Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't say we were any better or worse when it comes to colonization. There were bad actors as with any historical upheaval.
Comparing to all of world history, I imagine there was some that were more brutal: arguably Europeans against themselves.
Quote:
But I do know that for every predator there were volunteers, some who gave their entire lives, to bringing modern medicine, education and efficiency to the less developed cultures. It's never acknowledged in discussion with liberals. Apparently they think Americans are capable of inhuman perfection.
Was that before or after colonization and/or resource exploitation. You're also discounting what non-Europeans have contributed to the world or the life that may have been content with keeping relatively to themselves.
Quote:
This is what I hope for the US - that every new citizen who comes brings skills and willingness with him and makes himself an asset, not a liability. Vetting newcomers is the easiest way to ensure this. People who want less are self-destructive.
What I hope for the US - besides truth and reconciliation - is for us to honor the spirit of Emma Lazarus' "The New Colossus". As discussed earlier, most undocumented immigrants coming in from due south are seeking economic relief or escaping political strife. There have been a number of stories over the past couple of years of industries, particularly agriculture and tourism, being under-resourced because of the lack of visas available.
Quote:
You can't take care of the needy unless you have sufficient resources to give from. It's the old "put on your oxygen mask before you try to help others."
Said undocumented immigrants are probably thinking the same thing about themselves if not also the family left behind.
Quote:
And with the ever-increasing division among us now is not the time to flood the country with newcomers. We need to be stable before we help others. I think others are beginning to see that.
Agreed that there should be *some* level of control at the southern border. Aiming for zero entry, however, is not an ideal solution either.
Quote:
It's not racist. It's not selfish. It's a tenet of humanitarianism. You can't give from a bankrupt bucket, morally or economically. Who do we think we're fooling?
Quote:
And still masses think it's better here than where they are coming from. Yet we hear every day what a failure our society is. Exactly who thinks that's the way to elevate a country's efficiency?
I would wager that the descendants of enslaved Africans, if given the choice of having their ancestors not endure what they did coming over here and being, at best, second-hand citizens for the first 189 years of the nation's history, many might prefer being in their countries of heritage. I would imagine many Indigenous would have preferred the opportunity to be more selective about which "masses" could stay here.
Again, this does not justify European colonization of the US and the rest of Americas. Nor does it absolve the US - at least Canada has pivoted a bit in this direction - of being honest, reflective and remorseful about what was done.
Would you seriously stuff us all back in the Great Rift Valley of Africa? Seriously, humans and for that matter all animal species and many plants are inherently migratory; they seek out "greener pastures." Is it only European or any white colonization that is bad?
Please reflect on this and if the spirit moves you, answer.
Would you seriously stuff us all back in the Great Rift Valley of Africa? Seriously, humans and for that matter all animal species and many plants are inherently migratory; they seek out "greener pastures." Is it only European or any white colonization that is bad?
Please reflect on this and if the spirit moves you, answer.
I think you need to make up your mind about a principle.
Your opening post is about destabilizing society. Gee, do you think the invasion of North America by Europeans destabilized NA society?
That's the problem with your whole premise in this thread. You don't want to destabilize YOUR culture, but to heck with other cultures.
Would you seriously stuff us all back in the Great Rift Valley of Africa?
Are you African-American? If so, then I'd have to respect that you would feel it was worth it for your ancestors to endure slavery and almost 200 years of legal discrimination for you to be in the position you are today.
If you're not African-American - or particularly come from European heritage - then I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say.
Me? As an African-American, I would have preferred my ancestors to be free to make their own choices on their own land. Without colonization or resource exploitation, the continent would be have been as wealthy as any other if not even more so.
Quote:
Seriously, humans and for that matter all animal species and many plants are inherently migratory; they seek out "greener pastures." Is it only European or any white colonization that is bad?
Please reflect on this and if the spirit moves you, answer.
Migration is fine, especially when accompanied by consensual intergration.
Many non-European countries have imposed themselves on other countries and continents...but the US is at the center of this particular conversation.
I think you need to make up your mind about a principle.
Your opening post is about destabilizing society. Gee, do you think the invasion of North America by Europeans destabilized NA society?
