The US was a country founded on illegal immigration and open rebellion.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

PsychedelicDiamond:
Hot take: America has always been shit. Now I don't want to be unfair, there's a point to be made that they have a better track record than my country because, you know, that whole Holocaust thing, but it's not like America becoming the vanguard of western fascism in the 21st century was somehow a development that came out of left field. America always had a violently dangerous interpretation of Christianity and of Nationalism and of anticommunism and... look, the writing was on the wall about this one for a long time. I'd hesitate to say that America has ever been a force for good for the world at large.If you wanna cut them some slack for opposing the axis in WWII you might as well do the same for Stalinist Russia.

While the syndicate of mentally deranged criminals currently running America might or might not be seen as a sort of peak it was anything but unpredictable. I mean, where the hell did you think all of this was going? Sarah Palin almost became vice president, Rick Santorum almost ran for president, there was no good end to any of this. And even if America has democratic elections again and even if the Democrats put another president in office the only way the country can heal is if that government clearly says "The people who got Trump elected are traitors and they will face the consequences" because as soon as they try to reach out to Trump's followers and win them back they've given their consent for things to continue as usual.

Honestly, the best thing to do after taking back the government might just be to open up the borders completely and hope that within a generation all of American culture will be replaced with something hopefully better because I'm legitimitely not sure if there's anything redeemable about it at this point. At this point, if you're American, the best thing you can do is renounce America. Burn your flags. Cut out the whole "god bless America" shit and especially the "greatest country in the world" shit. I was born in Germany and I can acknowledge that a lot about current Germany is trash. But you know what? I can say with some confidence that having to live in current America, I'd hate even more. Viewing your nation as inherently good and being proud of what it stands for is what got you in this situation in the first place.

This. All of it.

It also kinda reminds me of when Ezri and Worf discuss about the future of the Klingon Empire.

PsychedelicDiamond:
Hot take: America has always been shit.

I see nothing wrong with this post. And the Holocaust was definitely a very evil event compressed into a pretty short time frame, but if we look at how the US benefited from slavery, genociding the natives, and all of the civil rights abuses after slavery, continuing up to this day, I'm pretty sure we're consistently a worse nation than Germany.

trunkage:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Hot take: America has always been shit. Now I don't want to be unfair, there's a point to be made that they have a better track record than my country because, you know, that whole Holocaust thing, but it's not like America becoming the vanguard of western fascism in the 21st century was somehow a development that came out of left field. America always had a violently dangerous interpretation of Christianity and of Nationalism and of anticommunism and... look, the writing was on the wall about this one for a long time. I'd hesitate to say that America has ever been a force for good for the world at large.If you wanna cut them some slack for opposing the axis in WWII you might as well do the same for Stalinist Russia.

While the syndicate of mentally deranged criminals currently running America might or might not be seen as a sort of peak it was anything but unpredictable. I mean, where the hell did you think all of this was going? Sarah Palin almost became vice president, Rick Santorum almost ran for president, there was no good end to any of this. And even if America has democratic elections again and even if the Democrats put another president in office the only way the country can heal is if that government clearly says "The people who got Trump elected are traitors and they will face the consequences" because as soon as they try to reach out to Trump's followers and win them back they've given their consent for things to continue as usual.

Honestly, the best thing to do after taking back the government might just be to open up the borders completely and hope that within a generation all of American culture will be replaced with something hopefully better because I'm legitimitely not sure if there's anything redeemable about it at this point. At this point, if you're American, the best thing you can do is renounce America. Burn your flags. Cut out the whole "god bless America" shit and especially the "greatest country in the world" shit. I was born in Germany and I can acknowledge that a lot about current Germany is trash. But you know what? I can say with some confidence that having to live in current America, I'd hate even more. Viewing your nation as inherently good and being proud of what it stands for is what got you in this situation in the first place.

Here is the thing about Germany. You screwed up. You had a good long hard look at yourselves and went Fascists. You screwed up. You had another hard look and got something reasonable.

All America does is double down on mistakes.

As an aside. Why do Americans insist on taking such pride in their country's achievements but go ballistic if it's suggested they feel some shame for the horrors their country has carried out?

CheetoDust:

trunkage:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Hot take: America has always been shit. Now I don't want to be unfair, there's a point to be made that they have a better track record than my country because, you know, that whole Holocaust thing, but it's not like America becoming the vanguard of western fascism in the 21st century was somehow a development that came out of left field. America always had a violently dangerous interpretation of Christianity and of Nationalism and of anticommunism and... look, the writing was on the wall about this one for a long time. I'd hesitate to say that America has ever been a force for good for the world at large.If you wanna cut them some slack for opposing the axis in WWII you might as well do the same for Stalinist Russia.

