Conservatives lost the culture war, Libertarians never fought one.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

So I used to lurk in these forums a while back when Ron Paul was still formally involved with politics. I also used to be of the opinion that every election was of utmost importance. Then I divorced myself from politics, focused on my career and personal life, and my life improved tremendously. Now, because of Cov-aids-19 and the rioting, I'm back to worrying about politics, maybe for good reason. Things seem to be devolving at a much more rapid pace than, let's say, 10 years ago.

I'm not so much the anarcho capitalist I used to be. Something bothers me. Did we all miss the bus when so many of us (myself included) focused so much on policy and philosophy that culture became an afterthought? After all, cultural Marxists were never really THAT mainstream until recent years, but they have slowly and gradually taken over all the important institutions and now they have several seats in congress.

It's funny. We free marketers understand time preference very well when it comes to economics, but the Marxists played the long game very well when it came to culture. And they have been consistently winning for some time now. We suck. Libertarians are the most reasonable, principled, and USELESS people ever.

My views have changed. This is just my opinion and you can disagree with me. I'd be happy to hear what everyone has to say. Here it is: culture is more important than policy and will prevail over politics every time.

Let's ask a simple question. Did America become a great nation because of the general character of the people or because of the government created by a few men? It's probably both, but which is more important? This is kind of a chicken and egg question too.

Also, would a libertarian government even survive any significant amount of time in a BLM type culture? I love the simple saying, "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." Same thing with the situation that we find ourselves in today. Socialism/Marxism is here today not because some politicians are pushing for it, but because generally we as a people are ready for it.

Having said all this, I think the best we can hope for is a peaceful dissolution of the nation.

[The Northbreather]

Libertarianism is essentially anti-racist as it is fundamentally anti-collectivism. The current decent back into tribalism is as old as time. These people dwell at the surface of politics. It takes time for people to understand deeper philosophy such as libertarianisms. It also helps to become older and more experienced. Often with age, people acquire property, this is when they learn, when they actually have property to protect.

The trend to indoctrinate and collectivize people from a young age has intensified greatly. Takes longer to de-program I would guess..

[tod evans]

I have only noticed cultural differences on line and even those seem confined to the cities where groups of people want to push their agenda, whatever said agenda might be.

People weren't built to stack up on top of each other.

Even rodents will battle if their population becomes to dense.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

I have only noticed cultural differences on line and even those seem confined to the cities where groups of people want to push their agenda

You may be right. I do live in a big city. So maybe I don't have my finger on the pulse in smaller or rural towns. Again, another reason for local politics -- I have no idea what you country folks are thinking. I only know concrete jungles.

[The Northbreather]

Also,

Welcome!

[jkr]

You become what you fight

[ResponsibleIdiot]

You become what you fight

Unless you fight what you become.

I was just thinking. I guess the hippies used to say, "Don't trust anybody over 30." The saying now should be "Don't trust anybody under 30." Young people amaze me with how big pussies they are nowadays, which is good for the people in charge. Bring back toxic masculinity, previously known as masculinity.

[pcosmar]

I have only noticed cultural differences on line and even those seem confined to the cities where groups of people want to push their agenda, whatever said agenda might be.

People weren't built to stack up on top of each other.

Even rodents will battle if their population becomes to dense.

I remember that lesson from High School Psychology... and seen it in action in the world.

[Anti Federalist]

So I used to lurk in these forums a while back when Ron Paul was still formally involved with politics. I also used to be of the opinion that every election was of utmost importance. Then I divorced myself from politics, focused on my career and personal life, and my life improved tremendously. Now, because of Cov-aids-19 and the rioting, I'm back to worrying about politics, maybe for good reason. Things seem to be devolving at a much more rapid pace than, let's say, 10 years ago.

I'm not so much the anarcho capitalist I used to be. Something bothers me. Did we all miss the bus when so many of us (myself included) focused so much on policy and philosophy that culture became an afterthought? After all, cultural Marxists were never really THAT mainstream until recent years, but they have slowly and gradually taken over all the important institutions and now they have several seats in congress.

It's funny. We free marketers understand time preference very well when it comes to economics, but the Marxists played the long game very well when it came to culture. And they have been consistently winning for some time now. We suck. Libertarians are the most reasonable, principled, and USELESS people ever.

My views have changed. This is just my opinion and you can disagree with me. I'd be happy to hear what everyone has to say. Here it is: culture is more important than policy and will prevail over politics every time.

