Universal Studios Cancels 'The Hunt' Theatrical Release - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15028134
Pants-of-dog wrote:That was the argument being made.

I am glad that we have now backed away from it and are now discussing more real things.

No one is claiming anymore that the elites are planning on replacing white people.


How does white privilege function in society? How does institutional racism in the year 2019 function in society?

Is it consciously planned by a shadowy cabal?

Or is it something that manifests because of the crooked attitudes and warped values of those who have power?

The fact that you haven't addressed this but arrogantly dismiss our claims is astonishing and ridiculous, lol.


Do you think I am incorrect on this point?


Lol, it's not a point! That's the point. It's irrelevant.

Are you arguing that you can simply pass a law and the migrants will magically stop coming? Because illegal immigration does exist.


You're saying that it's impossible for a government in 2019 that round up millions of people and control them?

Are you denying that the Holocaust happened?

If a government can't exercise border control and come up with means of tracking and extraditing citizens, how could a government have ever rounded up so many Jews and gypsies and murdered them?

By your logic, the Holocaust couldn't have happened because the task is just too monumental.

Why would they do this? To weaken their own position? To give money away for no reason?

It is as if you are so focused on finding a way for you to be a victim of immigration that you ignore economic motives.


What would be the economic motives of zero migration?

Who says "let's pay more money to our workers because of their scarcity and have a smaller consumer base, that'll be profitable!"

POD, you haven't made a single point but post like you've actually been participating and establishing facts.

I imagine this is how the Puerto Rican government largely functions, lol.
#15028174
Sivad wrote:Is that like a sacred identity for you? I can't imagine giving a fuck about my racial or ethnic or cultural identity, it doesn't even factor in to my conception of who or what I am. Like I don't care about white people, I don't care what happens to white people as a group(in fact I'm pretty sure the whites are doomed on account of stupidity right along with the rest of this jackass species) or about individuals because they're white. I feel no need to defend white culture from bigotry, I have no affinity for anyone based on their whiteness, whiteness is almost like an alien concept to me. I can't imagine how it could possibly hold any meaning or relevance to my life, to who I am, or to anything I'm about. I just really don't get what people get out of their racial or ethnic or cultural identities? I have no tribe, my commitment is to the greater good and that's it. Those who share that commitment are my kind of people, but they're not like 'my people' because we have no commitment to each other, our only commitments are to that principle.

That is what is very distinctive about you @Sivad .

Do you think an African living among Africans worries about his Africaness? Or an Irishman among the Irish in Ireland?
Of course they don't @Sivad . They worry about their professional status or their religious convictions.

You don't have to think about being white.

I never had to think about being Boricua in PR either. Everyone was.

Identity politics is the hallmark of racist systems.

But class conscious people are in many nations. If it is not a racist category it is a socioeconomic one.

As for @Verv his capitalist class will sell the 'white' working-class families up the river. But if they keep thinking the immigrants are the cause of their despair? They will be another powerless group that did not adapt and learn in time to save themselves.
#15028194
Tainari88 wrote:
Identity politics is the hallmark of racist systems.


I can understand why people band together into racial/ethnic/cultural identity groups but that only requires basic rational solidarity. You don't internalize that shit, you don't make it into a fetish. Here in the US we're well past the point in our socio-cultural development where it's safe for everyone to critically disassociate from their arbitrary identities. If you're still caught up in that nonsense then you need to take a step back and reflect on your own psychological issues.



But if they keep thinking the immigrants are the cause of their despair? They will be another powerless group that did not adapt and learn in time to save themselves.


and if the minorities keep thinking the white working class is the cause of their despair then they're gonna share the same fate. When you go around calling people racists all you're doing is fucking up your own program.
#15028208
Tainari88 wrote:
Do you think an African living among Africans worries about his Africaness? Or an Irishman among the Irish in Ireland?
Of course they don't.
They worry about their professional status or their religious convictions.


And more complex regional and local identities.

And the influence of outsiders...

And what constitutes their own identity as X in relationship to the current time, the future, and the past...

I think you're just generally wrong about this.

And....

You don't have to think about being white.

I never had to think about being Boricua in PR either. Everyone was.


Really? My head is never empty like that.

I don't know what it'd be like to think of identity as irrelevant and mutable, and to not also think of it at all in an age of increasing globalization that is often times a direct challenge to identity.

I guess the Puerto Rican identity mustn't be very complex or layered.

Is it just food and Spanish or something?

Or is this a Tainari thing?

Identity politics is the hallmark of racist systems.


Wrong.

Identity politics is just the name for the complex intersections that appear naturally when navigating culture and identity and association.

But class conscious people are in many nations. If it is not a racist category it is a socioeconomic one.

As for @Verv his capitalist class will sell the 'white' working-class families up the river. But if they keep thinking the immigrants are the cause of their despair? They will be another powerless group that did not adapt and learn in time to save themselves.


Immigrants take over our spaces and drive down our wages.

Capitalists don't mind because it's cheaper and increases the consumer base.

What reason would an elite have for desiring to preserve our spaces and pay us more?