While the syndicate of mentally deranged criminals currently running America might or might not be seen as a sort of peak it was anything but unpredictable. I mean, where the hell did you think all of this was going? Sarah Palin almost became vice president, Rick Santorum almost ran for president, there was no good end to any of this. And even if America has democratic elections again and even if the Democrats put another president in office the only way the country can heal is if that government clearly says "The people who got Trump elected are traitors and they will face the consequences" because as soon as they try to reach out to Trump's followers and win them back they've given their consent for things to continue as usual.

Honestly, the best thing to do after taking back the government might just be to open up the borders completely and hope that within a generation all of American culture will be replaced with something hopefully better because I'm legitimitely not sure if there's anything redeemable about it at this point. At this point, if you're American, the best thing you can do is renounce America. Burn your flags. Cut out the whole "god bless America" shit and especially the "greatest country in the world" shit. I was born in Germany and I can acknowledge that a lot about current Germany is trash. But you know what? I can say with some confidence that having to live in current America, I'd hate even more. Viewing your nation as inherently good and being proud of what it stands for is what got you in this situation in the first place.

Here is the thing about Germany. You screwed up. You had a good long hard look at yourselves and went Fascists. You screwed up. You had another hard look and got something reasonable.

All America does is double down on mistakes.

As an aside. Why do Americans insist on taking such pride in their country's achievements but go ballistic if it's suggested they feel some shame for the horrors their country has carried out?

Ironically, the best way to absolve yourself of your country's wrong doing is to acknowledge it. I don't blame any modern German for the Nazi party...until they pretend it never happened. (Or they actively support Nazi ideals ofcourse)

CheetoDust:
As an aside. Why do Americans insist on taking such pride in their country's achievements but go ballistic if it's suggested they feel some shame for the horrors their country has carried out?

I think asking someone to feel shame for their past is likely the reason. There are things that my ancestors did that I am certainly not proud of but I would not feel shame as it was not me that did them.

Acknowledge the wrongdoing, understand the motivations of those that made the choices, and learn from it.

Just better have no skeletons in one's closet when claiming national virtues in justification of social policy.

Abomination:
I think asking someone to feel shame for their past is likely the reason. There are things that my ancestors did that I am certainly not proud of but I would not feel shame as it was not me that did them.

Acknowledge the wrongdoing, understand the motivations of those that made the choices, and learn from it.

Just better have no skeletons in one's closet when claiming national virtues in justification of social policy.

But it is an interesting point though: a disconnect where some people take the positives in the achievements of other people (such as their historical national accomplishments) but suddenly baulk at the idea that they might also be expected to take on negatives, too.

At a purely individualistic level, we contribute precisely zero (or so close to zero it makes little difference) to nearly all these things. Yet we associate and identify with them and derive pride anyway, such is human nature. But the opposite of pride is shame, and those things we identify with surely did bad things too. The shame comes with the pride as much as a coin has two sides, and to accept the pride but deny the shame is just being a cherry-picking hypocrite.

Agema:
The shame comes with the pride as much as a coin has two sides, and to accept the pride but deny the shame is just being a cherry-picking hypocrite.

I'm not sure it's that aggressively observed- it's not being a "cherry-picking hypocrite" to not want to feel bad, but to look for things to feel good about- that's the "human nature" part, right? That we would gravitate towards minimizing a negative and it's impact on our lives (however tenuous the connection to the negative might be perceived), while also looking to great accomplishments of the past by our ancestors, and feeling a sense of pride.

Pretending that no wrongs were ever done, or that one's people were infallible, however, is ignorance or arrogance and yeah, hypocritical.

It is not being a hypocrite so much as nobody wants to be known for the bad things that they did. Most people will focus on the good things that they did in life and try to minimize the bad things in life. It's the same concept.

I have my own thoughts on why this focus on the "good" side of American history is taking place. More and more it feels like education is focused on deconstructing the myths of America and focus on the less savory actions of the country as a whole and the individuals.

For instance, Andrew Jackson has a decidedly mixed legacy but many examinations of him focus extremely negatively on maybe three main things: slavery, treatment of Native Americans and his outbursts of violence. Missing are his successful military career and his being the first outsider to win the presidency, thereby opening the office up to others.

Or recently, I caught a show looking at myths surrounding the American Revolution and they made the point that the army was not filled with a bunch of patriotic true believers but rather filled with bounty seekers, lower class criminals and dregs of society. What they neglected to mention was that all armies at the time were filled this way, including the British army that the Americans were fighting. This also failed to talk about how armies at the time usually had a segment of volunteers who were true believers, instead implying that the entire army from the start was a mob of mercenaries and criminals.

mrglass08:
I have my own thoughts on why this focus on the ?good? side of American history is taking place. More and more it feels like education is focused on deconstructing the myths of America and focus on the less savory actions of the country as a whole and the individuals.

