Re: The RevLeft Troll Thread

[Einstein]

Fair one but nobody on this forum supports your above points as far as I know.I wont speak for the others but I just want to live among my own people in my own culture and have good realtions with other groups be they mixed or one culture/tribe groups and all of us to live within our boundries free from exploitation in worker states.

Why does your ethnic group have more of a right to live in the country you live in than other ethnic groups, and why do you only want to live with your own ethnic group? Is there something wrong with other ethnic groups?

[TheocWulf]

Why does your ethnic group have more of a right to live in the country you live in than other ethnic groups, and why do you only want to live with your own ethnic group? Is there something wrong with other ethnic groups?

Why doesnt my ethnic group have more rights to live in my country? parts of my heritage (mixed English/Welsh) have been on this isle since the last ice age.

Its not all down to my Ethnic groups somebody from the baltic or scandinavia may not be suited to an English folk communty.

There is nothing wrong at all wih other ethnic groups on my travels around the world ive come to admire many cultures.Nothing warms my heart more to go to other countries and see people liveing among there own people and enjoying there culture,im after the same for mine.

[Einstein]

Why doesnt my ethnic group have more rights to live in my country? parts of my heritage (mixed English/Welsh) have been on this isle since the last ice age.

Its not all down to my Ethnic groups somebody from the baltic or scandinavia may not be suited to an English folk communty.

There is nothing wrong at all wih other ethnic groups on my travels around the world ive come to admire many cultures.Nothing warms my heart more to go to other countries and see people liveing among there own people and enjoying there culture,im after the same for mine.

1. Your ethnic group does't have more of a right to live in the country most of them live in because accident of birth should't determine where you can live or how other people treats you
2. Yeah i dont have any problem with other ethnic groups i just dont want them to live near me

[TheocWulf]

1. Your ethnic group does't have more of a right to live in the country most of them live in because accident of birth should't determine where you can live or how other people treats you
2. Yeah i dont have any problem with other ethnic groups i just dont want them to live near me

1 why dont we if we as a people have lived here for thousands of years?

2 I dont mind being neighbours at all.

[Einstein]

1 why dont we if we as a people have lived here for thousands of years?

2 I dont mind being neighbours at all.

1. Because people dont decide where they are born or who they are born to, it's not fair that simply because they were born to parents that were asian or african etc, they are not allowed to live in europe or another place that is not they "home". That is why discrimination is wrong, they did't choose to be black or choose to be asian etc.

2. What do you mean than with "I just want to live among my own people"?

[TheocWulf]

1.I didnt say they couldnt live in my country or Europe did I.

2.Exactly that

[Einstein]

1.I didnt say they couldnt live in my country or Europe did I.


2.Exactly that

Than why the fuck do you identify as a Strasserite? Seriously if you believe race mans nothing than why identify as a Strasserite?

If you believe race matters than please tell in what ways.

[TheocWulf]

Than why the fuck do you identify as a Strasserite? Seriously if you believe race mans nothing than why identify as a Strasserite?

If you believe race matters than please tell in what ways.

I didnt say it means nothing nothing I belive that my peoples history,traditions,culture and race should be preserved and the current situation in my land does not allow for this preservation of my or any other ethnic group to preserve its culture,language,history ect ect ect and im oppose this.

the non indigenous peoples in my land will not be repatreated to some country they have no links to apart from grandparents or parents they will make there own new vibrant autonumus communites and live by the standards set by there culture.language,religion ect ect and we will do the same.

[Rev Scare]

The fact that the majority of this site's members are former or current stormfront members proves that this forum is overwhelmingly racist. Many members openly admit that they are racialist, which is just what racists call themselves, and there are plenty of racist posts on this forum.

To begin, we are left-wing nationalists, and this does not necessitate a racial doctrine nor constituency. Nationalism posits the identification of individuals with a particular nation, which is more or less defined as a community of people who share commonalities, of which race is a part. Race is, simply put, an integral component of human identity. This is an empirical fact. There is no legitimate reason to deny a nation the right to self-determination; if you reject this, then your views contradict those of numerous socialists throughout history, including Lenin. Race is a valid factor of identity, but it is not necessarily a genuine basis for nationhood: if this were not so, then Europe would not maintain the strong ethnic divisions that it does. Therefore, nationhood transcends race, and we left-wing nationalists recognize this, but we also recognize the role that racial identity has in influencing society.