You don't understand the status quo or economics involved, so you misunderstand the problem itself. You can't describe reality so you believe in an ideology that is irrelevant and also can't describe reality.
#15028245
Sivad wrote:I just read an article on the Alliance for Prosperity and it's funny how all the indigenous rights activists and civil society organizations in the Northern Triangle knew exactly how it was going to play out before it was even implemented but you think the people with the billion dollar think tanks and the high powered policy wonks don't have any idea about how their policies are going to affect issues like immigration? Not only do they know in granular detail exactly what effects those policies will have, they strategically design the policies to produce those effects.


Please quote the relevant text from the aforementioned article.

Sivad wrote:I almost forgot this one.

If you can't figure out why an association would be made between a movie about ruling class elites murdering white deplorables and the systematic destruction of white deplorables as a class then you just lack all capacity for metaphorical thought. It's barely even a metaphor, they could just title that movie white genocide, that's how in-your-face blatant the ethno-class hostility is.


Except there is no systematic destruction of white working class people.

Evidence of which you were already asked to provide and you failed to do so.

Verv wrote:That would only truly be the case in a truly democratic society or a republic or monarchy with a close relationship with the middle class, where their interests and goals are mutual.

It can quickly cease to be the case.


No. It is the case right now in the USA. The middle class in the USA almost uniformly supports the status quo.

Verv wrote:How does white privilege function in society? How does institutional racism in the year 2019 function in society?

Is it consciously planned by a shadowy cabal?

Or is it something that manifests because of the crooked attitudes and warped values of those who have power?

The fact that you haven't addressed this but arrogantly dismiss our claims is astonishing and ridiculous, lol.


Yes, I did not address your logical fallacy, called a tu quoquo or whataboutism.

The fact that you have decided I have been unclear about something I never brought up in this thread is irrelevant.

It does not change the fact that you and @Sivad have failed to clarify your argument.

Lol, it's not a point! That's the point. It's irrelevant.


So, in a discussion about who is responsible for immigration, the notion that migrants themselves choose to do so is irrelevant?

How is the fact that the people running the businesses that make money off migrants do not have to pay a red cent to get migrants to come somehow irrelevant?

How is it irrelevant that the migrants actually choose to migrate on their own.?

How is it irrelevant that they see an opportunity to make more money and give their kids a better life?

You're saying that it's impossible for a government in 2019 that round up millions of people and control them?

Are you denying that the Holocaust happened?

If a government can't exercise border control and come up with means of tracking and extraditing citizens, how could a government have ever rounded up so many Jews and gypsies and murdered them?

By your logic, the Holocaust couldn't have happened because the task is just too monumental.


We were discussing how illegal immigrants will ignore laws and still cross the border if they see the economic gains as outweighing the risks associated with being in the USA illegally.

You now seem to he proposing that a racist totalitarian state would be a solution to this.

Sure, you can do this. But then the fences will be used to keep people in, not out.

What would be the economic motives of zero migration?

Who says "let's pay more money to our workers because of their scarcity and have a smaller consumer base, that'll be profitable!"


Strawman.

Back to my point:

The rich are not going to engage in efforts to redistribute wealth from the middle class to the poor and to migrants, just to make the poor and migrants better consumers.

They would save that money, and simply target the people with actual money (i.e. the middle class) as their market.
#15028248
Sivad wrote:I can understand why people band together into racial/ethnic/cultural identity groups but that only requires basic rational solidarity. You don't internalize that shit, you don't make it into a fetish. Here in the US we're well past the point in our socio-cultural development where it's safe for everyone to critically disassociate from their arbitrary identities. If you're still caught up in that nonsense then you need to take a step back and reflect on your own psychological issues.


Sivad, I don't choose to lose my ethnic identity. I happen to like being who I am and from the parents I got. I don't do drugs and I don't get into rants about how humanity is full of assholes. I got adult responsibilities like working and raising kids and finding a way to free up my time to do things I am passionate about and love. I don't think it is good to worry about the entire world is fucked forever. You got a limited amount of time in this world Sivad. Why waste it on thoughts that don't bring you happiness or personal satisfaction. Life should be about balance and finding a meaning that you think is worth your time. The only person who doesn't want to talk about why he has some issues is you Sivad. I happen to think you are a very intelligent and actually sweet young man. I do. Lol. But you are seriously angry or disillusioned about something. I don't know why. But, all I know is I don't like bullshit. So I give you my point of view. It is up to you to read it or not. You got to make your own path. I hope it is a path that won't be so difficult.





and if the minorities keep thinking the white working class is the cause of their despair then they're gonna share the same fate. When you go around calling people racists all you're doing is fucking up your own program.


@Sivad you need to be responsible for what you write in this forum. You wrote that Mexican culture was backwards. Mexican culture. Not some random general culture but Mexican culture. Do you know how fucking complex Mexican culture is? Mexico has about 120 million people. A whole bunch of states. I visited most of them. Except for three--Guerrero, Nayarit and Chiapas. Every other state I have visited, lived or worked in at some point. It is a huge nation where corn was first domesticated from a wild grass about 12 thousand years ago. It is the place where chocolate comes from, chiles, tomatoes, avocados, turkeys, and so many other things that it will take hundreds of pages to cover it all.

It has a lot of millionaires per capita. It has a lot of poor people. It has middle class folk. It has EVERYTHING. Doctors, lawyers, engineers, artists, scientists and everything in between.

