American Politics Discussion

[Cicero]

9 hours ago, Beelzebub said:

What? Details...

Hope you like donuts. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Cicero

[OrangeKhrush]

 

[OrangeKhrush]

need a dark knight joker meme.   when the democrats fly illegal immigrants around at midnight with guys kitted out in spec ops gear nobody bats an eye.  when de Santis sends 50 immigrants voluntarily to paradise on earth us edition everyone melts like the Germans at the end of raiders of the lost ark.

[Dr. Gonzo]

4 hours ago, OrangeKhrush said:

need a dark knight joker meme.   when the democrats fly illegal immigrants around at midnight with guys kitted out in spec ops gear nobody bats an eye.  when de Santis sends 50 immigrants voluntarily to paradise on earth us edition everyone melts like the Germans at the end of raiders of the lost ark.

I don't even know what you're referencing regardint the spec-ops gear shit  but I think it's funny to paint what the federal government, who has jurisdiction over migrants in federal custody, to a governor telling people he's flying them one place... and then flying them elsewhere to score political points with the MAGA idiot crowd.

Gotta say though, it's impressive how willing you are to fight a culture war for a country that you don't even live in.

[OrangeKhrush]

it's bad when even Bill Maher can't even satirize it and just admits that she needs to go or they will lose.

identity politics is so engrained into democrat talking points, that policy has fallen to the wayside.   when being libertarian is considered far right.

All they do is look for political hit jobs to rule up the voter base in hope that they are stupid and can't see that the democrats are bad for america and I dare say the world.

interesting take, not like america doesn't like taking other people's resources.

 

a good deep take on the common left wing tropes used ie maga people or the political attack on people opposed to late stage abortion which was 87% of Americans and 78% support 12 weeks limits, that must be maga people.

and to close, Forbes had their woman summit and a keynote speaker is a man(trans woman) that has pretended to be a woman for all but 2 minutes making insufferable tick toks about how it feels to be woman by relying on misogynistic stereotypes of woman is just pure gold.

meanwhile in the UK you can be sorry and let off for raping kids.

[OrangeKhrush]

https://www.sigsauer.com/mcx-spear-lt.html

the new US military service rifle, the US is outsourcing to SIG, HK and FN due to superior build quality.   

the spear lt or gen3 mcx is built off the AR-15 platform, just more dependable than colt

[Spike]

On 23/09/2022 at 05:58, Gunnersaurus said:

You know when someone says people are becoming a minority in their own country most things they say can be ignored. Hardly anyone is completely indigenous to their country if you go back far enough and we dont know the ones that are because it goes back so far. The original Germanics for example come from Scandinavia. This indigenous bollocks that right wingers try to promote is noncence. It's even less likely in mainland Europe because it is all land that could be be walked over. Britian is an island and even we hardly have anyone who is completely indigenous. You never become a minority in your own country unless you want to use the definition of minority as people who family line is completely from the same country which is highly unlikely. This is all about people who look different. Its just a way of disguising racism. There is loads of information that can show you how the boundaries have changed and the history of invasions and conquests. Most british people are a mix of french, German,Italian Scandinavian and British.  Even the English language is a germanic language. If you are seriously worried that the culture will be different in 200 years or so then you need to reevaluate your life. Most countries have a mix of different cultural influences. Most things British for example aren't originally british including fish and chips 

The problem with this line of thinking is that it can be used to easily justify colonialism. 

[Azeem]

While they overlap the historical rule of conquest and colonialism were different in ways. 

a. Every conquest has spoils but there were empires who were quite strict about the rules of spoil. Colonialism was unhinged. 

b. Colonialism was solely aimed at draining everything to a far away land. Many conquerors settled into their new lands permanently and become part of them i.e There would've been a small white minority in India/Pakistan like South Africa

b2. While mere conquest also benefited from conquered lands but colonialism transformed the entire local economy destroying it on a industrial scale just to get a prime price for 'seasonally' popular product back at home. If Alexander had forced others to exclusively sell a crop that was popular in Macedonia that would be the equivalent.

[Waylander]

10 hours ago, Beelzebub said:

While they overlap the historical rule of conquest and colonialism were different in ways. 

a. Every conquest has spoils but there were empires who were quite strict about the rules of spoil. Colonialism was unhinged. 

b. Colonialism was solely aimed at draining everything to a far away land. Many conquerors settled into their new lands permanently and become part of them i.e There would've been a small white minority in India/Pakistan like South Africa

b2. While mere conquest also benefited from conquered lands but colonialism transformed the entire local economy destroying it on a industrial scale just to get a prime price for 'seasonally' popular product back at home. If Alexander had forced others to exclusively sell a crop that was popular in Macedonia that would be the equivalent.

Colonialism was complicated.

Although it could be a way of getting resources back to the colonising nation cheaply it could also be about having a strategic position to stop other hostile forces.

Another consideration on colonisation was getting the colonised country to buy the colonisers manufactured products as their own producers go out of business. 

Here is another I gleaned from Newsnight tv program about a decade ago. the EU were giving loans to African nations to produce metal ores. The Africans wanted help to changes the ores into manufactured products. The EU refused to give loans to do that.

It will be interesting to see if China give the means of production to African nations. I suspect not.

[OrangeKhrush]

They are melting down over Twitter again, now they can't use the platform for thought control they are freaking out.

[Gunnersaurus]

On 05/10/2022 at 01:07, Spike said:

The problem with this line of thinking is that it can be used to easily justify colonialism. 

In what way? By a certain country saying their ancestors were there first?

[Spike]

1 hour ago, Gunnersaurus said:

In what way? By a certain country saying their ancestors were there first?