Let's ask a simple question. Did America become a great nation because of the general character of the people or because of the government created by a few men? It's probably both, but which is more important? This is kind of a chicken and egg question too.

Also, would a libertarian government even survive any significant amount of time in a BLM type culture? I love the simple saying, "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." Same thing with the situation that we find ourselves in today. Socialism/Marxism is here today not because some politicians are pushing for it, but because generally we as a people are ready for it.

Having said all this, I think the best we can hope for is a peaceful dissolution of the nation.

Hello and welcome.

Lots to "unpack" here...let me just say this: I was among the "anti culture warrior" crowd. I believed Thomas Jefferson to be correct when he said a man's religion (or sexual orientation or ethnic group or what have you) was of no concern to him, because it neither "picked his pockets or broke his bones".

I've come to realize he was very wrong, it most certainly does both, when a philosophy, religion, ethnic group or nationality becomes the predominant group at the expense of the previous group, as we are seeing right now in the Great Replacement.

Even more when those groups harbor deep seated and unlimited hatred for the former.

The New has no interest whatsoever in peacefully co-existing with the Old.

In fact, as dictated by Marx and Mao both, the Old must be utterly obliterated and purged from society completely.

And that is who are ascendant now...Marxists and Maoists and Bolsheviks and Jacobins.

Freedom is less popular now, than it has even been in my adult lifetime.

I concur also with your final thought: dissolution and secession is the only way forward and the only to avoid a bloody and disastrous conflict.

[jmdrake]

So I used to lurk in these forums a while back when Ron Paul was still formally involved with politics. I also used to be of the opinion that every election was of utmost importance. Then I divorced myself from politics, focused on my career and personal life, and my life improved tremendously. Now, because of Cov-aids-19 and the rioting, I'm back to worrying about politics, maybe for good reason. Things seem to be devolving at a much more rapid pace than, let's say, 10 years ago.

I am happy for your success. My career and personal life still suck. You made the right decision.

I'm not so much the anarcho capitalist I used to be. Something bothers me. Did we all miss the bus when so many of us (myself included) focused so much on policy and philosophy that culture became an afterthought? After all, cultural Marxists were never really THAT mainstream until recent years, but they have slowly and gradually taken over all the important institutions and now they have several seats in congress.

We we have a few seats too so.... Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, Justin Amash, and Mike Lee seems pretty good. But here's where we failed. We lost the Internet edge. In fact I'd say we lost our "edge" period. I think there was this idea that we had to become "respectable" to have influence in the GOP. The Marxists have no need to be "respectable." Without the edge it's hard to rally people to do a money bomb or a sign bomb or "spam" (not really) internet polls or any of the other stuff we used to be able to do. When Marxists on Tik-Tok spam requested Trump rally tickets I thought "That sounds like the kind of stunt we used to be able to pull off."

It's funny. We free marketers understand time preference very well when it comes to economics, but the Marxists played the long game very well when it came to culture. And they have been consistently winning for some time now. We suck. Libertarians are the most reasonable, principled, and USELESS people ever.

My left wing son, who is dedicated to voting for Joe Biden, actually likes Jo Jorgensen. Freedom can indeed be popular. But Jo isn't popular here because she is *gasp* anti racist. Ron Paul called out systemic racism in 2008 (and before and after) when he talked about racism in the drug war and in capital punishment. The way for libertarians, IMO, is to show how it addresses cultural ills.

My views have changed. This is just my opinion and you can disagree with me. I'd be happy to hear what everyone has to say. Here it is: culture is more important than policy and will prevail over politics every time.

Okay. But what is the culture we're trying to defend? Conservatives can say Christianity. Liberals can say humanism. Is limited government a "cultural" issue? Or can it be used to address cultural issues? Not arguing against you. Just thinking outloud.

Let's ask a simple question. Did America become a great nation because of the general character of the people or because of the government created by a few men? It's probably both, but which is more important? This is kind of a chicken and egg question too.

God's providence and/or luck.

Also, would a libertarian government even survive any significant amount of time in a BLM type culture? I love the simple saying, "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." Same thing with the situation that we find ourselves in today. Socialism/Marxism is here today not because some politicians are pushing for it, but because generally we as a people are ready for it.