It has famous painters, Communists, fascists and liberals and socialists and anarchists and everything else. It has people speaking Spanish and a whole slew of other languages. It has a huge group of Lebanese and Syrian immigrants, Chinese and Korean businesspeople. It has an army and a navy and an air force and everything else. It has just about everything in the world.

It has families of all sorts. People who vary and vary as individuals.

Taking that entire complex scene and calling it 'backward' without speaking the language, knowing the culture and socializing with the people? For years and years and having deep conversations with the entire spectrum of Mexican life is for fools or for racists @Sivad and many times fools and racists are both synonymous in this world.
#15028250
Verv wrote:And more complex regional and local identities.

And the influence of outsiders...

And what constitutes their own identity as X in relationship to the current time, the future, and the past...

I think you're just generally wrong about this.

And....


You only worry about threats Verv. Most of the threats only exist in your mind and not in reality. That what white people are going to go extinct or something? The reality is that you have to adapt to what is around you. You want what kind of society Verv? Because any society that wants to change the reason why immigrants are here or who try to get things to function for all people regardless of ethnic background is really about some kind of scientific economic theory and not the kind of illogical fallacies that you think work and they don't. No? I am wrong? Most men don't think every second of every day---I am a male. I am five feet ten inches tall, I got this look. No, people live within their own identities naturally. The only ones who obsess about being a male, being heterosexual or gay, or white or not white? Are people who aren't pursuing their lives with some specific purpose and their entire inadequacies or sense of personal power is derived from a weak and superficial sense of power. Like being white. Like being male. Or something. You take away your white identity and who are you Verv? Are you decent and courageous? Moral and truthful? Hard working and loving? Kind and generous?

Or are you one of those fascist men who only feel powerful and tall if they can force others to be on their knees? Pieces of cowardly crap who can't stand to be criticized because their characters are defective?

It reminded me of stories from the South that a bunch of extremely poor white sharecroppers would say after they did some horrible violence to black people....they would say, Ïf you aint better than a 'n' word? Then who is you better than?

Your behavior with me in this post indicates you share a lot with those men. For sure.
Work on your intellect Verv. Because the Palmyrene Anarchist 16 year old knows more about politics than you do. For sure. ;) :D




Really? My head is never empty like that.

I don't know what it'd be like to think of identity as irrelevant and mutable, and to not also think of it at all in an age of increasing globalization that is often times a direct challenge to identity.


You don't follow subtlety well. You don't understand it. Because you lack depth. This statement underscores that. I wasn't talking about identities being mutable or irrelevant. I was talking about people who are in their own societies and elements and because they are not strangers in a strange land they don't notice what people who are not from that society experience. In cultural anthropology it is called etic and emic perspectives.

You got a pattern of writing a lot but without content. Palmyrene noticed it and I notice it too. But you keep doing it. It is your way of covering up your intellectual inadquacies Verv.

Buenas noches. That is easy to understand isn't it? You monolingual limited man you. Hee hee hee. :lol:

The rest of your writing is a study in insecurity about who you are Verv.

Worried about some coming loss of control.

Get a grip. I don't think there is going to be some holocaust for workers who are working and making money for some sellout capitalists.

They don't care about nationalists with problems. They only care about the $$$$. :lol: :D
#15028258
Pants-of-dog wrote:Except there is no systematic destruction of white working class people.

(This was to Sivad)

The white workign class has experienced dipping wages and conditions that make it difficult to procreate. There's been a 300% increase in the suicide rate since 1999, and the increases are overwhelmingly in very white, middle class & down areas [1]. Something like 130 people die of opiate overdoses a day, and the charts just show a very rapid increase [2]. Even NPR has noted that the opioid epidemic is largely white [3].

I suspect you'll become incredibly picky about what can be meant by "systematic destruction."

No. It is the case right now in the USA. The middle class in the USA almost uniformly supports the status quo.


What do you conceptualize as the status quo?

Would you say that Reagan - Bush - Clinton - Bush - Obama - Trump is a reflection of the status quo that the middle class is supporting? Loosen up and give me a good description because then we can have a discussion.

Yes, I did not address your logical fallacy, called a tu quoquo or whataboutism.

The fact that you have decided I have been unclear about something I never brought up in this thread is irrelevant.

It does not change the fact that you and @Sivad have failed to clarify your argument.


Oh, wow, you missed the point:

Replace immigration functions in the same manner that white privilege or systemic racism functions.

That is to say, it is not a conspiracy operated by a shadowy cabal, but it is the result of various conditions and the indifference of the authorities and the desire of others to make a profit.

So, in a discussion about who is responsible for immigration, the notion that migrants themselves choose to do so is irrelevant?


Correct, completely irrelevant to the point at hand. Why would it be relevant that poor people are willing to move to much richer countries? How does that interact with what we are talking about?

How is the fact that the people running the businesses that make money off migrants do not have to pay a red cent to get migrants to come somehow irrelevant?


Geez, I do not know how it would be relevant if we are talking about replacement migration. I could see how it might be irrelevant to some other discussion, but not one about replacement migration.

How is it irrelevant that the migrants actually choose to migrate on their own.?