Would that itself be intended to counter a previous rose-tinted view? People say things were all wonderfully heroic and patriotic, so other people counter it with the mud and the blood, so someone else...

So instead of one extreme viewpoint you get to choose between two conflicting ones, because balance is hard?

Over correcting does tend to happen. It does not help that history is in the telling. The bare facts of history are boring and have little meaning outside the narrative that is constructed from them.

It also should be less choosing between two flawed understandings of history and more accepting that history is not a morality tale, there are very few pure heroes or villains, but knowing the good and the bad of the past helps to inform the now.

the December King:

I'm not sure it's that aggressively observed- it's not being a "cherry-picking hypocrite" to not want to feel bad, but to look for things to feel good about- that's the "human nature" part, right?

Absolutely, it is perfectly natural to prefer to associate with the good than the bad. But without bothering to sugar the pill, it's cherry-picking hypocrisy. It's a root of crass jingoism, xenophobia, etc.

As far as I'm concerned it's healthy and constructive self-improvement to admit and reflect on one's own flaws. By extension, also the flaws of what we choose to identify ourselves with.

Seanchaidh:
Saelune, you make it sound better than it is. The United States was founded on land theft, genocide, white supremacy and slavery, and a rebellion against aristocratic constitutional monarchy to replace it with oligarchic sham democracy. (Though, to be fair, some of the founding fathers favored a system of self employment rather than wage labor; none of them knew precisely what was to come on that front.)

Yup. People need to quit with the picking and choosing.

Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were - are you seriously advocating returning to that sort of scenario? Are we seeing this as the good outcome?

Catnip1024:

Seanchaidh:
Saelune, you make it sound better than it is. The United States was founded on land theft, genocide, white supremacy and slavery, and a rebellion against aristocratic constitutional monarchy to replace it with oligarchic sham democracy. (Though, to be fair, some of the founding fathers favored a system of self employment rather than wage labor; none of them knew precisely what was to come on that front.)

Yup. People need to quit with the picking and choosing.

Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were - are you seriously advocating returning to that sort of scenario? Are we seeing this as the good outcome?

I am making the point that many people who hate immigrants often rely on faulty logic. Many of their arguments can apply to themselves. Sort of a 'People in glass houses should not throw stones' thing.

Plus the right is far more prone to picking and choosing. Just look at every single right-wing Christian. You want to use the Bible as a legal document? Cause there is a lot of fucked up shit in it. Oh, now its just allegorical? Except those parts that defend hating gays and blacks?

And defending Trump? There is a whole reddit dedicated to posting Trump tweets from before he was President of him well, its bashing Obama usually, but they sound like he hates Trump too. Did you know Trump felt Obama golfed too much?

Saelune:

Catnip1024:

Seanchaidh:
Saelune, you make it sound better than it is. The United States was founded on land theft, genocide, white supremacy and slavery, and a rebellion against aristocratic constitutional monarchy to replace it with oligarchic sham democracy. (Though, to be fair, some of the founding fathers favored a system of self employment rather than wage labor; none of them knew precisely what was to come on that front.)

Yup. People need to quit with the picking and choosing.

Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were - are you seriously advocating returning to that sort of scenario? Are we seeing this as the good outcome?

I am making the point that many people who hate immigrants often rely on faulty logic. Many of their arguments can apply to themselves. Sort of a 'People in glass houses should not throw stones' thing.

Plus the right is far more prone to picking and choosing. Just look at every single right-wing Christian. You want to use the Bible as a legal document? Cause there is a lot of fucked up shit in it. Oh, now its just allegorical? Except those parts that defend hating gays and blacks?

And defending Trump? There is a whole reddit dedicated to posting Trump tweets from before he was President of him well, its bashing Obama usually, but they sound like he hates Trump too. Did you know Trump felt Obama golfed too much?

Every single right wing Christian?

Saelune, do you think I hate you? I might disagree with you on most issues, but it is never motivated by hate. This sounds like you might hate me though.

mrglass08:

Saelune:

Catnip1024:
Yup. People need to quit with the picking and choosing.

Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were - are you seriously advocating returning to that sort of scenario? Are we seeing this as the good outcome?

I am making the point that many people who hate immigrants often rely on faulty logic. Many of their arguments can apply to themselves. Sort of a 'People in glass houses should not throw stones' thing.

Plus the right is far more prone to picking and choosing. Just look at every single right-wing Christian. You want to use the Bible as a legal document? Cause there is a lot of fucked up shit in it. Oh, now its just allegorical? Except those parts that defend hating gays and blacks?

And defending Trump? There is a whole reddit dedicated to posting Trump tweets from before he was President of him well, its bashing Obama usually, but they sound like he hates Trump too. Did you know Trump felt Obama golfed too much?

Every single right wing Christian?

Saelune, do you think I hate you? I might disagree with you on most issues, but it is never motivated by hate. This sounds like you might hate me though.

