Make America Uniquely Anglo-Saxon Again?

[PRCD]

Where will they go?

That is not a gotcha question.

E. Europe, LatAm, many expats are already in Asia. I don't think any of these places are going to be better than anywhere else but people will try to move.

 

[Autoprax]

E. Europe, LatAm, many expats are already in Asia. I don't think any of these places are going to be better than anywhere else but people will try to move.

I thought I could live in Vietnam.

I felt fairly safe out in the countryside.

One thinks I wouldn't contribute to brain drain.

 

[Autoprax]

Although I don’t agree with it I understand it.

What I don’t understand is this
View attachment 108142
Average over 500 bed wetting posts/month?

I notice that certain people will trigger certain people.

There are a couple of people here I really trigger and I'm just trying to have fun.

 

[enframed]

What conditions, you ask? Whatever conditions there are that prompt people to (for example) cross into Mexico to get their medical and dental work and meds. Whatever conditions there are that push the rate of medical inflation in the US past the other rates of inflation applicable to all our other goods and services.

You just repeated yourself, and did not answer the question I asked. You've been in doublespeak mode for a couple of pages.

 

[hal9000]

If you're referring to my question the comparo is 2021 to 2001. Not 1951.

WRT slavery, that was standard across the entire world at that time. It wasn't something Americans invented or perfected.

suddenly you’re a fan of cultural relativism?

 

[afoaf]

You just repeated yourself, and did not answer the question I asked. You've been in doublespeak mode for a couple of years.

 

[test_article]

When my people came here there was no safety net. It was adapt or die. Sellout or starve. America isn't doing that any more. Now we're committed to carrying those among the newcomers who can't or won't adapt. This is having an effect on these outcomes.

So no, the feminized participation award program we're running now is nowhere near the moral equivalent of expecting people to exercise personal responsibility for their outcomes.

If you can take it then you can have it, and good for you. But if you require (the state to compel) me to give it to you then it doesn't belong to you and you are not morally entitled to it on the no-strings-attached basis. Which reasoning, BTW, applies to everyone other than the old/infirm and the widows/orphans.

Today's constraints are not yesterday's. If only you could go back to that time to live awhile, then let us know how you liked it. You've been the beneficiary of a lot of stuff that others have been compelled to give you whether you acknowledge it or not. For starters, as a cop, who paid you? Were you a Pinkerton?

 

[test_article]

What's so annoying is that the race hustlers are criticizing whitey for preferring or at least aspiring not to think of themselves in racialized terms (like when someone says "I don't see color"). Then they get outraged with what happens when they succeed in compelling whitey to actively think in racialized terms and to explicitly self-identify as white and distinctly separate and apart from non-white.

The most charitable interpretation of that fundamental logic disconnect would be to ask "what did they think was going to happen?". A more cynical interpretation of that disconnect in reasoning is that they fully intended to fan the flames of conflict.

...but the Constitution expresses racialized terms from the get-go, no? How far back do you want to walk it?

I think people who don't accept the idea of color blind are just saying that color blindness isn't enough to turn the trick considering the centuries of wholly legitimized and promulgated white on dark injustice. U.S. of America created this situation for itself.

 

[test_article]

And yet, the left expects everyone else to conform to their values or suffer the consequences.

I wish so many on the Right weren't expected to conform to a lack of values.

 

[hal9000]

I wish I had a Graham cracker and a piece of chocolate to go with the roasting that @test_article just served up.

 

[GDaddy]

Gaslighting and lying isn't roasting. Nor is it an argument. It's just bleedage.

 

[nolibos]

Fook na Angla-Shacsainigh!

 

[mundus]

Gaslighting and lying isn't roasting. Nor is it an argument. It's just bleedage.

As opposed to pining for an imaginary time that never existed?

 

[plasticbertrand]

Uh, you kinda did with this remark, where you equivocated criticism of culture with criticism of race: ""Oh it's not you race that I hate, it's your culture""

That's exactly opposite from equating the two.

Hating someone's culture is as bigoted as being a racist or a transphobe.

 

[test_article]

Gaslighting and lying isn't roasting. Nor is it an argument. It's just bleedage.

Who's being gaslighted? Who's lying? Are you saying the revenues that paid your salary weren't compelled? How about the U.S. of America's heritage of racial injustice? A lie? Is Donnie BooBoo a paragon of virtue or even a competent leader?

If you don't like the terms maybe you shouldn't inject them into the argument.

 

[enframed]

Gaslighting is a term we should all stop accusing folks here of cuz most here appear to not know what it means and/or use it incorrectly. I'm not sure it can even happen on a message board.

 

[Mr Doof]

Gaslighting is a term we should all stop accusing folks here of cuz most here appear to not know what it means and/or use it incorrectly. I'm not sure it can even happen on a message board.

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgement.[1] It may evoke changes in them such as cognitive dissonance or low self-esteem, rendering the victim additionally dependent on the gaslighter for emotional support and validation. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction and disinformation,[2] gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs.

Instances can range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents occurred, to belittling the victim's emotions and feelings, to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim. The goal of gaslighting is to gradually undermine the victim's confidence in their own ability to distinguish truth from falsehood, right from wrong, or reality from delusion, thereby rendering the individual or group pathologically dependent on the gaslighter for their thinking and feelings.

The term originated from the British play Gas Light (1938), performed as Angel Street in the United States, and its 1940 and 1944 film adaptations (both titled Gaslight). The term has now been used in clinical psychological literature,[3][4] as well as in political commentary and philosophy.[5]

 

[test_article]

Gee, I didn't want GDy to swallow his tongue, just to understand there are other truths.

 

[ElOgro]

I notice that certain people will trigger certain people.

There are a couple of people here I really trigger and I'm just trying to have fun.

You’re from my generation. What you and I consider fun in that respect results in some serious vaginal leakage from Hal and his ilk. Vaginal leakage is necessary for those among us that have a vagina. This is the reason I’m not a team player. One of the reasons anyway.

 

[ElOgro]

Gee, I didn't want GDy to swallow his tongue, just to understand there are other truths.

Yeah? Your post on how you got out of your commitment to military service is all we need to know about you.