How is it irrelevant that they see an opportunity to make more money and give their kids a better life?


How is it relevant if the subject is replacement migration?

I think we mustbe talking about something else.

We were discussing how illegal immigrants will ignore laws and still cross the border if they see the economic gains as outweighing the risks associated with being in the USA illegally.

You now seem to he proposing that a racist totalitarian state would be a solution to this.

Sure, you can do this. But then the fences will be used to keep people in, not out.


(1) How would it be racist to not allow illegal immigration or to even have almost no immigration plus no illegal immigration?

(2) Why would the fences be 'keeping people in?'

Do you think people in America would suddenly be dying to go to live in Mexico because ... they can't stand a country without illegal Mexicans?!

Strawman.

Back to my point:

The rich are not going to engage in efforts to redistribute wealth from the middle class to the poor and to migrants, just to make the poor and migrants better consumers.

They would save that money, and simply target the people with actual money (i.e. the middle class) as their market.


... I thought it was the middle class that bears the brunt of tax increases, corporations that usually shrimp out of them through loop holes and sponsorship of politicians and fancy accounting, shell companies, etc.?

Wait, are the major corporations really honest, pay their taxes meticulously, and thus we shouldn't ever suspect that these guys would love to see their own workers on welfare (like Wal-Mart) or paying more taxes just to make more bucks when the government redistributes their taxes to the poor, who become their consumers..?

[1] CDC
[2] CNN
[3] Time
#15028272
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:explain what your claim of immigration for political advantage has to do with "white genocide" or a movie of the old plot of rich people hunting humans.


Sivad wrote:I almost forgot this one.

If you can't figure out why an association would be made between a movie about ruling class elites murdering white deplorables and the systematic destruction of white deplorables as a class then you just lack all capacity for metaphorical thought. It's barely even a metaphor, they could just title that movie white genocide, that's how in-your-face blatant the ethno-class hostility is.

However, you've also claimed you are colour-blind:
I can't imagine giving a fuck about my racial or ethnic or cultural identity, it doesn't even factor in to my conception of who or what I am. Like I don't care about white people, I don't care what happens to white people as a group(in fact I'm pretty sure the whites are doomed on account of stupidity right along with the rest of this jackass species) or about individuals because they're white. I feel no need to defend white culture from bigotry, I have no affinity for anyone based on their whiteness, whiteness is almost like an alien concept to me. I can't imagine how it could possibly hold any meaning or relevance to my life, to who I am, or to anything I'm about. I just really don't get what people get out of their racial or ethnic or cultural identities? I have no tribe, my commitment is to the greater good and that's it. Those who share that commitment are my kind of people, but they're not like 'my people' because we have no commitment to each other, our only commitments are to that principle.

So you think no one should be singling out people because of the colour of their skin, yet you also claim that non-white immigration is "white genocide", not because it involves deaths, but because it means more people of a different colour.

You make no sense.
#15028420
Verv wrote:(This was to Sivad)

The white workign class has experienced dipping wages and conditions that make it difficult to procreate. There's been a 300% increase in the suicide rate since 1999, and the increases are overwhelmingly in very white, middle class & down areas [1]. Something like 130 people die of opiate overdoses a day, and the charts just show a very rapid increase [2]. Even NPR has noted that the opioid epidemic is largely white [3].

I suspect you'll become incredibly picky about what can be meant by "systematic destruction."


Please quote the relevant text from each of your sources so we can determine whether or not these facts are a) true and b) relevant to the claim of systematic destruction.

If you want a definition for “systematic destruction”, please ask @Sivad.

What do you conceptualize as the status quo?

Would you say that Reagan - Bush - Clinton - Bush - Obama - Trump is a reflection of the status quo that the middle class is supporting? Loosen up and give me a good description because then we can have a discussion.


I am using the standard definition.

Oh, wow, you missed the point:

Replace immigration functions in the same manner that white privilege or systemic racism functions.

That is to say, it is not a conspiracy operated by a shadowy cabal, but it is the result of various conditions and the indifference of the authorities and the desire of others to make a profit.


And again, you now seem to be backing away from the claim that this is a deliberate tactic by the elite, a claim that both yiu and Sivad have made.

Are you now saying that migration is not the deliberate tactic of a wealthy class?

Correct, completely irrelevant to the point at hand. Why would it be relevant that poor people are willing to move to much richer countries? How does that interact with what we are talking about?


Because it provides an alternate explanation for migration that does not depend on your conspiracy theories, and is far more rational and is consistent with economic motives.

So it is far more likely than your claim.

(1) How would it be racist to not allow illegal immigration or to even have almost no immigration plus no illegal immigration?


No one called you racist.

Stop posing as a victim and address your argument.

We were discussing how illegal immigrants will ignore laws and still cross the border if they see the economic gains as outweighing the risks associated with being in the USA illegally.

You now seem to he proposing that a racist totalitarian state would be a solution to this.

Sure, you can do this. But then the fences will be used to keep people in, not out.

(2) Why would the fences be 'keeping people in?'

Do you think people in America would suddenly be dying to go to live in Mexico because ... they can't stand a country without illegal Mexicans?!


Because you have instituted a racist totalitarian state where Hispanics are kept in concentration camps, and the fences would be to keep these people in concentration camps.

