@Deutschland Genetically Palestinian Arabs are pretty close to Israeli Jews. So do Kurds. Are some Kurds descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel?

WTF where did he say any of that?...

Edited 8/21/2016 02:11:57

Our first step is realizing the difference between a nation and a country.

In my opinion, ethnicity is a specific combination of DNA and RNA haplogroups which is unique amongst a group of people. I believe that most of the seperatists in spain, france, etc. should get independence

Break up the big nations. Make it a feudal, monarchist society. Then have Putin unite it all and rebuild the West.

GeneralPE, your ideas are ancient and non-viable. Feudalism cannot work at this point, any modern military would crush a feudal military, check Agincourt. The French feudal army at Agincourt was composed of primarily knights and men at arms, while the English had a much more modern paid army. Guess what, the French army was crushed, even though it outnumbered the English.

Then the French reorganized and created a more modern army and, lo and behold, defeated the English.

Also, Russia had a 10% population of Muslims. Shouldn't you hate Putin for that?

@chatul, I never said that ethnic and cultural groups correspond with only a single haplogroup. Every ethnic group is a combination of haplogroups and their cultures usually correspond with their ethnicities unless they have been influenced by other cultures or ethnicities. Most nationalists have patriotism for their country, ethnicity and ethnicity, whatever haplogroup combination their ethnicity may be

Monarchism is a problem.

I'd take monarchism over the world MGSB wants.


A nazi wants authoritarianism, what a surprise.

Also, Russia had a 10% population of Muslims. Shouldn't you hate Putin for that?

Kadyrov going to make the West great again wooo

Reading up on Agincourt, I believe the reason the French lost was because they were technologically behind England and underestimated the use of longbowmen and archers which the English alone had. It had nothing to do with the English armed force's lay out vs the French armed forces lay out which is what feudalism is about.

The English longbowmen were peasants and farmers, the French charge was led by noblemen disobeying orders, and this had happened multiple times before, with the antiquated French knights being defeated. Until the French reorganization that was the catalyst for French victory.

It has nothing to do with the modernization of the military... It simply calls for drafts when needed.

Feudalism calls for the nobles to provide military service and for peasants/serfs to be barred from military service. This produced the situation of the Hundred Years' War where the English with superior organization consistently defeated masses of noblemen. In a modern situation where the countries are comparable in population, there would also be a huge disparity in numbers, with the feudal state having much smaller numbers and the non-feudal state having a much larger military.

This would produce situations where states like Turkey, which would not use the noble system in this scenario, would absolutely dominate it's European neighbors in warfare, and states with intelligent leaders would fight endless wars with their nobles, attempting to consolidate their land.

My system: No armies needed, so no need to have a good way to raise armies
GPEs system: Inefficient army raising that will slowly give way to efficient army raising

total chaos would ensue

Why? Why would chaos ensue? My system would be implemented after about a hundred years of minarchy, transferring state-done things over to private companies, and ending with a cessation of taxation. There would be no sudden lack of policing if that's what you're concerned about. In general most services would be provided more efficiently. There would be no other state to invade Ancapistan; the system would be implemented globally.

Stop being an idiot, if private companies are in charge of giving services, they become the leaders of the region in which they supply those services.

Stop being an idiot, if they use the power they have in a high percent efficiency monopoly to the detriment of people buying their products, those people will stop buying their products and go to another company.

They will form new nations with CEO's at the head instead of a president, dictator, etc.

How exactly would they form a nation? There won't be mercenaries, weaponry wouldn't be kept for one group, and they don't have any sort of useful monopoly in this situation.

humans are meant to work in packs, not alone.

This is a irrelevant statement that has no bearing on this argument. Folk are not splitting up to small homes by themselves for years on end, they are not going to disband society, they're just going to get coercion out of society.

You reject basic science due to the fact that you belong to a religion which rejects basic human rights and any sort of Western beliefs, that's a fact.


Paugers stop talking to yourself, and nazism isn't a religion.

Or if these companies set up mercenary forces they can simply stop people from leaving their controlled area?

There are no mercenaries when this system starts; the companies would have to recruit from the population, equip them, and supply them. This is too large a task for companies, and would sink them in profits as other companies invest in ways to increase efficiency.

If there are no governing laws to stop them or any sort of police force to avoid these situations, what is to stop them from setting up arms monopolies?

There are police; private police. And monopolies would collapse as the incentive to lower prices would be too much, and one break in the cartel causes the entire cartel to falter.

Nice assertion, any arguments?

LOL !!
*roasted
xd
kek

Genghis

Allaah is GREATEST!

I think all peoples should be able to attempt independence for themselves.

However, they must understand the consequences of doing so. Scotland leaving the UK, for example, would cripple both nations. Neither could survive unless they united.
I think it's fine for you to feel ethnic and national pride. However, exaggeration of one's national achievements and devaluing the achievements of others leads to the ugliness of supremacy.

If the Basques want to be free, let them, but they must make sure they understand the consequences of becoming independent.

Perhaps having autonomy inside nations for ethnic groups can be a start, such as the Russian republics, autonomous regions for ethnic groups like Tatars, Alans, Chechens, Yakuts, etc.

Oh yeah, and 1416/squiggles, you're illogical, fundamentalist, and delusional. Must be the desert heat.

Only heyheuheism is logical and nondelusional. All else is false.