You voted for Hillary. You are doing a poor job of being a right-winger, and I think that's a good thing.

Happy 4th

Catnip1024:
Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were

I remember that part, where Abraham Lincoln helped free the slaves by throwing countless Irish refugees on to the front lines, employing tactics that would make Stalin proud.

Abomination:

Catnip1024:
Also pay attention to how mercilessly exploited the vast majority of immigrants were

I remember that part, where Abraham Lincoln helped free the slaves by throwing countless Irish refugees on to the front lines, employing tactics that would make Stalin proud.

Lincoln was also a free soiler, which means he was keen to free the slaves and send them back to Africa where they came from. You know, to secure land for white farmer and get rid of the economic threat of slaves to Northern farmers. He seemed to "join" the abolishment movement to secure an ally against the South. I wonder what would have happened if he wasnt assassinated. Reconstruction could have been the best of these two outcomes

Saelune:
I am making the point that many people who hate immigrants often rely on faulty logic. Many of their arguments can apply to themselves. Sort of a 'People in glass houses should not throw stones' thing.

Many people on all sides are. Pot, kettle.

Plus the right is far more prone to picking and choosing.

Not really. Look at the gentrification / white flight bullshit.

And defending Trump? There is a whole reddit dedicated to posting Trump tweets from before he was President of him well, its bashing Obama usually, but they sound like he hates Trump too. Did you know Trump felt Obama golfed too much?

Who said anything about that?

Abomination:
I remember that part, where Abraham Lincoln helped free the slaves by throwing countless Irish refugees on to the front lines, employing tactics that would make Stalin proud.

To be fair, I don't think Lincoln can really be held responsible for being stuck with a bunch of inadequate generals who couldn't make a big victory stick despite significant superiority in numbers and weaponry. Nor that when he finally discovered winners, they attempted quite a few massed frontal assaults on entrenched positions.

Saelune:

US cant support everyone, doesn't mean we are wrong for trying.

I don't know all the answers, but denying people their humanity cause they look different, come from somewhere else and just want a better life is wrong.

That is made abundantly clear by the fact you appear to be supporting a clear cut paradox. For example, why hasn't anyone so up in arms over the latest immigration crisis bothered to acknowledge and address this video yet?

It's downright tragic how greatly the powers that be have hijacked and obfuscated the greater American public to the point it wouldn't even comprehend the root of the problem

.

The sad part is pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial are largely mocked and ridiculed by the same people who will let CNN, MSNBC, Time Magazine, Fox, NPR, etc. drip feed them the same old politically motivated and beholden drivel ad nauseum. The irony train left the station generations ago.

Catnip1024:

Saelune:
I am making the point that many people who hate immigrants often rely on faulty logic. Many of their arguments can apply to themselves. Sort of a 'People in glass houses should not throw stones' thing.

Many people on all sides are. Pot, kettle.

Plus the right is far more prone to picking and choosing.

Not really. Look at the gentrification / white flight bullshit.

And defending Trump? There is a whole reddit dedicated to posting Trump tweets from before he was President of him well, its bashing Obama usually, but they sound like he hates Trump too. Did you know Trump felt Obama golfed too much?

Who said anything about that?

Only one side has complete control of the US government. Your method of just dismissing everyone doesn't help anyone.

hanselthecaretaker:

Saelune:

US cant support everyone, doesn't mean we are wrong for trying.

I don't know all the answers, but denying people their humanity cause they look different, come from somewhere else and just want a better life is wrong.

That is made abundantly clear by the fact you appear to be supporting a clear cut paradox. For example, why hasn?t anyone so up in arms over the latest immigration crisis bothered to acknowledge and address this video yet?

It?s downright tragic how greatly the powers that be have hijacked and obfuscated the greater American public to the point it wouldn?t even comprehend the root of the problem

.

The sad part is pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial are largely mocked and ridiculed by the same people who will let CNN, MSNBC, Time Magazine, Fox, NPR, etc. drip feed them the same old politically motivated and beholden drivel ad nauseum. The irony train left the station generations ago.

I tend to not waste my time with channels like 'The Truth Factory'. Maybe a title that sounds like you manufacture truth is not a good idea? I avoid political youtube channels unless they are just about pointing out blatant things. When I use youtube videos, I try to cut out middle men. If I want to show a video about Trump saying something terrible, id rather it just be a video of Trump saying it personally.

Oh for the love of...

You just parrot this stuff you hear others saying that you think support your political opinions without even thinking about it, don't you? I have seen this same opinion spammed across twitter, facebook and other sites all week, complete with the same flaws and irrationality behind it. Well, lets tackle it again.