... I thought it was the middle class that bears the brunt of tax increases, corporations that usually shrimp out of them through loop holes and sponsorship of politicians and fancy accounting, shell companies, etc.?

Wait, are the major corporations really honest, pay their taxes meticulously, and thus we shouldn't ever suspect that these guys would love to see their own workers on welfare (like Wal-Mart) or paying more taxes just to make more bucks when the government redistributes their taxes to the poor, who become their consumers..?


How does this relate to your argument?

In fact, please repeat your argument about whatever you are trying to claim here.
#15028436
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please quote the relevant text from each of your sources so we can determine whether or not these facts are a) true and b) relevant to the claim of systematic destruction.

If you want a definition for “systematic destruction”, please ask @Sivad.


They are very easy to identify claims at the beginning of the articles and I assure you that you can accept the veracity of them -- hence my eagerness to link to them. ^^


I am using the standard definition.


The problem is that status quo is a highly political definition that changes drastically according to the eye of the beholder.

Do you think two people with as many disagreements as us would recognize the status quo as being the same?

So, what is the status quo?

And again, you now seem to be backing away from the claim that this is a deliberate tactic by the elite, a claim that both yiu and Sivad have made.


Deliberate in the sense that a "shadowy cabal" meets up together and plans it? No.

Yet, it is something that is recognized as occurring, and no one particularly cares to stop at, and those who attempt to stop replacement migration are consciously demonized. Perhaps not by the power brokers themselves per se, but by the mainstream media that largely does the bidding of the power brokers.

I am curious: would you agree that the MSM does as much?

Are you now saying that migration is not the deliberate tactic of a wealthy class?


Immigration is sought, and illegal immigration is tolerated, because it gives them the results that they want.

But, naturally, I do not think there is some conscious effort to do so to replace white people, but rather it exists to get the most bang for the buck.

I was actually just listening to some Bob Packett this morning and he noted that many of the miners who initially had come to Korea were poor Europeans that were being exploited for their labor and treated as expendable, and this was back in the 1880s [1]. It would be easy to say that this was the same with the Chinese railroad workers, wouldn't it?

There's a long history of exploiting expendable foreigners for cheaper labor costs -- now they are totally even more fine with the idea of unloading them onto the welfare state when they are done, or even having the welfare state supplement their income.

Nothing about this has to be a conscious hatred of the foreigner advanced by the elites -- it is just pure greed. The result is just replacement migration -- of course, there are a few more factors involved, but these aren't being discussed.

Because it provides an alternate explanation for migration that does not depend on your conspiracy theories, and is far more rational and is consistent with economic motives.


I have no idea how you thought that I thought that the elites were bringing people over against their will to replace us.

I have no idea how you think that a single surface explanation is possible.

No one called you racist.

Stop posing as a victim and address your argument.


Right, SO has not come to the thread yet :lol: .

But, we all know that those who oppose illegal immigration are routinely accused of racism, right?

We were discussing how illegal immigrants will ignore laws and still cross the border if they see the economic gains as outweighing the risks associated with being in the USA illegally.

You now seem to he proposing that a racist totalitarian state would be a solution to this.

Sure, you can do this. But then the fences will be used to keep people in, not out.


One of your issues is that you are ready to jump to conclusions that serve yoru rhetorical purposes.

I was pointing out that it is easy to round up people and to control the situation.

Because you have instituted a racist totalitarian state where Hispanics are kept in concentration camps, and the fences would be to keep these people in concentration camps.


Aw, yes, the joys of hyperbolic fantasy lands.

In fact, please repeat your argument about whatever you are trying to claim here.


Mass migration is taking over historically white & Christian nations, and it is now justified by it being economically necessary. This is the phenomena of replacement migration.

It also serves the long-term goals of politicians on the left -- many of whom will serve multiple decades -- to acquire new voter bases, and it serves the purposes of mega corporations for very obvious reasons of cheap labor & a larger consumer base.

The problem is compounded by feminism and the atomization of WEstern culture, the cost of living and burden of taxes that the middle class and historic white population faces.

[1] Podbean
#15028465
Verv wrote:They are very easy to identify claims at the beginning of the articles and I assure you that you can accept the veracity of them -- hence my eagerness to link to them. ^^


Please quote the relevant text from your links, and show how they relate to your claim.

The problem is that status quo is a highly political definition that changes drastically according to the eye of the beholder.

Do you think two people with as many disagreements as us would recognize the status quo as being the same?

So, what is the status quo?


The current power paradigm that makes money for the people on top.

Deliberate in the sense that a "shadowy cabal" meets up together and plans it? No.

Yet, it is something that is recognized as occurring, and no one particularly cares to stop at, and those who attempt to stop replacement migration are consciously demonized. Perhaps not by the power brokers themselves per se, but by the mainstream media that largely does the bidding of the power brokers.

I am curious: would you agree that the MSM does as much?


Again, are you backing away from the claim that there is a group of people who are deliberately manipulating immigration policy in order to replace white people with immigrants, or deliberately bringing in immigrants in order to suppress wages and also oppose racism?

Yes or no?

Immigration is sought, and illegal immigration is tolerated, because it gives them the results that they want.