Many people caught up in the BLM "movement" don't necessarily support BLM the organization. Some genuinely want to address police brutality. And some have actually bought the Marxist Kool-Aid. What we have now is a failure of messaging. Look at what Trump and Pence said in the recent debates about race and police brutality. Instead of actually using their 2 minutes to talk about the issues, they spent about 30 seconds (or less) then spent the rest of their time talking about riots and law and order. That's not how you win a culture war. Trump and Pence actually have a better record on substantive issues of criminal justice reform, police reform, redressing past discrimination (HBCU money and farm bill money as examples) than Biden/Harris, but you wouldn't know that listening to their debates. Had Ron Paul or Jo Jorgensen been on stage they would have talked about ending no knock raids, police militarization and the war on drugs. Ron could have also talked about how government policies (like farm aid) naturally create inequities and thus government should be shrunk. But instead we have Trump spending like a drunken sailor. When people like Ice Cube say "They just pulled 3 trillion out they ass and gave it to they friends", that's what he's talking about. When libertarians ally themselves with non-libertarian, phony conservatives, you get what we got.

Having said all this, I think the best we can hope for is a peaceful dissolution of the nation.

There is no such thing as a peaceful dissolution of a nation.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

I am happy for your success. My career and personal life still suck. You made the right decision.



We we have a few seats too so.... Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, Justin Amash, and Mike Lee seems pretty good. But here's where we failed. We lost the Internet edge. In fact I'd say we lost our "edge" period. I think there was this idea that we had to become "respectable" to have influence in the GOP. The Marxists have no need to be "respectable." Without the edge it's hard to rally people to do a money bomb or a sign bomb or "spam" (not really) internet polls or any of the other stuff we used to be able to do. When Marxists on Tik-Tok spam requested Trump rally tickets I thought "That sounds like the kind of stunt we used to be able to pull off."



My left wing son, who is dedicated to voting for Joe Biden, actually likes Jo Jorgensen. Freedom can indeed be popular. But Jo isn't popular here because she is *gasp* anti racist. Ron Paul called out systemic racism in 2008 (and before and after) when he talked about racism in the drug war and in capital punishment. The way for libertarians, IMO, is to show how it addresses cultural ills.



Okay. But what is the culture we're trying to defend? Conservatives can say Christianity. Liberals can say humanism. Is limited government a "cultural" issue? Or can it be used to address cultural issues? Not arguing against you. Just thinking outloud.



God's providence and/or luck.




Many people caught up in the BLM "movement" don't necessarily support BLM the organization. Some genuinely want to address police brutality. And some have actually bought the Marxist Kool-Aid. What we have now is a failure of messaging. Look at what Trump and Pence said in the recent debates about race and police brutality. Instead of actually using their 2 minutes to talk about the issues, they spent about 30 seconds (or less) then spent the rest of their time talking about riots and law and order. That's not how you win a culture war. Trump and Pence actually have a better record on substantive issues of criminal justice reform, police reform, redressing past discrimination (HBCU money and farm bill money as examples) than Biden/Harris, but you wouldn't know that listening to their debates. Had Ron Paul or Jo Jorgensen been on stage they would have talked about ending no knock raids, police militarization and the war on drugs. Ron could have also talked about how government policies (like farm aid) naturally create inequities and thus government should be shrunk. But instead we have Trump spending like a drunken sailor. When people like Ice Cube say "They just pulled 3 trillion out they ass and gave it to they friends", that's what he's talking about. When libertarians ally themselves with non-libertarian, phony conservatives, you get what we got.



There is no such thing as a peaceful dissolution of a nation.

I see what you're saying but I've been hearing that for the last 12 years. Jo Jorgensen isn't unpopular because she's anti racist. She's unpopular because:

1. She has no balls (figuratively). She won't call out bad behavior and instead latches onto all this racial nonsense that everyone is ALREADY SAYING. Problems in different racial groups comes down primarily to culture, which is my point. Culture matters.

2. She continually gives the impression that she's very much lefty. Not lefty enough for the left, which is why they'll ignore her. And too lefty for the right, which is why they will never vote for her.

[acptulsa]

I see what you're saying but I've been hearing that for the last 12 years. Jo Jorgensen isn't unpopular because she's anti racist. She's unpopular because:

1. She has no balls (figuratively). She won't call out bad behavior and instead latches onto all this racial nonsense that everyone is ALREADY SAYING. Problems in different racial groups comes down primarily to culture, which is my point. Culture matters.

