>

Group-think is the problem. :)

[FreeTraveler]

Group-think is the problem. :)

QFT! In a nation of free individuals, you're free to associate with whomever you like for whatever reason you like. If that happens to be a group from the same culture so that you can wall yourself off from the rest of society, it's allowed, but not really recommended. This whole subject is divisive, IMHO.

[norak]

I understand what you are saying and I understand Ron's message but libertarianism cannot operate in a vacuum. The context is the group known as "Americans". And are not Ron Paul's supporters a group? Humans are social beings. The most basic human social identity is ethnic identity.

No that's not true. My friend cares more about being a BMW owner than he does being Celtic.

His choice.

But whether or not you are Celtic, a BMW driver, a Lexus driver, a female, gay, middle-class, or rap listener, you're still an individual.

The New Republic may try to smear Ron Paul, but libertarianism is clear about this. Individuals matter, not groups.

Ron Paul said, "Libertarianism is the enemy of all racism"

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnPnAJeVuvw and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gT3I_W0kKM&NR=1

[Luis]

No that's not true. My friend cares more about being a BMW owner than he does being Celtic.

His choice.

But whether or not you are Celtic, a BMW driver, a Lexus driver, a female, gay, middle-class, or rap listener, you're still an individual.

The New Republic may try to smear Ron Paul, but libertarianism is clear about this. Individuals matter, not groups.

Ron Paul said, "Libertarianism is the enemy of all racism"

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnPnAJeVuvw and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gT3I_W0kKM&NR=1

"The most basic human social identity is ethnic identity." I will reword my thought.

The most basic social identity is one's human identity. And the broadest, most profound and meaningful human identity is one's ethnic (or ethno-racial) identity. It is true that ordinarily one does not spend much of one's time in that identity.

[Luis]

QFT! In a nation of free individuals, you're free to associate with whomever you like for whatever reason you like. If that happens to be a group from the same culture so that you can wall yourself off from the rest of society, it's allowed, but not really recommended. This whole subject is divisive, IMHO.

Ethnicide is always divisive. That is its purpose. The purpose in discussing ethnicide is to end the ethnicide and the divisiveness.

[norak]

"The most basic human social identity is ethnic identity." I will reword my thought.

The most basic social identity is one's human identity. And the broadest, most profound and meaningful human identity is one's ethnic (or ethno-racial) identity. It is true that ordinarily one does not spend much of one's time in that identity.

When you say ethnic identity is the most basic way an individual gains identity, you may only be speaking for yourself.

Some people focus heavily on ethnic groups. Libertarianism says that's their right. You can pretend to belong to any imaginary group you like just as football fans like to believe they belong to a team. Individuals have a need to feel like they are part of something greater than their own individual selves. I understand because a sports executive told me this group-pride emotion was what he exploited to make money.

However, you cannot claim that all people value ethnic identity. For example, I don't. Among my family, friends, and co-workers, just about no one cares about their "ethnic" group. My ancestors were European but 175,000 years ago they were African (since all humans are descendants of Africans) and many billions of years ago my ancestors were prokaryotic bacteria. Do I care about my bacterial origins? No.

Many will feel that membership to other groups, e.g. income groups, gender groups, professional groups, etc, are more important. You cannot just say that everyone is interested in "ethnic" groups. What is the precise definition of an ethnic group anyway?

[Luis]

What is the precise definition of an ethnic group anyway?

Members of the same ethnic group share a common ancestry. Jews, for example, claim descent from Abraham and Sarah. Arabs also claim descent from Abraham but from a different woman.

Sometimes there is group of common ancestors. And sometimes the common ancestor or ancestors may be more mythical than real but after generations of intermarriage between members of the same ethnic group there is in fact a common ancestry and certain prevailing physical characteristics.

I claim descent from a Spanish couple that came to New Mexico in the middle of the 17th century from Spain via New Spain (Mexico). I am a tenth generation descendant of this couple. This same couple is claimed as ancestors by hundreds of thousands of other people across northern Mexico and across New Mexico and the United States. It's all documented because the Catholic Church and the Spanish government were scrupulous in their record keeping.

I am half Spanish but grew up identifying with my Spanish ancestral, cultural and linguistic heritage. I count Spanish governors and captain generals and even high nobility among my numerous ancestry.

I am Spanish American by choice, if you will, but that choice has a context and a certain logic. My father was born in Europe of Austrian and Hungarian ancestry. Having first immigrated to Mexico he spoke fluent and almost impeccable Spanish. I grew up trilingual with German as my third language.
Arrow

[Crowish]

Group-think is the problem. :)

YES YES YES