1st of all, America was founded by colonialists, not immigrants. They did not come over with intention of joining the great nations of the native americans, but rather to claim land and resources. They first acted as colonies for larger european powers, then eventually declared independence over disagreements regarding rights of citizens of the nation in colonies compared to on the mainland. They never came to america with the intention of not being english (or french, in the case of the canadian colonies), but rather to take new land and resources, gain distance from the church, and become wealthy in the new land while still being part of their nation. They were as much immigrants as an invading army is.

If you want to claim "they was immigrants!", beside being wrong outright, all you do there is justify every fear and concern people have about ALL immigrants, legal or illegal, as an invading force that will destroy the current way of life in america and make it like their home country. Not the position someone who supports immigration and opposes restrictions like a wall should be taking if they want to be viewed with any degree of seriousness (or any other emotion outside of pity, I suppose). I would have hoped someone so adamantly leftist would not be so eager to feed those fears out of concern that the fear would make people respond negatively, or even violently, but I suppose that was too much to expect there. It sounded like what you wanted to hear, so you echoed it uncritically despite the fact that is openly harms your claimed cause. No wonder zontar cheers your posts for their effectiveness in recruiting.

As for founding fathers being terrorists, again, you are wrong. They were rebels fighting a war. They didn't use terror and fear to push an ideological cause (you know, the definition of terrorism), they vandalized tea in a harbor, and fought a war for their own independence because their home nation would not give them representation despite taxing them. They were denied the rights to voice concerns in the political field despite being legal citizens, and after many acts of violence and denying of human rights against the soon-to-be american people (such as conscription to force them to fight or be killed, and attempts to disarm them), they finally rebelled and declared their independence, were then attacked for their declaration, and then fought and won their freedom from control by the crown.

That is very different than today where many people are encouraging violence as a response to not getting their way in a democratic republic where they DO have right to voice their concerns and vote on representatives. That is also very different on the basis of a lot of the people demanding being treated like citizens are not actual citizens of the nation they want to direct how to run what way.

There is a world of difference between how the american rebels could not vote or directly influence polices that directly affected them, such as the taxation, despite being legal citizens under the crown, and people who have every right and ability simply not getting the result they wanted this time around.

You are trying to compare very different situations and it is blatantly forced.

On the revolutionary side, you have people with no peaceful recourse, who were denied actual rights, had no means to vote for them, and were taxed and punished unfairly despite being legal citizens themselves, and who when even declaring freedom, were attacked and pressed into a war to justify their very human rights to speak freely, to arm themselves, and to be able to vote.

On the other you have a bunch of people upset the vote did not go their way, throwing temper tantrums and demanding the system that fairly determined the outcome now change to what they want under threat of violence in some cases. You have people with the same rights to voice opinion, arm themselves, and vote actively working to strip those rights down for others as a means to get the outcome they want, all while pretending they are in any way justified or morally right to do so.

You are comparing two very different things and the fact you unironically tried to sell this view completely straight is a very worrying thing to behold.

History says you are entirely wrong here Saelune. It joins common sense, recorded fact, basic reasoning, and reality itself in that stance.

Neither the history of the american colonies, nor the revolution itself justifies your views on immigration nor violence to get your way.

It is not inconsistent for people of a nation founded by a revolutionary war to cite the laws they made after forming as a reason to oppose illegal (not all, merely unlawful) immigration.

runic knight:
1st of all, America was founded by colonialists, not immigrants. They did not come over with intention of joining the great nations of the native americans, but rather to claim land and resources.

It's true! They were genocidal colonizers, not illegal immigrants.

runic knight:
They never came to america with the intention of not being english (or french, in the case of the canadian colonies)

Or Spanish, right? Unless you think that Las Vegas and Los Angeles are strange French dialects

If you want to claim "they was immigrants!", beside being wrong outright, all you do there is justify every fear and concern people have about ALL immigrants, legal or illegal, as an invading force that will destroy the current way of life in america and make it like their home country.

Hold the phone here a minute. Do you think that people here are arguing that colonialism was/is literally the same as immigration?

Might I offer an alternative argument: Commenting on the right's current hypocricy is about noting the bullshit entailed when people complain about immigrants in a country whose demographics are vastly made up by "non-native" populations?

There seems to be two options: Either you accept that European colonists injustly destroyed Native American culture and annexed all of their territory, in which case what kind of claim do you have to "America" anyway? What makes it yours aside from the formality of having happened to be born there? (Which sure didn't seem to help the Native Americans)

OR: The influx of global "settlers" (in many cases religious refugees, gee isn't that a funny parralel) have precicely as much right to the land of the USA as anyone else, meaning that there is as little right to turn away a non-violent refugee as there is to turn away a U.S. citizen.

