"Love It or Leave It" Attitudes Can Cost You High Quality Talent (enemies, legal)

[Phil75230]

Everyone here knows the saying “Be careful what you wish for, you may get it”. History is littered with examples of a government persecuting a minority or otherwise certain subset of its population, resulting in large segments of the population fleeing for locales less hostile to them. In most, if not all, cases, the immigrants former homes suffered economic, technological, and cultural stagnation due to their attitudes toward the so-deemed “undesirables”.

Concrete examples of this are, in brief outline form:

*Spain’s Inquisition against Jews, Moors, and heretics driving Jews to North Africa and the Ottoman Empire

*France’s 1714 revocation of legal protection to the Hugenots (French protestants), compelling them to flee to France’s future enemies, and later enriching them.

*Great Britain persecuting the Irish and/or Catholics. The Anglosphere is full of people of Irish ancestry who fled their homeland to escape famine and oppression.

*Eastern Europe (especially Russia, and later Germany) – Jews fled pogroms, especially to the US, where they were critical in developing the broadcasting and entertainment industry. They also contributed greatly to science and commerce.

*United States – blacks who fled the South were able to function and prosper somewhat better in their new home areas. Also, California proved less harsh than other parts of the country toward so-called "weirdos", "wackos", and even outright "wicked" people.

In all cases, the immigrants’/refugees’ new homes gained talent, entrepreneurship, and wealth at the old homeland’s expense. This is especially true for those who have ample means to begin with to immigrate. No mystery here. You treat “others” like dirt, they’ll leave the first chance they get – and take with them their life experiences, creativity, education, job experience, etc. that creates economic growth. It’s not rocket science.

You want misfits to leave, then be prepared to pay the price of a crippled economy, society, and overall culture. You want greater prosperity, entrepreneurship, and cultural flowering, then you have to concede that "weirdos", "disgusting people", and other misfits do indeed have a place in this country.

[Tall Traveler]

Originally Posted by Phil75230

Everyone here knows the saying “Be careful what you wish for, you may get it”. History is littered with examples of a government persecuting a minority or otherwise certain subset of its population, resulting in large segments of the population fleeing for locales less hostile to them. In most, if not all, cases, the immigrants former homes suffered economic, technological, and cultural stagnation due to their attitudes toward the so-deemed “undesirables”.

Concrete examples of this are, in brief outline form:

*Spain’s Inquisition against Jews, Moors, and heretics driving Jews to North Africa and the Ottoman Empire

*France’s 1714 revocation of legal protection to the Hugenots (French protestants), compelling them to flee to France’s future enemies, and later enriching them.

*Great Britain persecuting the Irish and/or Catholics. The Anglosphere is full of people of Irish ancestry who fled their homeland to escape famine and oppression.

*Eastern Europe (especially Russia, and later Germany) – Jews fled pogroms, especially to the US, where they were critical in developing the broadcasting and entertainment industry. They also contributed greatly to science and commerce.

*United States – blacks who fled the South were able to function and prosper somewhat better in their new home areas. Also, California proved less harsh than other parts of the country toward so-called "weirdos", "wackos", and even outright "wicked" people.

In all cases, the immigrants’/refugees’ new homes gained talent, entrepreneurship, and wealth at the old homeland’s expense. This is especially true for those who have ample means to begin with to immigrate. No mystery here. You treat “others” like dirt, they’ll leave the first chance they get – and take with them their life experiences, creativity, education, job experience, etc. that creates economic growth. It’s not rocket science.

You want misfits to leave, then be prepared to pay the price of a crippled economy, society, and overall culture. You want greater prosperity, entrepreneurship, and cultural flowering, then you have to concede that "weirdos", "disgusting people", and other misfits do indeed have a place in this country.

I agree with all of the above. So do you object to the poor treatment of KKK members and white nationalists?

[Phil75230]

Originally Posted by Tall Traveler

I agree with all of the above. So do you object to the poor treatment of KKK members and white nationalists?

I don't agree with anybody initiating attacks (physical, verbal, or psychological) or castigations on anyone, outside the scope of self-defense or defense of other innocents at the moment of that incident, or if at other times, the KKK and White Nationalists clearly show attitudes suggesting they still demean minorities or some other subset of a population.

That said, I'll say that the KKK and white nationalists do exclude certain others unjustly - not because those others consciously and deliberately do set out to demean others, but simply because of who those others are. In effect, KKK and White Nationalists say those others don't deserve helping hands, informal "grapevines", and resources to make the business of daily living less difficult. That kind of behavior or expression creates distrust among people, distrust that can damage a society's stability.

Sure, I'm all for challenging KKK and White Nationalist ideas, just realize that they do have reasons (however distorted or mistaken) for believing what they do, and therefore don't initiate rudeness or other disrespect against them. If there's going to be any shouting and screaming match, let them be the ones to start it. BTW, that's why I also don't like ANTIFA, although for their tactics and not their ideology of racial equality and tolerance.

[katygirl68]

Originally Posted by Phil75230

I don't agree with anybody initiating attacks (physical, verbal, or psychological) or castigations on anyone, outside the scope of self-defense or defense of other innocents at the moment of that incident, or if at other times, the KKK and White Nationalists clearly show attitudes suggesting they still demean minorities or some other subset of a population.

That said, I'll say that the KKK and white nationalists do exclude certain others unjustly - not because those others consciously and deliberately do set out to demean others, but simply because of who those others are. In effect, KKK and White Nationalists say those others don't deserve helping hands, informal "grapevines", and resources to make the business of daily living less difficult. That kind of behavior or expression creates distrust among people, distrust that can damage a society's stability.