We understand that national identity continues to play a significant role in the lives of the international working classes in spite of the vitiation that has come about as a result of bourgeois relations (e.g., lax immigration policies, globalization, etc.). As such, we maintain that the proletarian revolution can only be accomplished by means of the national emancipation of the working class.

How can you in the FAQ claim you are not a racist website when you allow so called racialists and former stormfront members to post racist bullshit?

Some of us are former members of SF, but we were expelled precisely because of our rejection of the core tenets guiding the majority of the membership on that forum. We believe that race is a significant factor governing individual and group identity, but our nationalism does not root itself in race. We are not "racists" by any reasonable definition of the rather vague term. We do not believe in imperialism, chauvinism, nor ethnic discrimination. We also propound that a healthy national formation can only be perpetuated within a cooperative international framework. Should a nation decide to subsume foreign elements, those people must be granted full rights as citizens (most likely provided that certain preliminary parameters have been met, such as duration of stay) regardless of racial and ethnic character.

Lastly, I urge you to provide examples of this "racist bullshit" that we are allegedly so tolerant of on the general forum, not in the restricted area.

[Einstein]

Why did my serious thread get merged with an unserious troll thread?

[Einstein]

I didnt say it means nothing nothing I belive that my peoples history,traditions,culture and race should be preserved and the current situation in my land does not allow for this preservation of my or any other ethnic group to preserve its culture,language,history ect ect ect and im oppose this.

the non indigenous peoples in my land will not be repatreated to some country they have no links to apart from grandparents or parents they will make there own new vibrant autonumus communites and live by the standards set by there culture.language,religion ect ect and we will do the same.

Why should people be forced to live in segrated communities just because of they race? As for preservation of your ethnic group how would you do this exept by outlawing inerracial sex? Or is that want you want do?

[TheocWulf]

Why should people be forced to live in segrated communities just because of they race? As for preservation of your ethnic group how would you do this exept by outlawing inerracial sex? Or is that want you want do?

well if that was the case it would most likely be the will of the majority of the people wouldnt it.

It wouldnt be against the law as I and everyone else knows love crosses boundries,However if somebody wanted to have a mixed race family or marry outside of there tribe they would not be a member of a folk community.

[Admin]

If you treat people differently based on the color of they skin or other racial criteria for example believing only certain ethnic should be allowed to have citizenship, should only be allowed to have certain job or only a specific amount of that ethnic gruop should be allowed at a workplace, should only be allowed to marry members of they own race or not being allowed to marry a specific race, believing that race is tied to which culture you have etc. In general believing a certain group should be preferred over other racial groups. Since stormfront is a white nationalist forum, meaning they believe whites should be preferred over other groups. Since this forums membership seems to come almost exclusively from stormfront this means they must be racist, and as such this forum can be characterised as racist.

First of all, just because some amount of the forum's membership comes from reactionary forums like Stormfront does not in any way mean that White Nationalism (or any variety of racism) is embraced on this forum. The foundational (ideological) premises of the Socialist Phalanx are revolutionary socialism and left-wing nationalism. Left-wing nationalism is explicitly defined as

a unique variety of nationalism that is both thoroughly anti-capitalist and anti-reactionary. As such, this variety of nationalism inherently rejects the theories and tendencies associated with most other expressions thereof — such as ethnic chauvinism, economic exploitation, and imperialism."

As one would logically conclude from this definition, left-wing nationalism inherently rejects practically every (rationally defined) manifestation of racism. What it does not reject, however, is national identity and the right to self-determination based upon that framework — provided such a pursuit does not violate fundamental socialist principles or the human rights of others.

Now, this guilt by (former) association nonsense carries no currency here. [Even RevLeft has a significant number of former racists, fascists, and other reactionaries as members.] So, if you are going to continue to perpetuate such prejudicial rhetoric, I will simply ban you for your frivolity, "Einstein" (what a disgrace to the name).

