What if people could take a buyout and form their own country? For example, each Canadian could be given 1/40,000,000 of all the resources in Canada (including the land) and then allowed to setup their own borders for their own country? Now obviously if 100 people got together they could form their own country if they agreed.
I really think buying people out of the country seems fair. You often hear people say like "if you don't agree with the government then find a different country". I think we should let people do exactly that but fairly by letting people have a fair share of the resources in the country they are abandoning so they have land and resources to truly find a new country by starting their own.
The "left" might even get behind this sort of idea because obviously this is a great way to start a communist utopia. The only reason we don't have one now is because of the evil capitalists stealing all the resources but if people are give. 1/40,000,000 of all the resources when they decide to leave Canada then this no longer becomes an issue.
Nice in theory but no government would ever allow it. Just as “land ownership” is truly just land rental from the government. Serfdom is still the name of the game with the added caveat of economic leeches, bureaucracy, and fags.
Yes - the only way to do this would be to move to a micro country and gain political power.
I don't see why I shouldn't just get to keep my own country and throw out all the foreigners.
yeah
my family have been here since before there was even a country.
That's the point. You are getting your own country. All 1/40,000,000 of it... you want more than 1/40,000,000 though? I suppose that makes sense but I bet you 1/40,000,000 is more than what you have now.
Unnecessarily complicated, in my opinion. We just need much smaller government (which those currently in power would also not allow, just like your plan), with cities or counties (in some instances districts of cities) taking on the roles of states, essentially.
Also, when you said buy out, I thought you meant pay people to leave. Which would also be fun.
If that was allowed, it would result in war. Remember, one of the main reasons for the Cold War was to stop communist leaders from nationalizing resources so that the corporations wouldn't have access to them.
Oh boy, my ancestors carved my family farm out of wilderness before there ever was a USA, then the fought and bled to free the country from London bankers. Then they fought and bled to free themselves from New York bankers (though they failed). Then they had their farms stolen and flooded by the TVA and CoE. Then their land was flooded by shitskins from the south of the border and yankees from north of the Mason-Dixon line, and now you want me to have to buy back what is rightfully mine to begin with. Fuck you.
Here is a better compromise. Shoot anyone who didn't have more than 50% of their ancestors in the US by 1850.
Buy back? No, I'm suggesting the government give you 1/40,000,000 of the resources and you start you own country with it.
I'm assuming you're using hyperbole as a counter to the ridiculouslessness of OP's suggestion, as I'd be willing to argue that's more than half of the country at this point.
If you're serious, complaining about shit from prior to 150 years ago is like retarded blacks asking for reparations for slavery
It's only slight hyperbole. I chose 1850 for 2 reasons. It was the beginning of the first Jewish invasion of America (the second started during the 1880), which immediately led to the the civil war, and I know for a fact that the bulk of my family, on both sides was already in the three surrounding counties where I live today.
The more important distinction is the difference between an immigrant and a colonist. Immigrants move to cities, colonist build them. Take Gizortnik, a Steinburgowitzky, from eastern Europe, like he admitted in the post below. His family moved to the US after almost all the major cities were already founded. There was no more pushing the frontier, the transcontential rail road was already built. Instead his family most likely took loans from the banks to build their middlemen businesses, which consisted of the money put there by the colonists and settlers, and was then used to impoverish those same people with the price manipulation that middlemen always do.
The gist of my post was the unacceptability of any solution that forces me from my land. There is an idiot on ConPro that is constantly harping about how whites should all move west of the Rockies to make a new nation, giving up forest and rivers to live in uninhabitable desert. OP's post is more of that same shit. It's just trying to tear people away from their history, to erase any connection with the past.
After all, what happens when you don't pay the danegeld OP is asking for? They just come remove you when someone else wants you land?
"Kill everyone who isn't at least twelfth generation immigrant"
I'm willing to bet that would include you, idiot.
Oh how I wish I could enforce that bet on you, without doxing myself. It would be free money. It is pure projection on your part that I do not know my family tree.
Not everyone is a rootless cosmopolitan like you. Some of us know our family trees back to the 1400's.
My mother's side has been here since the 1600s but my father's the 1950s. Where would that put me?
In a better position than Giztornik.
Most of you people are missing the point of what I'm saying. I shouldn't have to buy back what is already mine. I shouldn't keep having to pay rent to some government on top of what has already been paid to it, just to keep existing.
I would take that bet as well. The issue is that it would have to happen, and considering I'm a seventh generation """"immigrant"""" to you (immigrated to the US in the late 1880's from Eastern Europe), I wouldn't need money, but ammunition to drive you out of my country because you're a murderous lunatic.
Being an American isn't being a "rootless cosmopolitan". You should probably just leave my country, and go back to wherever the fuck you think you came from (who probably wouldn't have you), rather than live in a country that doesn't work with your values by rejecting the murder of over 150 million Americans for no reason.
Truth is, if we did do a genetic test and did trace your family history; I'm willing to bet it's far more mixed then you are willing to accept. You've just chosen one specific lineage that you like that you think you can trace; but it's more likely that you're just an Amerimutt like everyone else.
That's assuming you're even American.
Honestly, if you were a true, blue-blood Anglo, you'd probably be a rabid Leftist. Most of the Anglo colonial-settler elites (and the plantation class elites) all are.
The second one guy "invades" another and the police/US military gets involved the experiment (and the charade) ends.
Which despite all protestations to the contrary will happen, as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow.
Heh, it'll likely be the government invading one of the people who left under the grounds that he was committing incest and sexual abusing children. We've seen similar plays before.
Fair point. Whichever of your or my scenario happens first is how this will all end.
Commies don't want a land of their own. They want to subjugate the people of "their" current country and force the utopia on to it.
Even if this idea of yours was possible as soon as The Free City States of Ancapistan had a population over 2 leftists would be banging on the gates, demanding to be let in. And if you were stupid enough to let them in they would immediately call for change in order to bring about another utopia.
You'd almost be better off trying to build an underwater Rapture. Even though the result would still be the same:
"We want something from you, and because you can't defend yourselves, we'll take it by force."
Whether it be wanting set up international banks (on their terms), wanting resources you have access to, currency control, cultural control, etc etc.
Actually, they probably wouldn't even bother with military force to start with. All they'd have to do is throw a bunch of paid for migrant freighters at you, and then when you try to force those boats away they'll declare that you're committing atrocities and then they'll proceed with military action, after you've had to waste resources on turning those stupid boats away.
Wouldn't work because someone else would try to invade this way, better it be an island or hell I think there are static buildings like old forts in the English channel that have more of a shot being their own country.
Having land isn't enough, you have to have some kind of obstacle or deterrent between you and the next guy that makes them go 'you know what, not worth trying it, I like breathing'
Interesting for sure.
It's a stupid idea that achieves nothing. If you can do it, you don't need to.
They tried that in America in the mid 19th century. Turns out the government doesn't like half its tax base disappearing overnight
Trying to "buy out" your own country is like trying to vote out corrupt officials. You have to use force against those who only understand force.