Dinesh D'Souza: "The #SeattleAutonomousZone gives me an idea. We might consider a long-term plan to create our own autonomous zone, with our own media, our own movies, our own education system."

submitted by Aureus from (twitter.com)

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Erasmus 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

I don't know why we don't have several competing solutions already for separating from each other. Normally, think tanks like the Cato Institute or the Heritage Foundation are the heavy lifters who develop white papers for new policy paradigms on the right, but the silence at this point is deafening. Big business hates the idea of separation.

We are probably going to need to crowdfund a new think tank—a multi-racial, multi-ethnic think tank that can obtain buy-in from various communities—solely devoted to proposing equitable, peaceful, legal ways of separating from each other.

[–]Aureus[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I could understand this. I'm not sure it will fly, however. I feel certain parts of the grassroots left might be okay with it, but the radicals absolutely would not be. And as you say, big business and the political establishment would also be adamantly against it. That said, a dialogue is worth thinking about and worth trying.

Do you have any other thoughts on this issue?

[–]Erasmus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

certain parts of the grassroots left might be okay with it, but the radicals absolutely would not be.

If you ask any black American, "Would you like a piece of the country that is your own space, solely run by blacks, for the benefit of blacks, where any white people there had to do whatever you told them?", ten out of ten of them are going to say yes.

So when the option of a black state is genuinely on the table, you should expect a seismic fracture down the American left, largely along racial lines. The integrationists are primarily Jewish folks and white women, and always have been since the 1960s, both using blacks as proxies to fulfill their own political or emotional needs. Black Americans offered their own sovereignty or something like it are going to tell these non-blacks to sit down and shut the fuck up.

I'm of the opinion that once a plan with real merit and credibility gets publicity, the excitement it generates is going to be unstoppable. From slavery to sovereignty is a powerful narrative, a fitting capstone of the African-American story, one almost impossible to stand in the way of. And what's the alternative? The ultimate dissolution of black identity in a sea of Hispanic immigration over the decades to come? Or perhaps even civil war with a heavily-armed white America pushed to its limits by endless racial grievance politics?

No. Separation makes the most sense for all of us. And I think it will permanently sideline the Marxist left in America if done right. But it's not as simple as just getting out a red marker and drawing lines on a map. What legal theories are you going to use to justify the separation? How is the leadership of the separated state or states decided? How will conflicts of law be managed? Military protection? On and on. You need professional policy wonks to fledge out the details in a way that can gain institutional traction.

So you need a think tank where you have various well-respected professionals from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds who are committed to working together for the benefit of the entire country. It can definitely be done, and I've just been waiting for someone to do it. Famous last words, though. I'll start the ball rolling myself if I have to.

[–]Canbot 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

From slavery to sovereignty is a powerful narrative

This is the story of Liberia.

I think you are making the mistake of taking what they say at face value. They don't wan't their own society because the results are obvious and undesirable. What they want is power. Having blacks only spaces in mixed areas, especially where whites are not allowed to have white's only areas, elevates them above everyone else. They want dominance, not equality. And they want control over white societies, not black societies.

[–]Erasmus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's a complicated situation. For the average black person, the idea of having their own state is a powerful thing. Look at their response to the idea of Wakanda! The chance to make Wakanda real would absolutely catch fire in the everyday black community.

Would a black state on American soil fail? I guess the relevant question here is: does it matter? What might be failure to you and I might be success to them. We both want a different texture of life, and the kind of law-and-order based societies that most whites want are intolerable to many blacks. If their society has less law and order than ours does, but they are happy in it, then it's been a success for both of us.

The most important thing, I think, is that lines of racial sovereignty would be established. And yes, this is why many black activists, unlike most everyday blacks, would push against it. But this is because those black activists are largely cat's-paws of Marxist Jews, and it will be very revealing to most everyday blacks to see this so clearly. Because those activists know this is a losing position, I expect the way that they would push back would be to say that blacks are owed all of America or some impossible to meet demand.

But I think popular momentum would carry it through.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Wakanda isn't a real place. Everyone wants to live in a magically advanced ethnostate, that has nothing at all to do with what a black ethnostate in reality would be like. No one wants to live in Liberia.

If their society has less law and order than ours does, but they are happy in it, then it's been a success for both of us.

Psychologists studying childhood development looked into why kids often do things that lead them to get seriously injured. For example, it is common for a kid to set up a ramp to jump a bike or skateboard that faces an obstacle like a curb, when simply turning that ramp would make it safe. When asked why the answer is always "I don't know" or "I didn't think of that". Kids all lack the ability to predict logical consequences. Not all people develop this ability at the same time. It seems many adults struggle with it too.