Well you stated that no one (or very few) is indigenous or native so that essentially pulls the rug out on any and just about every movement that calls for justice and equality for First Nations peoples. If you follow the logic of your post you can easily replace the talking points of Europeans with Native Americans or Aboriginal Australians.

I would also disagree with the idea that populations are largely non-Indigenous in Europe. Migration for the most part wasn't as huge as people you might think, and conquerors of lands usually just replaced the nobility, not the general populace. For instance in England just because the the Anglo-Saxon Kings were replaced by Norman kings doesn't mean the common people were displaced as well.  I recall reading an article of how the basic DNA of people from the Italian peninsula is largely unchanged over a thousand years despite many different people having conquered the peninsula.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Spike

[Gunnersaurus]

16 minutes ago, Spike said:

Well you stated that no one (or very few) is indigenous or native so that essentially pulls the rug out on any and just about every movement that calls for justice and equality for First Nations peoples. If you follow the logic of your post you can easily replace the talking points of Europeans with Native Americans or Aboriginal Australians.

I would also disagree with the idea that populations are largely non-Indigenous in Europe. Migration for the most part wasn't as huge as people you might think, and conquerors of lands usually just replaced the nobility, not the general populace. For instance in England just because the the Anglo-Saxon Kings were replaced by Norman kings doesn't mean the common people were displaced as well.  I recall reading an article of how the basic DNA of people from the Italian peninsula is largely unchanged over a thousand years despite many different people having conquered the peninsula.

I'd have to look into the facts but I'm pretty certain a lot of people.have mixed DNA but I'd have to check 

[Dr. Gonzo]

16 minutes ago, Spike said:

For instance in England just because the the Anglo-Saxon Kings were replaced by Norman kings doesn't mean the common people were displaced as well.

In Yorkshire they put down rebellions by slaughtering a lot of the natives and salted the fields to make it harder for people there to survive.

[Gunnersaurus]

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

In Yorkshire they put down rebellions by slaughtering a lot of the natives and salted the fields to make it harder for people there to survive.

Just found an article and it says abit about it @Spike ironically yorkshire is the  most british place 

https://www.ancestry.com/corporate/international/press-releases/DNA-of-the-nation-revealedand-were-not-as-British-as-we-think

 

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In Yorkshire they put down rebellions by slaughtering a lot of the natives and salted the fields to make it harder for people there to survive.

That doesn't mean that a bunch of peasants from Caen were put there to replace them though.

[Spike]

7 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

Just found an article and it says abit about it @Spike ironically yorkshire is the  most british place 

https://www.ancestry.com/corporate/international/press-releases/DNA-of-the-nation-revealedand-were-not-as-British-as-we-think

 

That article defines British as Anglo-Saxon, Scotland and Wales were not Anglo-Saxon, and before the Anglo-Saxons (and Romans) were Celtic peoples that were spread from Britain to Ireland, they were largely similar and the modern day equivalents were divergent of each other.. So I'm not really sure what that article is getting at.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Spike

[Dr. Gonzo]

13 minutes ago, Spike said:

That doesn't mean that a bunch of peasants from Caen were put there to replace them though.

Still displaced though

[Spike]

You also have an idea of 'bloodline purity' being the only pre-requisite to being native. That opens up a whole of lot of issues, I think 'Indigenous' and 'Native' is more nuanced and simply DNA sequencing. I'd say for the most part the average 'British ethnically' British person is native, just because a Norse marauder raped one of their ancestors doesn't mean that person isn't 'Indigenous'. Otherwise how could most if not all Aboriginal Australians, and Native Americans claim to be Indigenous of their particular lands? It's a very complex issue that gets into some dicey ethical territory.

[Spike]

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

Still displaced though

That isn't displacement though. They died in their home.

[Gunnersaurus]

12 minutes ago, Spike said:

That article defines British as Anglo-Saxon, Scotland and Wales were not Anglo-Saxon, and before the Anglo-Saxons (and Romans) were Celtic peoples that were spread from Britain to Ireland, they were largely similar and the modern day equivalents were divergent of each other.. So I'm not really sure what that article is getting at.

Bit confusing wording. I think since it is only going back 500 years ago it might be clashing people who living in britian at the time as British. And anyone who cake after as not.  And since the Anglo Saxon invasion happened before then anglo saxons  are being classed as British but it is confusing wording. @nudge help

[Dr. Gonzo]

7 minutes ago, Spike said:

That isn't displacement though. They died in their home.

The survivors who had to go elsewhere cos all their farmland was destroyed, though.

[Spike]

10 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

Bit confusing wording. I think since it is only going back 500 years ago it might be clashing people who living in britian at the time as British. And anyone who cake after as not.  And since the Anglo Saxon invasion happened before then anglo saxons  are being classed as British but it is confusing wording. @nudge help

They aren't really sure if it happened. It wasn't like the Norman invasion, it happened during the Dark Ages so there really isn't must info on it. The whole process was over a few hundred years, there was no 'Anglo-Saxon' people that invaded England the 'Anglo-Saxons' were an amalgamation of different Germanic tribes (Angles, Jutes, Saxons) and whatever mish mash of Romanic Celts were there. Historians can't even agree if it was a mass migration that caused a demographic shift, or a ruling elite that set the culture.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Spike

[Spike]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The survivors who had to go elsewhere cos all their farmland was destroyed, though.

That is true. But lets no pretend that didn't happen once a year under feudalism.

[nudge]

20 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

Bit confusing wording. I think since it is only going back 500 years ago it might be clashing people who living in britian at the time as British. And anyone who cake after as not.  And since the Anglo Saxon invasion happened before then anglo saxons  are being classed as British but it is confusing wording. @nudge help

Not my field of expertise, sorry!