[Einstein]

To begin, we are left-wing nationalists, and this does not necessitate a racial doctrine nor constituency. Nationalism posits the identification of individuals with a particular nation, which is more or less defined as a community of people who share commonalities, of which race is a part. Race is, simply put, an integral component of human identity. This is an empirical fact.

Do you have a source for that, that "Race is, simply put, an integral component of human identity"?

There is no legitimate reason to deny a nation the right to self-determination; if you reject this, then your views contradict those of numerous socialists throughout history, including Lenin. Race is a valid factor of identity, but it is not necessarily a genuine basis for nationhood: if this were not so, then Europe would not maintain the strong ethnic divisions that it does. Therefore, nationhood transcends race, and we left-wing nationalists recognize this, but we also recognize the role that racial identity has in influencing society.

Race should't influence society and only currently does so because of our race obsessed culture. If you change the culture you change the values, and that
is what any legitimate leftist should, because racism and discrimination is wrong simply because we do not choose which race we are, which gender we are, which sexual orientation we have etc.

We understand that national identity continues to play a significant role in the lives of the international working classes in spite of the vitiation that has come about as a result of bourgeois relations (e.g., lax immigration policies, globalization, etc.). As such, we maintain that the proletarian revolution can only be accomplished by means of the national emancipation of the working class.

What exactly is meant here by national emancipation?

Some of us are former members of SF, but we were expelled precisely because of our rejection of the core tenets guiding the majority of the membership on that forum. We believe that race is a significant factor governing individual and group identity, but our nationalism does not root itself in race. We are not "racists" by any reasonable definition of the rather vague term. We do not believe in imperialism, chauvinism, nor ethnic discrimination.

Apparently some of your members do, for example this stresserite believing interracial sex should be banned

We also propound that a healthy national formation can only be perpetuated within a cooperative international framework. Should a nation decide to subsume foreign elements, those people must be granted full rights as citizens (most likely provided that certain preliminary parameters have been met, such as duration of stay) regardless of racial and ethnic character.
Lastly, I urge you to provide examples of this "racist bullshit" that we are allegedly so tolerant of on the general forum, not in the restricted area.

Ha, I got banned for being too much of a consistent pro-White racialist on Stormfront (ie, in their reactionary lexicon, I'm considered a 'commie').

It's a badge of honor to be condemned by misleaders and defenders of race-traitor capitalism! When they chose to take a 'screw the working people' stance in defense of the system, they spit and stomped on the White racial banner.

They are right about one thing: we don't belong with them...in the cesspool which they call the 'movement'! Whitey deserves much better, wouldn't you agree?

There isn't a single one of us here who embraces anti-white racism in the slightest. Every one of us in this Collective has clearly expressed our pro-White commitment. And the truth is that our foes KNOW that we're not only not anti-White bigots or race-deniers, but they have heard and read from each of us that racialism is at the very essence of our socialism.

So, come to your own conclusions about why so many clearly pro-White racialists have been banned from a website proclaiming itself to be pro-White.
We're pro-White folks who've been explicitly and permanently banned for our politics, and this is admitted by Stormfront's misleadership.

I wonder who's next to get the boot on the basis of their politics. Hitlerite NSers on Stormfront, I'm looking at you, and wondering why you think you'll still be allowed to hang out at Stormfront through the reaminder of this year and into 2012. Do you really need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind blows in today's 'movement'?

What do YOU mean when you state that you are pro-White?
Honestly, is that the same thing as what the 'movement' means when it says it is pro-White, or do they really mean something entirely different?
Think for yourself and come to your own conclusions.

A post made by Coach in the thread http://www.socialistphalanx.com/t6-reactionary-wn-threads
If thats not racist i dont know what is

[Einstein]

Apparently when i tryed to edit my posts it entire new posts so i just deleted everything in the post's i did't mean to post and let the right one stay. A moderator please delete those post that i dont know why it posted, since i simply made an edit to my post.

[Einstein]

well if that was the case it would most likely be the will of the majority of the people wouldnt it.

It wouldnt be against the law as I and everyone else knows love crosses boundries,However if somebody wanted to have a mixed race family or marry outside of there tribe they would not be a member of a folk community.

1. It is't right just because it is the will of the majority, do you have any argument besides that?
2. What? Can you explain that more in detail?