Not the position someone who supports immigration and opposes restrictions like a wall should be taking if they want to be viewed with any degree of seriousness (or any other emotion outside of pity, I suppose). I would have hoped someone so adamantly leftist would not be so eager to feed those fears out of concern that the fear would make people respond negatively, or even violently, but I suppose that was too much to expect there. It sounded like what you wanted to hear, so you echoed it uncritically despite the fact that is openly harms your claimed cause. No wonder zontar cheers your posts for their effectiveness in recruiting.

This is simply condescending tripe. You have completely missed the crux of the argument. We arent talking about "immigration" from just colonial times (though in the literal sense, they most definitely were "immigrants") but immigrants from all across the U.S.' history. Irish, Italian, German, Spanish: huge numbers of immigrants.

Immigration has been at the heart of the U.S.'s economic success. The same people that celebrate white immigration (irish, italian) are claiming that non-white immigration is the end of all civilisation, with no self-awareness or understanding of their own immigration based history.

As for founding fathers being terrorists, again, you are wrong. They were rebels fighting a war. They didn't use terror and fear to push an ideological cause (you know, the definition of terrorism), they vandalized tea in a harbor, and fought a war for their own independence because their home nation would not give them representation despite taxing them.

That is without a doubt the most uncritical and niave interpretation as to the start of the U.S. war of independence that I have ever heard on this website. Its adorable.

That's it, is it? No mention of slavery? No mention of U.S. states denied requests to expand the 13 colonies inland? Please, give me a break. That explanation sounds like what they teach children.

They were denied the rights to voice concerns in the political field despite being legal citizens, and after many acts of violence and denying of human rights against the soon-to-be american people (such as conscription to force them to fight or be killed, and attempts to disarm them), they finally rebelled and declared their independence, were then attacked for their declaration, and then fought and won their freedom from control by the crown.

I can almost hear the propaganda music playing in the backround. Nothing but heroes, hm? It must be nice, to delude yourself over history quite so much.

That is very different than today where many people are encouraging violence as a response to not getting their way in a democratic republic where they DO have right to voice their concerns and vote on representatives. That is also very different on the basis of a lot of the people demanding being treated like citizens are not actual citizens of the nation they want to direct how to run what way.

Yes, there is absolutely no similarity between the U.S.' treatment of Porto Rico and the British Empire's treatment of the 13 colonies. None at all. Not even a smidge.

Furthermore, anyone in a gerrymandered district of Alabama or Texas (especially a racially gerrymandered one) whose vote is far less meaningfull than other white swing voters is just a cry-baby liberal who cant handle all their freedom.

Cool, nice.

There is a world of difference between how the american rebels could not vote or directly influence polices that directly affected them, such as the taxation, despite being legal citizens under the crown, and people who have every right and ability simply not getting the result they wanted this time around.

See above

On the revolutionary side, you have people with no peaceful recourse, who were denied actual rights, had no means to vote for them, and were taxed and punished unfairly despite being legal citizens themselves, and who when even declaring freedom, were attacked and pressed into a war to justify their very human rights to speak freely, to arm themselves, and to be able to vote.

EDIT: can't get this link to work, start this youtube vid at 1m23 sec. :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DRD1SNdhoc

On the other you have a bunch of people upset the vote did not go their way, throwing temper tantrums and demanding the system that fairly determined the outcome now change to what they want under threat of violence in some cases. You have people with the same rights to voice opinion, arm themselves, and vote actively working to strip those rights down for others as a means to get the outcome they want, all while pretending they are in any way justified or morally right to do so.

You are comparing two very different things and the fact you unironically tried to sell this view completely straight is a very worrying thing to behold.

You all ready typed this exact same point minus some meaningless ad-hominum, but I'm not surprised you forgot

History says you are entirely wrong here Saelune. It joins common sense, recorded fact, basic reasoning, and reality itself in that stance.

People claiming to be on the side of "common sense" are typically people whose arguments are far more flimsy than they are willing to admit. You thinking that your argument is self-evident does not excuse you from making it. And no, nothing that you have offered thus far has demonstrated your argument to any logically satisfactory degree.

Neither the history of the american colonies, nor the revolution itself justifies your views on immigration nor violence to get your way.

It is not inconsistent for people of a nation founded by a revolutionary war to cite the laws they made after forming as a reason to oppose illegal (not all, merely unlawful) immigration.

I don't know enough about gymnastics to be able to predict your score, but if there is any justice in the mental-gymnastics league it'll be a record breaker, I'm sure.

The US has a history like any other nation which fought for its independence, it was not pretty but it was sure more tamed then other nations.Haiti revolted once and cut the genitals of French officers when their island declared independence. While another France revolted and decapitated half of the population not once but twice to form a republic. People die violently during such turmoil but it does not define the future of a nation as being violent.

Saelune:
Only one side has complete control of the US government. Your method of just dismissing everyone doesn't help anyone.

Which absolves the opposition of any responsibility to be logically consistent how? Your method of consistently applying inconsistent standards helps nobody but the people you attack.