But, naturally, I do not think there is some conscious effort to do so to replace white people, but rather it exists to get the most bang for the buck.

I was actually just listening to some Bob Packett this morning and he noted that many of the miners who initially had come to Korea were poor Europeans that were being exploited for their labor and treated as expendable, and this was back in the 1880s [1]. It would be easy to say that this was the same with the Chinese railroad workers, wouldn't it?

There's a long history of exploiting expendable foreigners for cheaper labor costs -- now they are totally even more fine with the idea of unloading them onto the welfare state when they are done, or even having the welfare state supplement their income.

Nothing about this has to be a conscious hatred of the foreigner advanced by the elites -- it is just pure greed. The result is just replacement migration -- of course, there are a few more factors involved, but these aren't being discussed.


That was a long winded way to avoid answering a direct question.

I am now going to assume that you have abandoned the claim of a deliberate attempt to migrate people.

Does this mean that you now agree that capitalists are merely taking advantage of an existing situation?

I have no idea how you thought that I thought that the elites were bringing people over against their will to replace us.

I have no idea how you think that a single surface explanation is possible.


Because that is what you and @Sivad claimed.

I did not think you were right.

One of your issues is that you are ready to jump to conclusions that serve yoru rhetorical purposes.

I was pointing out that it is easy to round up people and to control the situation.


That is true in totalitarian states that use racism to target an ethnic minority.

It is not true in the USA right now. Nor will it be for the foreseeable future.

Aw, yes, the joys of hyperbolic fantasy lands.


Yes, your use of hyperbole is noted.

Now, do you agree that the USA is unable to stop illegal immigration with the status quo?

Mass migration is taking over historically white & Christian nations, and it is now justified by it being economically necessary. This is the phenomena of replacement migration.


No, mass migration is not taking over the USA, which is the example you cited.

Nor is it being justified. In fact, the POTUS is constantly denouncing it and people love him for it. “Leftist” politicians like Obama constantly deported people.

It also serves the long-term goals of politicians on the left -- many of whom will serve multiple decades -- to acquire new voter bases, and it serves the purposes of mega corporations for very obvious reasons of cheap labor & a larger consumer base.


I have no idea why you added “on the left”. Other than that, it seems like you agree completely with my argument.

The problem is compounded by feminism and the atomization of WEstern culture, the cost of living and burden of taxes that the middle class and historic white population faces.


And now we get to the part where you blame everyone except the capitalists who promote and maintain the status quo that results in migration.
#15028476
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please quote the relevant text from your links, and show how they relate to your claim.


No, that's OK. I don't have time for that and any rational actor can see how what I did was completely acceptable.


Again, are you backing away from the claim that there is a group of people who are deliberately manipulating immigration policy in order to replace white people with immigrants, or deliberately bringing in immigrants in order to suppress wages and also oppose racism?

Yes or no?


You can see my claim at the bottom of the message, so I will skip this.

That was a long winded way to avoid answering a direct question.

I am now going to assume that you have abandoned the claim of a deliberate attempt to migrate people.

Does this mean that you now agree that capitalists are merely taking advantage of an existing situation?


I'd say that the existing situation has come to be because of what Capitalists desire.

That is true in totalitarian states that use racism to target an ethnic minority.

It is not true in the USA right now. Nor will it be for the foreseeable future.


It is also true that non-totalitarian states that are not racist, like South Korea, have countless methods for rounding up illegal immigrants and do so with little hassle simply because it is incredibly difficult to open a bank account, rent a home, or be employed without a valid ID and immigration status and because they actually deport criminals who are also illegals, y'know, little tricks liek that.

Now, do you agree that the USA is unable to stop illegal immigration with the status quo?


Unwilling is a better way to say it.

No, mass migration is not taking over the USA, which is the example you cited.

Nor is it being justified. In fact, the POTUS is constantly denouncing it and people love him for it. “Leftist” politicians like Obama constantly deported people.


The percentage of white people in 1970 was 87.7% white.

In 2010 it was stated to be 72.4%[1], but you can also find hilarious headings like "2010 Census Shows White Population Growth Fueled by Hispanics" [2], so the actual number of whites is perhaps a bit elusive and would require more research than I can do now.

But I can show you this awesome infographic:

Image
Brookings, the article itself is in [3].

They are doing their best to show that the demographics haven't shifted radically, but they really have when the white population is a minority under age 10 in 2017.

And now we get to the part where you blame everyone except the capitalists who promote and maintain the status quo that results in migration.


I don't think of the Democrats & Republicans today as "capitalists," but as "globalists," because this better describes their ideology.

It isn't 1975 anymore, Scout, and because I am not a Latinx, I actually think of the US as my homeland and view my problems in that context, not in the context of somoene like Tainari who talks about colonialism and the likes -- somethign that I imagine you enjoy doing as well.

Might want to update the rhetoric and get a better idea of what the real conflict is.


[1] Wikipedia
[2] Census
[3] Brookings
#15028483
Verv wrote:No, that's OK. I don't have time for that and any rational actor can see how what I did was completely acceptable.


I am now dismissing all those claims as unsupported.

If you are not going to make the effort to read the sources, and address the relevant text, why should I?

You can see my claim at the bottom of the message, so I will skip this.