[Einstein]

First of all, just because some amount of the forum's membership comes from reactionary forums like Stormfront does not in any way mean that White Nationalism (or any variety of racism) is embraced on this forum.

That would seem to be the case considering the post made by Coach in http://www.socialistphalanx.com/t6-reactionary-wn-threads

The foundational (ideological) premises of the Socialist Phalanx are revolutionary socialism and left-wing nationalism. Left-wing nationalism is explicitly defined as

a unique variety of nationalism that is both thoroughly anti-capitalist and anti-reactionary. As such, this variety of nationalism inherently rejects the theories and tendencies associated with most other expressions thereof — such as ethnic chauvinism, economic exploitation, and imperialism."

left-wing nationalism is a contradiction in words

As one would logically conclude from this definition, left-wing nationalism inherently rejects practically every (rationally defined) manifestation of racism. What it does not reject, however, is national identity and the right to self-determination based upon that framework — provided such a pursuit does not violate fundamental socialist principles or the human rights of others.

Can you explain this more in detail? I have seen no leftist who rejects the right to self-determination, so i would to know what is more to so called "left-wing nationalism".

Now, this guilt by (former) association nonsense carries no currency here. [Even RevLeft has a significant number of former racists, fascists, and other reactionaries as members.] So, if you are going to continue to perpetuate such prejudicial rhetoric, I will simply ban you for your frivolity, "Einstein" (what a disgrace to the name).

Fine your forum your rules.

By the way are you a former stormfront member?

[Leon Mcnichol]

Great, another racist accusing us of being "racist"... i love these "lefties" who don't care about class or proletarian, and is more worried with "interracial sex"...

[Einstein]

Great, another racist accusing us of being "racist"... i love these "lefties" who don't care about class or proletarian, and is more worried with "interracial sex"...

Why do you think i'm a racist lol. I do care a lot about working class emancipation, but other topics are important too. Seriously how can you claim that being allowed to have sex with whoever you want to regardless of race or gender is not important?

[Rev Scare]

Do you have a source for that, that "Race is, simply put, an integral component of human identity"?

I could bother to procure sources from psychology and sociology in order to bolster my case, but I do not find it is necessary for me to prove something that is blatantly obvious to the vast majority of the human population. Your query is akin to asking me to prove that most people do not fundamentally identify with or are identified by their biological sex. Race is part of our constitution. It is a historical and social fact that groups divide along racial and ethnic lines. Ethnic diversity only perpetuates social tension and, in our opinion, inhibits the progression of productive class struggle on the part of the working class because identity politics and peripheral issues surface and take precedence over the class struggle.

Race should't influence society and only currently does so because of our race obsessed culture. If you change the culture you change the values, and that
is what any legitimate leftist should, because racism and discrimination is wrong simply because we do not choose which race we are, which gender we are, which sexual orientation we have etc.

Our culture cannot honestly be described as promoting any "racist" tendencies; if anything, bourgeois culture promotes multiracial and multicultural societies as a means of consumerist expansion, labor exploitation, and the stultification of working class struggle. What you claim to be a "race obsessed" culture is nothing more than the "negative" (or natural) expression of an ethnically diverse society, which antecedes capitalism and has existed at least as far as recorded history traces.

To quote Chomsky, a fellow libertarian socialist:

"See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist—it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn't built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist—just because it's anti-human. And race is in fact a human characteristic—there's no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that's produced—that's their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance."
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky (New York: The New York Press, 2002), pp.88-89

What exactly is meant here by national emancipation?

The liberation of the national proletariat by means of socialist revolution.

Apparently some of your members do, for example this stresserite believing interracial sex should be banned

We are a relatively open forum as far as ideology is concerned, and we tolerate a degree of deviation from the orthodoxy, unlike forums such as Stormfront and RevLeft, which adhere to a rigid subcultural dogma. I do not perceive any racism in the statements made by the member in question. Self-determination based upon the democratic criteria of a national group is a right that cannot be lightly dismissed. All groups discriminate to some capacity or else they would cease to exist as groups. Group identity is important because it reinforces a sense of solidarity and purpose, which is essential to socialism. Internal racial discrimination, however, is something that we adamantly reject.

