Not at all. If Israel were a libertarian country with a non-aggression principle then they wouldn’t do it.
My understanding is that the freedom of each person has to be protected or everthing falls back to tribalism where everybody has to seek membership in a group to be protected.
Because it seems like in your scenario their choices are leave or live with racist assholes.
If it is not a matter of principles, what is so bad about moving as long as you are supported? When done right, things should be better than living with assholes.
…
… So do you not see how you’re advocating for an aggressive removal of people to make room for violent colonizers? You know, like Israel?
Okay. I’ll play along. Who / what country are you going to get to willingly give up their homes and land and everything that is included in that? With what resources will you ensure they are taken care of in… wherever they’re being deported to? Where, by the way, is that? I’m sure you’ve thought that far ahead if you’re serious about this. What will you do if someone doesn’t want to go from their home? I’m certain you have a non - genocidal answer, because you seem pretty sure this is happening peacefully. What about disabled and elderly folks that can’t travel at all let alone move to another country? You wouldn’t be suggesting eugenics and race based large scale ethnic cleansing obviously.
I am not talking about Israel because it is obviously not a libertarian country.
In a libertarian country, people can move to different cities. Since it’s libertarian, those who profit from the move have to pay for it. People will only move if they are paid enough.
No. Obviously that’s my point. Hence all the questions I asked about location… You know, for when you start your racist eugenics based colonization project. The ones you ignored? Remember?
Okay. How does kicking a bunch of people off their land so you can have your own extra-white version of Israel fit into that?
Not at all. If Israel were a libertarian country with a non-aggression principle then they wouldn’t do it.
My understanding is that the freedom of each person has to be protected or everthing falls back to tribalism where everybody has to seek membership in a group to be protected.
…
… So do you not see how you’re advocating for an aggressive removal of people to make room for violent colonizers? You know, like Israel?
I said moving, not being moved or forced. Is there something wrong with moving if it is not forced?
Okay. I’ll play along. Who / what country are you going to get to willingly give up their homes and land and everything that is included in that? With what resources will you ensure they are taken care of in… wherever they’re being deported to? Where, by the way, is that? I’m sure you’ve thought that far ahead if you’re serious about this. What will you do if someone doesn’t want to go from their home? I’m certain you have a non - genocidal answer, because you seem pretty sure this is happening peacefully. What about disabled and elderly folks that can’t travel at all let alone move to another country? You wouldn’t be suggesting eugenics and race based large scale ethnic cleansing obviously.
I am not talking about Israel because it is obviously not a libertarian country.
In a libertarian country, people can move to different cities. Since it’s libertarian, those who profit from the move have to pay for it. People will only move if they are paid enough.
Okay, what libertarian country is that?
Do I have to tell you that there is none?
No. Obviously that’s my point. Hence all the questions I asked about location… You know, for when you start your racist eugenics based colonization project. The ones you ignored? Remember?