Catnip1024:

Saelune:
Only one side has complete control of the US government. Your method of just dismissing everyone doesn't help anyone.

Which absolves the opposition of any responsibility to be logically consistent how? Your method of consistently applying inconsistent standards helps nobody but the people you attack.

The person in the passenger seat might be a terrible driver, but they aren't driving. When they are behind the wheel, then I will worry. But right now we are driving on the wrong side into on-coming traffic.

And how am I inconsistent?

hanselthecaretaker:
For example, why hasn?t anyone so up in arms over the latest immigration crisis bothered to acknowledge and address this video yet?...

pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial

They are not pragmatic: quite the opposite, they are highly ideologically biased.

I'll bet Saelune could point you to some "independent" YouTube sites that would send you apoplectic - because they'd be telling you pretty much exactly the opposite. And that tells us all we need to know about "indepedent" as a marker for quality of fact and opinion.

There is no way that random members of the public jabbering away on the internet are going to be an improvement over the mainstream media. Good journalism comes from creating institutional processes to support good journalistic practice. Research; verification; ethics; objectivity; accountability; etc. By their very nature, random people jabbering away on YouTube almost inherently lack any such institutional processes. The mainstream media might have many flaws, but at least it does tend to have some processes to protect standards.

What random people jabbering away on YouTube do is exploit people's preference to be told that they are right. People know the answers they want to hear, and they seek and propagate whatever sources conform to what they already believe. Look through the YouTube videos supplied on this forum over the last ten years supposedly in defence of something or other and the vast majority are utter junk. Random people of no expertise blahblahblahing away with hopeless bias, colossal ignorance of vital facts or context, and barren of insight.

hanselthecaretaker:
The sad part is pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial are largely mocked and ridiculed by the same people who will let CNN, MSNBC, Time Magazine, Fox, NPR, etc. drip feed them the same old politically motivated and beholden drivel ad nauseum. The irony train left the station generations ago.

All of those sources are garbage. Yes, including Black Pigeon Speaks and Roaming Millennial.

Agema:

hanselthecaretaker:
For example, why hasn?t anyone so up in arms over the latest immigration crisis bothered to acknowledge and address this video yet?...

pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial

They are not pragmatic: quite the opposite, they are highly ideologically biased.

I'll bet Saelune could point you to some "independent" YouTube sites that would send you apoplectic - because they'd be telling you pretty much exactly the opposite. And that tells us all we need to know about "indepedent" as a marker for quality of fact and opinion.

There is no way that random members of the public jabbering away on the internet are going to be an improvement over the mainstream media. Good journalism comes from creating institutional processes to support good journalistic practice. Research; verification; ethics; objectivity; accountability; etc. By their very nature, random people jabbering away on YouTube almost inherently lack any such institutional processes. The mainstream media might have many flaws, but at least it does tend to have some processes to protect standards.

What random people jabbering away on YouTube do is exploit people's preference to be told that they are right. People know the answers they want to hear, and they seek and propagate whatever sources conform to what they already believe. Look through the YouTube videos supplied on this forum over the last ten years supposedly in defence of something or other and the vast majority are utter junk. Random people of no expertise blahblahblahing away with hopeless bias, colossal ignorance of vital facts or context, and barren of insight.

Ok, but if we're limited to just discussing immigration for this thread's sake and compare the immigrants of Europe from centuries ago to who's coming from Mexico today, there are clearcut "ideological" differences as well. European immigrants overall had a plan for how to build this country into what it is today. It involved corruption and injustice of great proportions to be sure, not to mention new diseases along the way, but how many people living today would prefer the alternative? What if a different, less technologically adept and ambitious group of people conquered North America? Chances are we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

What people don't seem to understand (or want to) is that North America went from a land occupied by tribal forces to one occupied by those who primarily created modern civilization. Today, we have nearly the opposite occurring, where people from a near-third world environment are migrating to an already advanced society. That means one of two things will occur: they can either assimilate to the new established way of life, or continue to live how they did before and take advantage of their new surroundings at their neighbors' expense. If too much of the latter is allowed to happen, we end up changing the culture, which is what we have occurring today.

When some people cannot understand why this could cause problems among the people who've been here for centuries and have generations of struggle, strife and pride behind them in establishing their way of life here, it becomes what should be an understandable issue of social injustice in itself.

hanselthecaretaker:

Agema:

hanselthecaretaker:
For example, why hasn?t anyone so up in arms over the latest immigration crisis bothered to acknowledge and address this video yet?...

pragmatic, truly independent outlets like Black Pigeon Speaks and The Roaming Millenial

They are not pragmatic: quite the opposite, they are highly ideologically biased.

I'll bet Saelune could point you to some "independent" YouTube sites that would send you apoplectic - because they'd be telling you pretty much exactly the opposite. And that tells us all we need to know about "indepedent" as a marker for quality of fact and opinion.