Furthermore, our focus, as I have stated previously, is on nationalism, not racialism. Ethnic identity, which includes all features of a common heritage, is the primary determinant of nationhood. This identity is something that cannot be discounted arbitrarily, for it molds individuals and societies. This form of identity is ubiquitous and would only become more fragmented if nationality were denied, but it would never disappear.

A post made by Coach in the thread http://www.socialistphalanx.com/t6-reactionary-wn-threads
If thats not racist i dont know what is

Ignoring the fact that the quote in question dates to the very beginning of this forum, and as such it is reasonable to believe that the views of the quoted member have changed quite considerably since, I see nothing fundamentally racist about the contents of the post.

[TheocWulf]

1. It is't right just because it is the will of the majority, do you have any argument besides that?
2. What? Can you explain that more in detail?

1 no the will of the community at the end of the day is the importiant issue,If its the will of the people to live in folk communities then we should all support that shouldnt we.

2 If the people of my nation have decided that they want to live in folk communities or one large folk nation then that is the will of the people and those who dont want to be a part of it or live by the standards of these communitys then they will have to leave and go to a community where they will be welcome.

[Red & White]

Why do you think i'm a racist lol. I do care a lot about working class emancipation, but other topics are important too. Seriously how can you claim that being allowed to have sex with whoever you want to regardless of race or gender is not important?

Someone's sexuality is, when all is said and done, a pretty irrelevent issue. Some people enjoy having sex with the same gender. Great, go for it. Others like having sex with someone from the opposite gender. Sometime utlilising the missionary position, sometimes in so-called doggy fashion.

Big deal. Ho hum, excuse me while I nod off...

This is what the modern left are so obsessed about. Utterly inconsequential matters, such as how people gets thing on in the bedroom.

And whilst they are obsessing about such totally trivial matters, which are personal matters of the people involved, the whole working class, of all nations, is being shafted good and hard (to go back to the sex theme...) by capitalism and globalisation.

THIS is the most vital issue of the day. Not people's personal lifestyle choices.

As this is a forum that promotes first and foremost the emancipation of the working classes, around the world, then if you can't get that other issues, which whilst are worth addressing at some point, will always come behind the general well-being of the working classes, then you have no place here.

To prempt you next question, "if that's so, then why do you place so much empahsis on nationalism?" or as you're bigoted mindset would probably put it, ("why are you all such Nazis/fascists?"):

Current modes of multiculturalism and globalisation are doing nothing to foster any sense of international working-class solidarity. The current state of affairs is a capitalist's wet dream. Get loads of cheaper workers to flood a country and push down the wages of said country, so the capitalists make more profit. And as these workers will work for a pittance, and will doing anything the bosses tell them to do, totally destroy all the gains in the realm of working conditions that the said country's generations of workers had toiled for, and often, died for.

The workers of said country will naturally be pretty pissed off with the foreign workers. Afterall, they're showing no class solidarity by taking over other worker's countries, so why should they show any solidarity with them?

And all the while, in the background, the capitalists are laughing their arses off. Not only because they're causing strife between their main enemies, the working class, but the left wing, the people who are supposed to be the champion of the working class, are colluding with their plans! By supporting mass immigration and multiculturalism, the left are doing exactly what the capitalists want. And the left are totally oblivious to their own stupidity. They have become (and this is something of my tradmark phrase here, so if anyone uses it, I'd like a trademark put after it... ) stormtroopers of globalisation.

But hey, whilst all this serious stuff is going on, you concentrate on whether people fully appreciate the fact that some men like to touch other men's genitals.

I'll be over here concentrating on more pressing matters.

[Pantheon Rising]

If you treat people differently based on the color of they skin or other racial criteria for example believing only certain ethnic should be allowed to have citizenship, should only be allowed to have certain job or only a specific amount of that ethnic gruop should be allowed at a workplace, should only be allowed to marry members of they own race or not being allowed to marry a specific race, believing that race is tied to which culture you have etc. In general believing a certain group should be preferred over other racial groups. Since stormfront is a white nationalist forum, meaning they believe whites should be preferred over other groups. Since this forums membership seems to come almost exclusively from stormfront this means they must be racist, and as such this forum can be characterised as racist.