2. She continually gives the impression that she's very much lefty. Not lefty enough for the left, which is why they'll ignore her. And too lefty for the right, which is why they will never vote for her.

The fact that libertarians embrace the best rhetoric from each major party, and reject the worst foolishness from each major party, is exactly what sold me back in the day. Back when the major parties occasionally did back up their rhetoric with action, that would have made two dozen libertarians in Congress all powerful and uniquely effective.

As for what passes for "culture" these days, "culture" has come to describe the movement of the herd, and the sheep dogs don't move the herd our way because if they do, the sheep ranchers won't feed them.

We publicized policy because it was what we had in common, and because it was what set us apart, what made us wise and prescient. We could gain attention by rejecting the pro-government propaganda. What "cultural" thing could we have used, what fad could we have kicked off, to do better?

That is the relationship between the masters, the media, the masses and us. There is nothing to be done about it at this late date but to abandon the ship of fools and build an ark.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

Hello and welcome.

Lots to "unpack" here...let me just say this: I was among the "anti culture warrior" crowd. I believed Thomas Jefferson to be correct when he said a man's religion (or sexual orientation or ethnic group or what have you) was of no concern to him, because it neither "picked his pockets or broke his bones".

I've come to realize he was very wrong, it most certainly does both, when a philosophy, religion, ethnic group or nationality becomes the predominant group at the expense of the previous group, as we are seeing right now in the Great Replacement.

Even more when those groups harbor deep seated and unlimited hatred for the former.

The New has no interest whatsoever in peacefully co-existing with the Old.

In fact, as dictated by Marx and Mao both, the Old must be utterly obliterated and purged from society completely.

And that is who are ascendant now...Marxists and Maoists and Bolsheviks and Jacobins.

Freedom is less popular now, than it has even been in my adult lifetime.

I concur also with your final thought: dissolution and secession is the only way forward and the only to avoid a bloody and disastrous conflict.

I like you already.

The whole culture thing changed my mind on immigration as well. Democracy and open immigration simply won't work. I don't think open immigration would work in an an-cap/libertarian society either. Why would you let people in who simply don't want to assimilate to a civilized society? You can say that if they get out of line, a private policing system can take care of that. But why even go through the trouble?

I have read enough about the "right wing" populist movements in Europe to know that they make a really good point about immigration. Immigration needs to be extremely selective (people will call it racist) and/or curtailed. A million Japanese immigrants can work within our framework as soon as they set foot in the country, but a million Somalian immigrants may probably never fully assimilate. Cultures are different. I would even go as far as saying that most non western cultures would not work in our country. And I'm not even white, but I just call things out as I see them.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

The fact that libertarians embrace the best rhetoric from each major party, and reject the worst foolishness from each major party, is exactly what sold me back in the day.

Think about what you said. Jo Jorgensen embraces all the woke nonsense which is not only the worst the left has to offer, but pretty much the worst $#@! I've ever encountered. She tainted the libertarian party. She places libertarian policies inside their narrative.

[oyarde]

the national libertarian scene is currently another form of leftism thats more hidden that the rabid dem communism that is the dem establishment. foolish too , because they will get no votes from leftists and will lose conservative votes , wont be talked about in five years , by then theyll be with the greens or something

[oyarde]

yes , conservatives lost the culture war to the vast population centers of huge cities and the overpopulated east and west coast. save yourself and forget about them .

[r3volution 3.0]

Culture has very little effect on (the important part of) policy in the long run. Culture will determine the legality of abortion, for instance, but not how much the state spends, regulates, or prints; whether people are afforded due process; or how it conducts foreign policy. As for libertarians missing out on the culture war, first, that's not really true anymore; most self-ascribed libertarians have enthusiastically joined team red. Second, to the extent that it's still true, or was true, that makes perfectly good sense, considering that libertarianism is not a cultural phenomenon. A libertarian qua libertarian has no opinion on cultural issues. Nonetheless, should have cloaked our ideology in cultural terms, to appeal to people who care deeply about culture, and joined the fray? No, I don't think so. There are only two sides in the culture war and both are implacably hostile to libertarianism. If you want to be an appendage of the right-socialists or the left-socialists, join the culture war. If not, don't.

[jmdrake]

I see what you're saying but I've been hearing that for the last 12 years. Jo Jorgensen isn't unpopular because she's anti racist. She's unpopular because:

1. She has no balls (figuratively). She won't call out bad behavior and instead latches onto all this racial nonsense that everyone is ALREADY SAYING. Problems in different racial groups comes down primarily to culture, which is my point. Culture matters.

