Kids and property change everything. In fact, it should be almost a requirement to comment or write about our current situation that one have both.

I look forward to more output from the author .

You may shrug your shoulders and say so what; they’ve always been “fed up to there” and we’ve still managed to shove more down their throats. But I challenge any of you DWLs to cruise the boards and see how much gloating and glee was being expressed over the Black Brunches in tony hipster eateries all over hell’s half acre.

Yes, the blue collar stiff may be a racist who hates your pet People of Color, but that is pale to the visceral loathing he harbors in his breast for the likes of you. It’s deep, it’s visceral, it’s growing. The idea of forcing you DWLS to live your stated Cultural Marxist principles has been germinating and is about to flower … big time.

If you’re the ones pushing the so-called “white privilege” meme, it’s not going to take long for a smart working stiff (who you have forced to rub shoulders with POC) to remind them that there are degrees of privilege, that the branches of the bottom of the “White Privilege Tree” have been picked bare, and it’s time to climb higher.

Drug testing for welfare recipients is not enough. It is idiotic to expect the taxpayer to pay for the breeding of a feral, low-IQ underclass of people. No way, no how should a woman conceive a child on welfare. Part of the package of accepting welfare should be to require the recipients to undergo tubal ligations and vasectomies. Both of which are easily reversible once they get a job and can afford to pay for them out of pocket.

Polycentric Legal Regime? You mean like David Friedman’s Medieval Iceland or the Xeer system in Somalia? I don’t know, I honestly haven’t read that much about them.

You make a good counter-argument for the utility of surveillance, but I’d like to think we’ve seen enough mysteriously vanishing evidence not to trust government with the keys to it.

Perhaps the “bottom-up” panopticon avoids this.

I will confess that the entire line of argument makes me uncomfortable, and perhaps a little irrational. Ferguson-style riots are a legitimate public safety concern, and one we expect the state to respond to. I just fear the inevitable “mission creep” of all government agencies, police included.

What do you think of a polycentric legal regime? Not feasible?

The truth, however, is, he was right, 2/3 of Americans now carry pocket-sized always-on audiovisual recording devices with GPS logging. In the near future, surveillance will be ubiquitious and mostly invisible. Living in the ‘burbs, you won’t notice robocop or cheetah bots.

One of the upsides of surveillance that doesn’t get enough coverage is its utility after the fact in the case of self-defense. In the last few years, several individuals have been exonerated by surveillance cameras conclusively showing that they were the victim not the aggressor.
This case was notable:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/black-mob-picks-the-wrong-guy/
So was this one:
http://www.khou.com/story/news/2014/07/18/11540180/

If you CCW, and you use a gun in self-defense, and your attacker is a NAM juvenile without a gun, you better pray that was captured on film. Otherwise you get Zimmerman’d.

Bjørn Vosskriger