Is It OK for a Nation to Enforce a Religious Monoculture?

There's nothing wrong with a nation enforcing an ethnic or religious monoculture. So certainly this has some overlap with the last question. I think you disagreed with this one. Yeah. Uh yeah, I disagree. No, we agreed. We both agreed. Well, says you disagree? Yeah, we both agreed. So there's nothing wrong with a nation enforcing, yeah. Maybe I just didn't understand it. So I tried to write the question so that people like that you get a bunch of agrees and disagrees so we don't get subject to agree bias in the I I'm I'm I'm challenged because I'm an outlier. I'm a I'm a minority of a minority in a minority, and I know that I I don't represent really any constituency because of my own very rare and uh beliefs. I'm a secular humanist libertarian who thinks that people should be largely Christians, and that you know the Islamic communities in the United States should probably be proselytized and converted so that they can become more compatible with American values.

And I think that there's probably uh that the crowd, or as Nietzsche would call it, the herd, that there's probably a herd morality for most people that they need to adhere to, and that there's probably a different set of rules for the elites of society, and there always have been. Uh, and I think that when you try and enforce an ethnic or religious monoculture, you have to realize that the elites are always going to be more atheistic. Uh they're not going to adhere to that. And and I mean, would I enforce it by law? No, but would I actively encourage Christians to proselytize and to and to um convert Islamists in this country? Yeah, I would, because I think that that gets them I I want to move people closer to the libertarian ideal. Um and I do think a libertarianism ultimately is more of an elitist more theoretical than it is about America or even the nation that you might want to live in.

I mean, if you endorse Israel, which I believe you have, I do. That's a country that wants a religious monoculture, right? That that's sort of. Oh yeah, I mean Muslims can vote and live and and uh Arabs, Arab Muslims live in in Israel and and practice uh their religion in Israel. It's not like it's uh they're not exclusionary to the sense that you have to be Jewish to live in Israel. I I think uh it's it's they're certainly not neutral on the subject. And I and I and you could if you don't like that as an example, you could look at plenty of other nations, like uh well let me we don't need to make it a question about Israel, although we do need to do that talk about that, yeah. Uh uh well uh that's a whole show. Uh I I I I think you know, with this one, it's about this is just does a nation have a right to exist that does this?

And to me, it's like if if an if a nation is my neighbor and it's a religious or an ethnic monoculture and it's it's not aggressing towards me, uh why do I why would I care, you know, it trades with me fine or whatever. Why would I care that it's an ethnic or religious monoculture? To me, na national legitimacy here to me, the nations generally do two or maybe three things that make them illegitimate or wrong to me. One is they don't let their people leave. You know, if you're not letting people leave your nation, that that feels very illegitimate to me. Um, the other is nations don't just keep things inside of their borders, right? They say, not not only does my you know religion apply inside of my nation, my religious beliefs apply outside of my nation, and that becomes much more of a problem.

And then the third thing is the nations don't let this is maybe adjacent to the first one, they don't let subpolities leave. So there's not only do they not let people leave, there's no ability for some portion of the nation to break off. I just I don't like monoculture because I think it leads to inbreeding. And my my problem with the monoculture concept is like I think it's good that we have Catholics and Protestants in this country because I see them as the tension between the two of them makes both of them stronger. Plus, when they're fighting with each other, they have less time to kill the rest of us. So, you know, me being a a secular humanist, I I'm never going to be bound by the laws of society because I will never obey them. I I will never obey the laws or the rules of society. I will always, I will always do what I want.

But if you try and enforce a religious monoculture, then you have to then you take the liberty of someone like myself. Well, no, if we're going to be better at that, you have laws that you would follow. It would. It would. I agree. I feel similar. Yeah. No, no, no. But I'd rather have lost it. I'm good. But here's the thing. Most people I think probably need it. Right? Look at the people who lined up to put on a mask. Look at the people who lined up to go do things during COVID-19. This is the herd mentality, right? So you have to create a system where those people can coexist and do so peacefully. And and with with the least amount of danger to the people like ourselves in society who who need to be able to live in a society who are not a monogram. I agree completely. I mean, in fact, in terms of this is a little bit off topic, but if liberty wants to be winning, one of the biggest things we need to be doing is doing a better job, giving the average person the uniform that they can put on and not trying to convince them to understand the nap or the philosophy.

Right, agreeable stuff. Yes, normies. Normy politics. Yes.