I'd say that the existing situation has come to be because of what Capitalists desire.


I will assume that you agree with my argument.

It is also true that non-totalitarian states that are not racist, like South Korea, have countless methods for rounding up illegal immigrants and do so with little hassle simply because it is incredibly difficult to open a bank account, rent a home, or be employed without a valid ID and immigration status and because they actually deport criminals who are also illegals, y'know, little tricks liek that.


US politicians and business elites would oppose that as they would lose money.

Capitalism benefits from a large group of people always seeking work. This constant influx provides that.

So even if your anecdotal evidence is true, the basic demands of capitalism would require that these measures not be implemented in the USA.

Unwilling is a better way to say it.


Would you like me to say that the USA is unable to do without abandoning either capitalism or democracy?

The percentage of white people in 1970 was 87.7% white.

In 2010 it was stated to be 72.4%[1], but you can also find hilarious headings like "2010 Census Shows White Population Growth Fueled by Hispanics" [2], so the actual number of whites is perhaps a bit elusive and would require more research than I can do now.

But I can show you this awesome infographic:

Image
Brookings, the article itself is in [3].

They are doing their best to show that the demographics haven't shifted radically, but they really have when the white population is a minority under age 10 in 2017.


Again, this does not say what you think it does. That data classifies anyone as non-white if they identify as anything other than white in the census. This includes people who are partly Asian and partly white, like Keanu Reeves. Or white Latinos, like Michelle Bachelet.

This is the non-white invasion you are so worried about.

I don't think of the Democrats & Republicans today as "capitalists," but as "globalists," because this better describes their ideology.


Your view of them is irrelevant. They are capitalists. Capitalism is an inherently international or globalist ideology. If you wanted a nationalist private market, you would embrace fascism.


It isn't 1975 anymore, Scout, and because I am not a Latinx, I actually think of the US as my homeland and view my problems in that context, not in the context of somoene like Tainari who talks about colonialism and the likes -- somethign that I imagine you enjoy doing as well.

Might want to update the rhetoric and get a better idea of what the real conflict is.


I have no idea what this is about or why I should address it.
#15028501
Well, I think we've had enough back & forth on this issue for the thread, POD, so I will just give a few parting thoughts & let you have last word.

(1) You got it.

US politicians and business elites would oppose that as they would lose money.

Capitalism benefits from a large group of people always seeking work. This constant influx provides that.

So even if your anecdotal evidence is true, the basic demands of capitalism would require that these measures not be implemented in the USA.


South Korea is doing a lot to increase the domestic birth rate and is also giving a lot of temporary work visas. I also have to say, the standards for becoming a citizen were through the roof in 2005, but they have largely been relaxed in 2019. My girlfriend and I will have the option to become citizens soon. The benefits of having children are also incredibly substantial.

We could implement similar policies.

And, by the way, I am not some laissez-faire Pharisee.

I am glad you agree with me on this point.

(2) The chart tracks actual ethnic shift.

Look at the people over 60, and the people under 35. The graph has just completely shifted, and it's not because everyone is... Keanu Reeves? lol.

Who was the first black President?

A half-white guy.

See how race tends to function within a society?

Just as such, Han Hyun-min[1] is seen as half-black, but mostly just seen as black, and before him Hines Ward stirred up a lot of debate for merely being half-black and half-Korean -- indeed, a society which doesn't follow American football at all suddenly took interest to mostly talk about the fact that he's half-black, AND KOREAN!. Daniel Henney [2] is also seen as an outsider in spite of the fact of being half-white and not even looking any bit white.

People who are half are not seen as equivalents to people who are full, whether it is America or Asia.

This realy isn't completely relevant and I thought I would not have to make statements like this but your claim that this is just Keanu Reeves or something, lesening the importance of those numbers, made it necessary.

(3) Identity plays a big role in all of this.

Just look at the media: whites are said to have privilege and set up as fundamentally hostile to everyone else these days; them becoming a minority in the country does not bode well for them, though we are still years away from that.

Identity is more relevant in the sense that the culture of America will fundamentally shift because the greatest force of culturation is the family. Just as such, white & black Americans have distinct cultures from one another.

This is not even racial -- it is cultural, because culture tends to be passed down through kin groups.

So, the replacement of white people through mass migration and their loss of majority status is certainly undesirable to white people who value their culture and legacy.

And this is not wrong of them -- just as such, why would it ever be wrong for a Korean to be sad about the idea of their own culture fading away and being replaced by another or hybridized into something else?

It's a fair concern, and no one should feel bad about it.

[1] South China Morning Post
[2] Wikipedia
#15028517
Verv wrote:Identity is more relevant in the sense that the culture of America will fundamentally shift


That's the problem right there, it's not about race at all. If the people from the global South we're culturally superior I would welcome the displacement, I'd be doing everything I could to help accelerate it. If they were on par with the West in terms of civic and political and social culture I'd be indifferent. The reality is these are defeated peoples from broken cultures and they are going to bring their problems with them.
#15028518
Verv wrote:Well, I think we've had enough back & forth on this issue for the thread, POD, so I will just give a few parting thoughts & let you have last word.

(1) You got it.

