Libertarianism vs Sovereigntarianism

(pastoralism/diasporia/parasitism vs territorialism/production)

The difference between my anglo sovereigntarianism and ashkenazi libertarianism(libertinism) is that the militia and the judiciary rule under the natural law of reciprocity, property in toto, universal standing, and universal application – with a monarchy as a judge of last resort (headman). And that one constructs the market for the construction of commons (government) in whatever way is necessary for competitive persistence(survival, and flourishing) of the polity (militia). This means monarchy, republic, direct democracy, as conditions (war, growth, windfalls) warrant. This organization both adapts to all circumstances and suppresses all parasitism of all forms – providing competitive survivability; whereas ashkenazi libertarianism (libertinism) does not suppress parasitism. It licenses it. And ensures the competitive death or conquest of the polity. There is a reason the ashkenazi civilization is diasporic and dependent: inability to produce high trust territorial commons due to the high costs of opportunities, costs, duty and sacrifice required.

Leave a Reply