2. She continually gives the impression that she's very much lefty. Not lefty enough for the left, which is why they'll ignore her. And too lefty for the right, which is why they will never vote for her.

Hmmmm....I listened to the Trump / Biden debate and I heard her say a lot of things on race and police brutality that neither of them said. I heard her say ban no knock raids, end the war on drugs, and de-militarize the police. All constitutionalist / libertarian / Ron Paulesque position. When I pose those positions to BLM supporters the 100% agree with that. You asked the question "would a libertarian government even survive any significant amount of time in a BLM type culture." The answer to that question is absolutely yes if it actually followed "libertarian culture" rather than "problems in racial groups come down to culture" argument you're making. Problems in racial groups come down to government. It's government that codified slavery as legal, then codified Jim Crow as legal once slavery was over. It's government that takes from all and the divies the bounty up to its cronies. Whenever you have a situation like that, ethnic unrest is likely. Go all the way back to the Bible and the book of Acts. The early church was basically voluntary socialist. Everybody put their money into the church and the church shared "as each had need." Problem was the Jewish widows got a bigger share than the Greek widows. What did the church do in response? They appointed deacons, some of them Greek (Stephen and Phillip), to make sure everything got handed out fairly. Now multiply that problem by a factor of a thousand, make the taking of money by force instead of voluntary, and you have a recipe for problems eventually regardless of culture. And race really isn't the biggest cultural divide. It seems that way right now because 2020 is a crazy year. But in a year or two (especially if Biden wins) it will all be about LBGTQABCDEFG+.

[Swordsmyth]

Culture has very little effect on (the important part of) policy in the long run. Culture will determine the legality of abortion, for instance, but not how much the state spends, regulates, or prints; whether people are afforded due process; or how it conducts foreign policy. As for libertarians missing out on the culture war, first, that's not really true anymore; most self-ascribed libertarians have enthusiastically joined team red. Second, to the extent that it's still true, or was true, that makes perfectly good sense, considering that libertarianism is not a cultural phenomenon. A libertarian qua libertarian has no opinion on cultural issues. Nonetheless, should have cloaked our ideology in cultural terms, to appeal to people who care deeply about culture, and joined the fray? No, I don't think so. There are only two sides in the culture war and both are implacably hostile to libertarianism. If you want to be an appendage of the right-socialists or the left-socialists, join the culture war. If not, don't.

Bunk.
Culture affects everything, directly and indirectly.

[oyarde]

Bunk.
Culture affects everything, directly and indirectly.

the thing is it does effect but it is hard for people to define and see. it is difficult to summarize .

[oyarde]

the progressives have been $#@!ing $#@! up for 11 decades and there is a moral decline that goes with it

[Swordsmyth]

the progressives have been $#@!ing $#@! up for 11 decades and there is a moral decline that goes with it

The left knows that all vices are connected, libertarians fail to realize that and not only ignore but embrace vices and are then surprised when communism advances.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

The left knows that all vices are connected, libertarians fail to realize that and not only ignore but embrace vices and are then surprised when communism advances.

I agree. Not that I'm a Saint, and I do indulge in vices. But what about the days when people kept that to themselves and did not broadcast vices as if they were virtues? That's culture.

[Swordsmyth]

I agree. Not that I'm a Saint, and I do indulge in vices. But what about the days when people kept that to themselves and did not broadcast vices as if they were virtues? That's culture.

You can be saved politically and theologically if you have failings as long as you acknowledge the truth about what is ideal and should be striven for but you are doomed if you choose to lie to yourself about what is good and what is bad.

[otherone]

Culture has very little effect on (the important part of) policy in the long run. Culture will determine the legality of abortion, for instance, but not how much the state spends, regulates, or prints; whether people are afforded due process; or how it conducts foreign policy. As for libertarians missing out on the culture war, first, that's not really true anymore; most self-ascribed libertarians have enthusiastically joined team red. Second, to the extent that it's still true, or was true, that makes perfectly good sense, considering that libertarianism is not a cultural phenomenon. A libertarian qua libertarian has no opinion on cultural issues. Nonetheless, should have cloaked our ideology in cultural terms, to appeal to people who care deeply about culture, and joined the fray? No, I don't think so. There are only two sides in the culture war and both are implacably hostile to libertarianism. If you want to be an appendage of the right-socialists or the left-socialists, join the culture war. If not, don't.