Well Einstein, no one here believes in any of that. That is why they got kicked off Stormfront, which is a site abhorred by most, if not all, members here.

Though, I will say that race/ethnicity is partly tied into culture, and that is not a negative thing. The position is, as a left wing nationalist, that every unique ethnic group has the right to self determination. Not that one gets "preferred" over another or only one gets a job.

If we end up all conglomerated into a monoethnic and a monoculture where does your precious diversity go then?

[Einstein]

I could bother to procure sources from psychology and sociology in order to bolster my case, but I do not find it is necessary for me to prove something that is blatantly obvious to the vast majority of the human population. Your query is akin to asking me to prove that most people do not fundamentally identify with or are identified by their biological sex. Race is part of our constitution. It is a historical and social fact that groups divide along racial and ethnic lines. Ethnic diversity only perpetuates social tension and, in our opinion, inhibits the progression of productive class struggle on the part of the working class because identity politics and peripheral issues surface and take precedence over the class struggle.

Essentially you have nothing. I wont believe you unless you can prove it.

Our culture cannot honestly be described as promoting any "racist" tendencies; if anything, bourgeois culture promotes multiracial and multicultural societies as a means of consumerist expansion, labor exploitation, and the stultification of working class struggle. What you claim to be a "race obsessed" culture is nothing more than the "negative" (or natural) expression of an ethnically diverse society, which antecedes capitalism and has existed at least as far as recorded history traces.

You dont see it? Racism is in the media constantly, we are constantly bombarded with messages like we are all racists deep down or that blacks are poorer than whites have nothing to do with racism etc.

To quote Chomsky, a fellow libertarian socialist:

"See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist—it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn't built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist—just because it's anti-human. And race is in fact a human characteristic—there's no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that's produced—that's their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance."
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky (New York: The New York Press, 2002), pp.88-89

Yes capitalism is not inherently racist, there is a reason why it's an improvementt over feudalism and slavery based economies. And no there is no reason why different racial characteristics should be perceived as negative.

The liberation of the national proletariat by means of socialist revolution.

What about the minorities who are also working class, do they not matter at all?

We are a relatively open forum as far as ideology is concerned, and we tolerate a degree of deviation from the orthodoxy, unlike forums such as Stormfront and RevLeft, which adhere to a rigid subcultural dogma. I do not perceive any racism in the statements made by the member in question. Self-determination based upon the democratic criteria of a national group is a right that cannot be lightly dismissed. All groups discriminate to some capacity or else they would cease to exist as groups. Group identity is important because it reinforces a sense of solidarity and purpose, which is essential to socialism. Internal racial discrimination, however, is something that we adamantly reject.

I'm a little confused over what we are talking about here, are we talking about groups which membership of is voluntary deciding that it's members can only have sex with a certain race, or are we talking about actual states?

Furthermore, our focus, as I have stated previously, is on nationalism, not racialism. Ethnic identity, which includes all features of a common heritage, is the primary determinant of nationhood. This identity is something that cannot be discounted arbitrarily, for it molds individuals and societies. This form of identity is ubiquitous and would only become more fragmented if nationality were denied, but it would never disappear.

Yes it molds individuals and society, but only because of the racist culture. Change the culture and you would change that too.

Ignoring the fact that the quote in question dates to the very beginning of this forum, and as such it is reasonable to believe that the views of the quoted member have changed quite considerably since, I see nothing fundamentally racist about the contents of the post.

Using terms like race traitor, race denier etc and calling yourself a racialist is rhetoric only a racist would employ.

[Einstein]

1 no the will of the community at the end of the day is the importiant issue,If its the will of the people to live in folk communities then we should all support that shouldnt we.

2 If the people of my nation have decided that they want to live in folk communities or one large folk nation then that is the will of the people and those who dont want to be a part of it or live by the standards of these communitys then they will have to leave and go to a community where they will be welcome.

1. What kind of authority does this community have? Does it have a defined territory (is it a state) or is it simply a group one can voluntarily choose to join with no defined territory?
2. I'm not exactly sure how to respond to this exept that if anyone ever found him/herself in such a situation i would encourage that person to practise civil disobedience instead of leaving in defeat.

[Sponsored content]