Sure, I'm all for challenging KKK and White Nationalist ideas, just realize that they do have reasons (however distorted or mistaken) for believing what they do, and therefore don't initiate rudeness or other disrespect against them. If there's going to be any shouting and screaming match, let them be the ones to start it. BTW, that's why I also don't like ANTIFA, although for their tactics and not their ideology of racial equality and tolerance.

There are very few KKK or white nationalists, and as far as I know, the limited number of them don’t do anything but sit around and complain.

[Phil75230]

Originally Posted by katygirl68

There are very few KKK or white nationalists, and as far as I know, the limited number of them don’t do anything but sit around and complain.

While true, TallTraveler simply brought up a point, and so I answered it. At any rate, it's not a matter of "census counts", so to speak. It's a matter of how many people are "that" way. It's a matter of if their "difference" really does threaten the well-being of others.

[The Dark Enlightenment]

Originally Posted by Phil75230

You want greater prosperity, entrepreneurship, and cultural flowering, then you have to concede that "weirdos", "disgusting people", and other misfits do indeed have a place in this country.

The "weirdos" and "disgusting people" tend to arrive after a place becomes prosperous, not before.

[Drewjdeg]

Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment

The "weirdos" and "disgusting people" tend to arrive after a place becomes prosperous, not before.

Kinda like in Japan eh?

[The Dark Enlightenment]

Originally Posted by Drewjdeg

Kinda like in Japan eh?

Yes.

[rebeldor]

Originally Posted by Phil75230

Everyone here knows the saying “Be careful what you wish for, you may get it”. History is littered with examples of a government persecuting a minority or otherwise certain subset of its population, resulting in large segments of the population fleeing for locales less hostile to them. In most, if not all, cases, the immigrants former homes suffered economic, technological, and cultural stagnation due to their attitudes toward the so-deemed “undesirables”.

Concrete examples of this are, in brief outline form:

*Spain’s Inquisition against Jews, Moors, and heretics driving Jews to North Africa and the Ottoman Empire

*France’s 1714 revocation of legal protection to the Hugenots (French protestants), compelling them to flee to France’s future enemies, and later enriching them.

*Great Britain persecuting the Irish and/or Catholics. The Anglosphere is full of people of Irish ancestry who fled their homeland to escape famine and oppression.

*Eastern Europe (especially Russia, and later Germany) – Jews fled pogroms, especially to the US, where they were critical in developing the broadcasting and entertainment industry. They also contributed greatly to science and commerce.

*United States – blacks who fled the South were able to function and prosper somewhat better in their new home areas. Also, California proved less harsh than other parts of the country toward so-called "weirdos", "wackos", and even outright "wicked" people.

In all cases, the immigrants’/refugees’ new homes gained talent, entrepreneurship, and wealth at the old homeland’s expense. This is especially true for those who have ample means to begin with to immigrate. No mystery here. You treat “others” like dirt, they’ll leave the first chance they get – and take with them their life experiences, creativity, education, job experience, etc. that creates economic growth. It’s not rocket science.

You want misfits to leave, then be prepared to pay the price of a crippled economy, society, and overall culture. You want greater prosperity, entrepreneurship, and cultural flowering, then you have to concede that "weirdos", "disgusting people", and other misfits do indeed have a place in this country.

You just made the perfect case for libertarianism. Every one of the things you listed was a result of Statism and the State's inherent violence and aggression.

Good job!

[Tom Lennox 70]

Originally Posted by Phil75230

Everyone here knows the saying “Be careful what you wish for, you may get it”. History is littered with examples of a government persecuting a minority or otherwise certain subset of its population, resulting in large segments of the population fleeing for locales less hostile to them. In most, if not all, cases, the immigrants former homes suffered economic, technological, and cultural stagnation due to their attitudes toward the so-deemed “undesirables”.

Concrete examples of this are, in brief outline form:

*Spain’s Inquisition against Jews, Moors, and heretics driving Jews to North Africa and the Ottoman Empire

*France’s 1714 revocation of legal protection to the Hugenots (French protestants), compelling them to flee to France’s future enemies, and later enriching them.

*Great Britain persecuting the Irish and/or Catholics. The Anglosphere is full of people of Irish ancestry who fled their homeland to escape famine and oppression.

*Eastern Europe (especially Russia, and later Germany) – Jews fled pogroms, especially to the US, where they were critical in developing the broadcasting and entertainment industry. They also contributed greatly to science and commerce.

*United States – blacks who fled the South were able to function and prosper somewhat better in their new home areas. Also, California proved less harsh than other parts of the country toward so-called "weirdos", "wackos", and even outright "wicked" people.

In all cases, the immigrants’/refugees’ new homes gained talent, entrepreneurship, and wealth at the old homeland’s expense. This is especially true for those who have ample means to begin with to immigrate. No mystery here. You treat “others” like dirt, they’ll leave the first chance they get – and take with them their life experiences, creativity, education, job experience, etc. that creates economic growth. It’s not rocket science.

You want misfits to leave, then be prepared to pay the price of a crippled economy, society, and overall culture. You want greater prosperity, entrepreneurship, and cultural flowering, then you have to concede that "weirdos", "disgusting people", and other misfits do indeed have a place in this country.

I wouldn't say that Detroit and Chicago have gained much from the ghetto migration northward, but Louisiana and Mississippi are better for it! And I know a number of people in Louisiana today who say New Orleans is better now that some of the Katrina evacuees didn't return.

And it's also true that Mexico, in fact, isn't sending its best.