This.

Culture in this country has been a tool of oligarchs to motivate the masses. The media is the salesman. That the focus of the culture has changed is not relevant. The Libertarians are non-starters because ideology will always trump culture.

[Anti Federalist]

There is no such thing as a peaceful dissolution of a nation.

An empire or nation?

Certainly there are many instances of empires dissolving without massive warfare and bloodshed.

[jmdrake]

An empire or nation?

Certainly there are many instances of empires dissolving without massive warfare and bloodshed.

Empires are made up of many independent nations, far flung, where the people in the independent nations have strong internal unit cohesion and weak external cohesion. That does not describe the 50 states. Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands...yeah that's part of the U.S. empire and could be gone without conflict or even being missed for that matter.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

This.

Culture in this country has been a tool of oligarchs to motivate the masses. The media is the salesman. That the focus of the culture has changed is not relevant. The Libertarians are non-starters because ideology will always trump culture.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/culture

The arts, beliefs, customs, institutions, and other products of human work and thought considered as a unit, especially with regard to a particular time or social group.

If the kids in this country are not taught what would be considered good, which can include family, work ethic, frugality, civility, and working towards a future, then we lose. If we don't have this, there's no point in moving forward. Communism/Socialism/Marxism is not as likely to take hold when these cultural values are held in high regard.

[jmdrake]

I like you already.

The whole culture thing changed my mind on immigration as well. Democracy and open immigration simply won't work. I don't think open immigration would work in an an-cap/libertarian society either. Why would you let people in who simply don't want to assimilate to a civilized society? You can say that if they get out of line, a private policing system can take care of that. But why even go through the trouble?

I have read enough about the "right wing" populist movements in Europe to know that they make a really good point about immigration. Immigration needs to be extremely selective (people will call it racist) and/or curtailed. A million Japanese immigrants can work within our framework as soon as they set foot in the country, but a million Somalian immigrants may probably never fully assimilate. Cultures are different. I would even go as far as saying that most non western cultures would not work in our country. And I'm not even white, but I just call things out as I see them.

I agree. Not that I'm a Saint, and I do indulge in vices. But what about the days when people kept that to themselves and did not broadcast vices as if they were virtues? That's culture.

It's hard to fight a culture war when you haven't defined the cultural values you are defending. Would you want these people immigrating to the U.S.? They are from Canada and mostly white.



And ANTIFA isn't made up mostly of Somalia refugies. But it has a lot of people in it from the above video.

The latest thread about the Supreme Court nominee who's being attacked for using the phrase "sexual preference" shows me where the cultural battle lines are. Freedom of speech and ideas. The left can make WAP a meme that everybody is using while simultaneously word shaming a phrase that until just recently businesses who are LGBTQABC friendly used to show they didn't discrimination. How many times have you read "We don't discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, or sexual preference."

Death has also become a cultural issue. We went from relatives having to sue to get hospitals to take their loved ones off life support to having to sue, and sometimes lose, to keep their relatives on life support. I posted about that here....and nobody even responded.

So what are the cultural issues that are important to you?

Edit: I see you answered the question in a subsequent post.

[Todd]

Hello and welcome.

Lots to "unpack" here...let me just say this: I was among the "anti culture warrior" crowd. I believed Thomas Jefferson to be correct when he said a man's religion (or sexual orientation or ethnic group or what have you) was of no concern to him, because it neither "picked his pockets or broke his bones".

I've come to realize he was very wrong, it most certainly does both, when a philosophy, religion, ethnic group or nationality becomes the predominant group at the expense of the previous group, as we are seeing right now in the Great Replacement.

Even more when those groups harbor deep seated and unlimited hatred for the former.

The New has no interest whatsoever in peacefully co-existing with the Old.

In fact, as dictated by Marx and Mao both, the Old must be utterly obliterated and purged from society completely.

And that is who are ascendant now...Marxists and Maoists and Bolsheviks and Jacobins.

Freedom is less popular now, than it has even been in my adult lifetime.

I concur also with your final thought: dissolution and secession is the only way forward and the only to avoid a bloody and disastrous conflict.

The problem is that the whole rotten system allows a predominant group to take at the expense of another. That still speaks to having every aspect of life politicized by government control. I don't see how this is rectified when the majority of society want polticization (sp) of everything.