There is no way that random members of the public jabbering away on the internet are going to be an improvement over the mainstream media. Good journalism comes from creating institutional processes to support good journalistic practice. Research; verification; ethics; objectivity; accountability; etc. By their very nature, random people jabbering away on YouTube almost inherently lack any such institutional processes. The mainstream media might have many flaws, but at least it does tend to have some processes to protect standards.

What random people jabbering away on YouTube do is exploit people's preference to be told that they are right. People know the answers they want to hear, and they seek and propagate whatever sources conform to what they already believe. Look through the YouTube videos supplied on this forum over the last ten years supposedly in defence of something or other and the vast majority are utter junk. Random people of no expertise blahblahblahing away with hopeless bias, colossal ignorance of vital facts or context, and barren of insight.

Ok, but if we?re limited to just discussing immigration for this thread?s sake and compare the immigrants of Europe from centuries ago to who?s coming from Mexico today, there are clearcut ?ideological? differences as well. European immigrants overall had a plan for how to build this country into what it is today. It involved corruption and injustice of great proportions to be sure, not to mention new diseases along the way, but how many people living today would prefer the alternative? What if a different, less technologically adept and ambitious group of people conquered North America? Chances are we wouldn?t even be having this conversation.

What people don?t seem to understand (or want to) is that North America went from a land occupied by tribal forces to one occupied by those who primarily created modern civilization. Today, we have nearly the opposite occurring, where people from a near-third world environment are migrating to an already advanced society. That means one of two things will occur: they can either assimilate to the new established way of life, or continue to live how they did before and take advantage of their new surroundings at their neighbors? expense. If too much of the latter is allowed to happen, we end up changing the culture, which is what we have occurring today.

When some people cannot understand why this could cause problems among the people who?ve been here for centuries and have generations of struggle, strife and pride behind them in establishing their way of life here, it becomes what should be an understandable issue of social injustice in itself.

You know Mexicans don't live in huts right? And why is the centuries of native American pride, struggle and strife less valid than US Americans who have been here way less than they?

Saelune:
You know Mexicans don't live in huts right? And why is the centuries of native American pride, struggle and strife less valid than US Americans who have been here way less than they?

Because they're not citizens of the USA.

At the end of the day that is all that matters. If you are not a citizen you have no right to enter that country without prior approval.

All this chest beating by either side about who has struggled and striven the most is (typical of American political discussion) a red herring.

The United States can choose to accept more or less immigrants from whatever country they deem worthy, much like any other country can choose to do so. A country's absolute authority is recognized by its borders and it can do what it desires to those who have willingly entered it without its permission.

Abomination:

Saelune:
You know Mexicans don't live in huts right? And why is the centuries of native American pride, struggle and strife less valid than US Americans who have been here way less than they?

Because they're not citizens of the USA.

There are native Americans who are also US citizens.

I think you got "Mexicans" and "native Americans" mixed up when reading Saelune's post.

hanselthecaretaker:
Ok, but if we?re limited to just discussing immigration for this thread?s sake and compare the immigrants of Europe from centuries ago to who?s coming from Mexico today, there are clearcut ?ideological? differences as well. European immigrants overall had a plan for how to build this country into what it is today. It involved corruption and injustice of great proportions to be sure, not to mention new diseases along the way, but how many people living today would prefer the alternative? What if a different, less technologically adept and ambitious group of people conquered North America? Chances are we wouldn?t even be having this conversation.

Imagine a bunch of aliens visited Earth and brought with them an alien form of smallpox that wipes out 95% of the Earth's population. Then, two generations later, some more aliens visit Earth and go "Wow, look at all these vast and empty ruins of great cities - and these strange savage beings living in squalor amongst them! Let's come live here, there's tons of space." And then over the next five hundred years, humanity is slowly pushed out of the cities they built by aliens with space lasers - who drive humanity into the barren parts of the world, hunt humanity's own livestock to extinction, disintegrate humans when they try to poach alien crops to eat, and mine the shit out of Mount Rushmore to look for space gold or something. And once there's no more space left to drive the humans into, the aliens create "human reservations" out in the middle of the nowhere where the humans can live in peace - though they still depend on the aliens for food and resources, because the aliens appropriated all the arable land and useful resources, and ultimately end up working menial jobs in service to wealthier aliens under a constant crushing weight of low-yield prejudice, while suffering vastly higher rates of crime and sexual assault - mostly from aliens targeting humans - than the average alien citizen would.

And then imagine that an alien living in the United Alien States of Earth goes onto the Space Internet and says "It's ultimately a good thing that we came to Earth. We had a plan for how to build this planet into what it is today. It involved corruption and injustice of great proportions, to be sure, but how many people living today would prefer the alternative?"

What would you say to that alien?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here