Is there anything Spencer’s project of a white ethno-state has in common with Ocasio-Cortez’s ideas?
Otherwise, yes he’s trolling.
Is there anything Spencer’s project of a white ethno-state has in common with Ocasio-Cortez’s ideas?
Otherwise, yes he’s trolling.
“The system is failing poor folks in favour of the rich elite.”
It’s just that Spencer’s version has it specify “poor white folks,” and adds triple parentheses around the word “elite.”
Spencer, like most white nationalists, are populists. They generally advocate any position that white people across economic groups believe in - less war, universal healthcare, etc. without actually throwing their support behind politicians that believe that. They also advocate controversial positions to get attention - Spencer himself has literally said that no women should be listened to about policy, and that he doesn’t think most people should be allowed to vote if there should be democracy at all.
So he shares some policy positions, but it’s all spaghetti on the wall.
“When a dog bites a man, that is not news, because it happens so often. But if a man bites a dog, that is news.”
I absolutely think that that segment should happen, but, based on the “man bites dog” standard, people suffering because of American militarism isn’t “news.”
How the hell do they always show up on every thread?
Because unlike Discourse they don’t give communities the tools they need manage that bullshit.
Adam Smith also discusses the British internal passport system, which I think is comparable to the international restrictions today:
The very unequal price of labour which we frequently find in England, in places at no great distance from one another, is probably owing to the obstruction which the law of settlements gives to a poor man who would carry his industry from one parish to another without a certificate. A single man, indeed who is healthy and industrious, may sometimes reside by sufferance without one; but a man with a wife and family who should attempt to do so, would, in most parishes, be sure of being removed; and, if the single man should afterwards marry, he would generally be removed likewise. The scarcity of hands in one parish, therefore, cannot always be relieved by their superabundance in another, as it is constantly in Scotland, and I believe, in all other countries where there is no difficulty of settlement. In such countries, though wages may sometimes rise a little in the neighbourhood of a great town, or wherever else there is an extraordinary demand for labour, and sink gradually as the distance from such places increases, till they fall back to the common rate of the country; yet we never meet with those sudden and unaccountable differences in the wages of neighbouring places which we sometimes find in England, where it is often more difficult for a poor man to pass the artificial boundary of a parish, than an arm of the sea, or a ridge of high mountains, natural boundaries which sometimes separate very distinctly different rates of wages in other countries.
To remove a man who has committed no misdemeanour, from the parish where he chooses to reside, is an evident violation of natural liberty and justice. The common people of England, however, so jealous of their liberty, but like the common people of most other countries, never rightly understanding wherein it consists, have now, for more than a century together, suffered themselves to be exposed to this oppression without a remedy. Though men of reflection, too, have some times complained of the law of settlements as a public grievance; yet it has never been the object of any general popular clamour, such as that against general warrants, an abusive practice undoubtedly, but such a one as was not likely to occasion any general oppression. There is scarce a poor man in England, of forty years of age, I will venture to say, who has not, in some part of his life, felt himself most cruelly oppressed by this ill-contrived law of settlements.