The Regime and Racial Egalitarianism

FROM “burnt-toast” on Gab:
Philosophically, race would be a natural target of a global monarch who sought to consolidate power by dissolving distinctions among his subjects into a singular political identity: citizens first, all else second.
A ruler aspiring to govern across races might regard racial classifications as competing sources of allegiance, historical grievance, and collective identity that threaten the unifying authority of the state.
By subordinating race to citizenship, he could present himself as the sovereign of a common political community, above the divisions that distinguish one population from another.
Yet this reveals the fundamental purpose of colorblindness as a governing principle: imperial consolidation demands that they surrender their historical identities and grievances that challenge the ruler’s authority.
The charge, then, is that the Court has withdrawn a consequential instrument of democratic self-government, not to enforce the Constitution, but to acquiesce to a royal decree by a foreign monarch that subordinates the republic’s independence to a universal global doctrine of citizenship.
If an absolute monarch wanted to conquer and rule the entire world unchallenged, a “color-blind” royal decree such as Brown v Board is the ultimate administrative weapon:
The Erasure of Local Identity and Resistance
For a global monarch, the greatest threat to total rule is the existence of distinct, self-governing groups — tribes, nations, cultures, and races—with their own unique histories, allegiances, and structures. (more…)








