I was thinking, if I were to hypothetically make a country, it would be pretty damn free as I still adhere to fairly libertarian positions. But I fear such a country would not be able to resist marxist subversion in the long term. Just as the more relatively laissez faire (economically at least) US was unable to prevent it.
So I thought of using the Constitution as a way of taking care of issues I was afraid my society would be unable to deal with.
Such a safeguard I suspect would take the place of amendments prohibiting cultural marxist ideas.
Not prohibiting their discussion but making them into social policy.
Examples could include: any policies designed with the intention of destroying the nuclear family are not allowed to be public policy.
Another example could be any policy which reduces the ethnic population to below 90% would be banned. Since that is a hallmark of CM, reduction of the dominant group by reducing their political control in their country. And 90% is a safe supermajority.
But this seems inelegant, so another solution I thought of would be to have a very decentralized system (making it harder to capture) and also limiting how the media can report news. Probably by reintroducing the Fairness Doctrine which had the unintended consequence of prohibiting stations from taking chances on radical ideas (for those unaware, the FD was US policy that stated on any contested issue one had to show both sides of the issue in a fair manner. As a result, media outlets stuck to the standard zeitgeist of past America).
Would ANY of this be wise? Think of this as bug testing.
And maybe as an exercise, what would users on this forum do if anything?
Going to bed so if I don't reply right away, that is why
So I thought of using the Constitution as a way of taking care of issues I was afraid my society would be unable to deal with.
Such a safeguard I suspect would take the place of amendments prohibiting cultural marxist ideas.
Not prohibiting their discussion but making them into social policy.
Examples could include: any policies designed with the intention of destroying the nuclear family are not allowed to be public policy.
Another example could be any policy which reduces the ethnic population to below 90% would be banned. Since that is a hallmark of CM, reduction of the dominant group by reducing their political control in their country. And 90% is a safe supermajority.
But this seems inelegant, so another solution I thought of would be to have a very decentralized system (making it harder to capture) and also limiting how the media can report news. Probably by reintroducing the Fairness Doctrine which had the unintended consequence of prohibiting stations from taking chances on radical ideas (for those unaware, the FD was US policy that stated on any contested issue one had to show both sides of the issue in a fair manner. As a result, media outlets stuck to the standard zeitgeist of past America).
Would ANY of this be wise? Think of this as bug testing.
And maybe as an exercise, what would users on this forum do if anything?
Going to bed so if I don't reply right away, that is why