From the comments:
I violently disagree that any person adult & sane should be governed by another.
I used to agree with this position but it’s way too extreme.
Someone with an IQ under 70 is generally defined as being mentally retarded. I think it’s clear to everyone that such a person needs some guidance. The problem does not disappear with an increase in IQ to 71.
I live near some section 8 housing. The people that live in the section 8 housing have lots of problems. An over-abundance of governance is not one of them. I honestly don’t believe that any thoughtful person could walk through that housing project and believe that no one should be governed by another.
We all know some proles who – though lovely people – are happiest with some gentle guidance which provides them with direction and purpose. Try explaining anarcho-capitalism or minarchism to such people and watch their eyes glaze over.
I’m willing to admit that many people in today’s society are burdened by too much governance. Why can’t libertarians admit the inverse?
One way to get you two to agree would be to agree on a definition of adult and sane. Is a 75 IQ individual adult in a meaningful way?
Also, on the global level, that is in effect a call for recolonization, seeing what the average IQ in certain parts of the world is.
Indeed my suggestion is basically a call for re-colonialization, which I think is good evidence that it is likely correct.
As Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn put it, good government requires “building up defence machineries around spheres in which the person should have power and self-government approximately commensurate with his own capacities”.
The Section 8 people have both too litle governance, and too much, because they are protected from the consequences of choices they do have the capacity to make.
[...] Foseti: Elitism and On leadership [...]
[...] Foseti – “HBD Denialism“, “On Leadership” [...]