The consequence for having a society which doesn't have law and order, whether you can understand it or not, will have a lot of violence and crime. Crime leads to social decay. Stores close forever. Parks and public places become unsafe and can't be used. Gangs take over. This society inevitably, and invariably turns into a ghetto. Vigilante justice is not justice, and can not replace police and courts. There is no substitute for law and order that can keep a lawless society from turning into a ghetto.

People who want a lawless society have an imaginary utopia that they want in which they are personally exempt from the oppression of laws and the consequences of their actions. They lack the ability to understand the inevitable result. They don't want to live in the ghetto that their society would actually be.

[–]Erasmus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't disagree with you on a lot of this. But I also feel like this is not my burden to bear. Let the African-American professional class that blames all their problems on "whiteness" discover for themselves the challenges of policing a city and managing a school system, with no one else to blame. What's important to me is that separation happens. It will be joyful for blacks who finally have at least the opportunity to determine their own destiny, and joyful for whites who can be relieved of the burden of being held personally responsible for every black failure.

[–]Aureus[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

IMO the most realistic scenario would be a voluntary migration out of the cities and into the countryside. To an extent, this is already happening without any central planning. Leftists prefer urban areas, while conservatives prefer rural areas.

Earlier on, you mention forming a think-tank and drafting whitepapers. Is there any reason this couldn't be done already? What does it take to create a whitepaper besides research? I would be happy to participate in a think tank or write a whitepaper.

[–]yellow_algebra_31 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think abandoning all cities is a good idea. Aren't cities important for tech and strength?

I think there may be some aspect of life stages going on here. Cities are good for new possibilities, for proving yourself, for meeting a spouse. Country is good for settling down and raising kids someplace safe. Younger people may tend to be more exploratory.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

    [–]Erasmus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Well, by communities here, I meant racial and ethnic communities. You can't have an all-white organization pushing some plan for blacks to inhabit a certain part of the country and get them to buy into it, even if you're offering a great deal.

    But the idea of returning to some variety of federalism is definitely one way of going, and the way I'd actually prefer most.

    We'd have to sunset the 14th Amendment to do it.

    The 14th Amendment is the linchpin of leftist dominance in the United States, and every major socially transformative decision from gay marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges) to destroying single-race neighborhoods (Shelley v. Kraemer) to providing schools for illegal immigrants (Plyler v. Doe) to birthright citizenship, among many others, all find their legal basis in the 14th, which was essentially ratified at gunpoint after the Civil War. The "Equal Protection" clause of 14th also ensures that citizens have the same rights in every state, which means states can't differ in social policy. This is what we would have to change.

    Ideally, we'd pass a new Amendment sunsetting the Equal Protection clause (and perhaps other elements of the 14th) on some future date, say, 10 years from ratification. Each state and its citizens would have 10 years to signal exactly what sort of constituency they intend to appeal to. Some states would take a hard right turn, other states would take a hard left turn. Most states would probably take a more measured approach in one direction or the other.

    Citizens would have a decade to advocate for policies in their home state, or to move to a new state which looked to suit them better. Everyone would find themselves in a community of people who share more-or-less the same values. Then one day, the 14th Amendment would end, just like the 18th Amendment ended on December 5th, 1933. The era of American insanity that we're living in now could stop just as suddenly and simply as Prohibition did.

    [–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Equitable is an antonym to equal. It is a word that has been propagandized to seem good but is always pushing a racist agenda that seeks to establish unequal treatment based solely on race.

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Aureus[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      "Autonomous zone" isn't a great term for what Dinesh is really suggesting. A better term would be "parallel cultural institutions".

      We're in the position we're in because conservatives have gone it alone for decades, while far-leftists have gotten together and organized. Conservatives need to figure out how to find each other, organize, work together, and build institutions.

      [–]noice 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      I agree completely. I have been thinking this a lot lately. The internet HAS stemmed a growth of independent media, it's just obviously not competitive with mainstream media in terms of viewership, release cadence, or production quality. There are a few different video hosting alternatives to Youtube now, and that is good in terms of censorship.

      I think an education system could be hugely beneficial. We are at an incredible place in terms of technology, capability, and knowledge (our ability to summon so much info from the internet etc.). I think the hard part would be getting people to agree on the curriculum, and eventually the execution of day-to-day activities. Building an education system seems like a hugely important task, hopefully incredible leaders can emerge with some ways forward.

      I think a combination of learning-focused technology and also being taught more directly by parents could be interesting. It seems a bit far-fetched as a universal solution, but in select communities I bet something like that could thrive.

      [–]Aureus[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Building an education system seems like a hugely important task, hopefully incredible leaders can emerge with some ways forward.

      I agree; it won't be a walk in the park. However, there are already some resources for this. I think the two main components would be a homeschooling curriculum as well as a collection of college-level courses. COVID forcing most colleges online has already led many to rethink education.