South Korea is doing a lot to increase the domestic birth rate and is also giving a lot of temporary work visas. I also have to say, the standards for becoming a citizen were through the roof in 2005, but they have largely been relaxed in 2019. My girlfriend and I will have the option to become citizens soon. The benefits of having children are also incredibly substantial.

We could implement similar policies.

And, by the way, I am not some laissez-faire Pharisee.

I am glad you agree with me on this point.


Sorry, but now I am confused.

I was under the impression that you were citing SK’s immigration policy as one that protects its ethnic majority.

Now you seem to be arguing that it is very easy for an ethnic minority to migrate there and have babies.

And these two stances contradict each other.

Am I missing something?

(2) The chart tracks actual ethnic shift.

Look at the people over 60, and the people under 35. The graph has just completely shifted, and it's not because everyone is... Keanu Reeves? lol.

Who was the first black President?

A half-white guy.

See how race tends to function within a society?

Just as such, Han Hyun-min[1] is seen as half-black, but mostly just seen as black, and before him Hines Ward stirred up a lot of debate for merely being half-black and half-Korean -- indeed, a society which doesn't follow American football at all suddenly took interest to mostly talk about the fact that he's half-black, AND KOREAN!. Daniel Henney [2] is also seen as an outsider in spite of the fact of being half-white and not even looking any bit white.

People who are half are not seen as equivalents to people who are full, whether it is America or Asia.

This realy isn't completely relevant and I thought I would not have to make statements like this but your claim that this is just Keanu Reeves or something, lesening the importance of those numbers, made it necessary.


So let me get this straight.

This is not about real things like actual ancestry, but instead is about how white people perceive people of colour?

But to get back to my point, the ethnic majority being discussed is non-Hispanic whites.

This means that a white Hispanic is considered to be not white.

And this also means that the (completely white) child of a white Hispanic and a white non-Hispanic would be considered “mixed” and therefore not white.

(3) Identity plays a big role in all of this.

Just look at the media: whites are said to have privilege and set up as fundamentally hostile to everyone else these days;


I disagree.

White privilege is not a media conspiracy used to make white people look bad. Nor are whites portrayed as fundamentally hostile to everyone else.

them becoming a minority in the country does not bode well for them, though we are still years away from that.

Identity is more relevant in the sense that the culture of America will fundamentally shift because the greatest force of culturation is the family. Just as such, white & black Americans have distinct cultures from one another.

This is not even racial -- it is cultural, because culture tends to be passed down through kin groups.


It does not logically follow that different genetic groups of people residing in the same place will have significantly distinct cultures.

And this all seems irrelevant to everything else we discussed.

So, the replacement of white people through mass migration and their loss of majority status is certainly undesirable to white people who value their culture and legacy.


Yes, I can see why people who believe in a mythical “white culture” in the USA, and who also incorrectly believe that they are being replaced, might worry about their legacy, or more concretely, their societal power.

But those of us who do not believe in these incorrect ideas do not see any reason to worry. Nor should we.

And even if white people in the USA are being replaced, it is simply an unintended side effect of capitalism. So it is unintentional and is due entirely to the general support for capitalism in the USA. Do you support capitalism?

And this is not wrong of them -- just as such, why would it ever be wrong for a Korean to be sad about the idea of their own culture fading away and being replaced by another or hybridized into something else?

It's a fair concern, and no one should feel bad about it.


No one is talking about feelings.

—————————

@Sivad

What makes a culture superior? Please tell.
#15028523
Sivad wrote:The degree of liberty, peace, and prosperity it engenders,


At home or abroad?

What about a culture that gives some freedom to its own people but deliberately destroys liberty, peace, and prosperity in other countries?

its capacity for innovation and evolution,


How do we measure that?

Is a Cuban who can make a car run on parts that are over sixty years old less innovative than a Canadian engineer who has labs and a huge budget and a whole team of people?

its propensity for critical self examination and self correction, etc.


I would argue that this would make cultures more or less superior at different times and that this would be a good or a bad thing depending on context.

————————

On a more topical note, I will almost certainly watch this film when it is released. I am thoroughly enjoying Ms. Gilpin’s performance in GLOW.
#15028525
Pants-of-dog wrote:At home or abroad?

What about a culture that gives some freedom to its own people but deliberately destroys liberty, peace, and prosperity in other countries?


Yeah, if we were to rate cultures on a scale from 1 - 10 according to those criteria I'd give the US like a 3.5, it's not what I'd call a superior society. It just has relative superiority to most of the societies these people are coming from which would rate at 1 - 1.5 on that scale.


How do we measure that?


There are metrics for all of those criteria, you can go look them up if you're interested.

Is a Cuban who can make a car run on parts that are over sixty years old less innovative than a Canadian engineer who has labs and a huge budget and a whole team of people?


The gulagist culture of Cuba is the reason anyone would have to do that in the first place. The fact that Cubans tolerate that shit at all should disqualify them from mass immigrating to anywhere.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
Ukrainegate

Dr. Fiona Hill was making reference to the Repu[…]

Or he can retire now, give Gantz the Prime Minist[…]

Syrian war thread

Was this just news to you? Israel has bombed Syr[…]

Israelis nervous about BDS

Why do you think it's fantastic that Israel's the[…]