That's the problem with your whole premise in this thread. You don't want to destabilize YOUR culture, but to heck with other cultures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FindingZen
Are you African-American? If so, then I'd have to respect that you would feel it was worth it for your ancestors to endure slavery and almost 200 years of legal discrimination for you to be in the position you are today.
If you're not African-American - or particularly come from European heritage - then I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say.
Me? As an African-American, I would have preferred my ancestors to be free to make their own choices on their own land. Without colonization or resource exploitation, the continent would be have been as wealthy as any other if not even more so.
Migration is fine, especially when accompanied by consensual intergration.
Many non-European countries have imposed themselves on other countries and continents...but the US is at the center of this particular conversation.
I will start out with the obvious point that the Great Rift Valley was in Africa and thus all migrants are African. I doubt their out-migration was consensual to the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon's that may have been still hanging out. I doubt the woolly mammoths enjoyed their decision to sally forth.
After the first waves of people moved out of the Great Rift Valley to other parts of Africa and other continents, did those First Wavers want company? Maybe, maybe not. In the Americas, did the first migrants across Beringia want further population? I doubt it but some could do something about it, some could not.
My argument is that cultures have a right to limit impingement or destabilization. The Chinese and Japanese sure do. What deprives us of the right to self-defense? I am not contradicting myself. To some extent, I argue, we should except change, so far as its orderly or constructive.
I will start out with the obvious point that the Great Rift Valley was in Africa and thus all migrants are African. I doubt their out-migration was consensual to the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon's that may have been still hanging out. I doubt the woolly mammoths enjoyed their decision to sally forth.
After the first waves of people moved out of the Great Rift Valley to other parts of Africa and other continents, did those First Wavers want company? Maybe, maybe not. In the Americas, did the first migrants across Beringia want further population? I doubt it but some could do something about it, some could not.
My argument is that cultures have a right to limit impingement or destabilization. The Chinese and Japanese sure do. What deprives us of the right to self-defense? I am not contradicting myself. To some extent, I argue, we should except change, so far as its orderly or constructive.
I don’t know how the world can make amends to Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals - even you acknowledge yhere’s little way of knowing whether or not their new arrivals were friendly - but we are well aware of what happened on this land and can do better in making amends towards Natives.
Again, I agree that the country needs to find better ways to handle migration from the southern border. I just don’t think, given how this country was established, that we should approach it from a “victors takes the spoils” perspective. While I am glad to be in this country, as an African-American, I don’t see myself as a “victor” in that context.
I will start out with the obvious point that the Great Rift Valley was in Africa and thus all migrants are African. I doubt their out-migration was consensual to the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon's that may have been still hanging out. I doubt the woolly mammoths enjoyed their decision to sally forth.
After the first waves of people moved out of the Great Rift Valley to other parts of Africa and other continents, did those First Wavers want company? Maybe, maybe not. In the Americas, did the first migrants across Beringia want further population? I doubt it but some could do something about it, some could not.
My argument is that cultures have a right to limit impingement or destabilization. The Chinese and Japanese sure do. What deprives us of the right to self-defense? I am not contradicting myself. To some extent, I argue, we should except change, so far as its orderly or constructive.
And you want to do that by restricting or even eliminating personal freedom of people who don't look or think like you. Perhaps your grammatical error in that last sentence tells us where you mind really is.
All of your arguments in this thread are no different than the arguments made by racists against Blacks and Latinos being part of the American culture....or for that matter the prejudice against certain white European groups in the 1800s and early 1900s (for example the 'Irish canal diggers', the Italians, and the Chinese, the latter of which led to racial exclusion acts). It is the age-old excuse used by the majority against almost any minority, whether it be a racial minority or a sexual minority. It's the same concept of there being a 'good old boys' club. And that concept has caused whole groups of people as well as individuals to suffer greatly over the decades and even centuries.
I don’t know how the world can make amends to Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals - even you acknowledge yhere’s little way of knowing whether or not their new arrivals were friendly - but we are well aware of what happened on this land and can do better in making amends towards Natives.
Again, I agree that the country needs to find better ways to handle migration from the southern border. I just don’t think, given how this country was established, that we should approach it from a “victors takes the spoils” perspective. While I am glad to be in this country, as an African-American, I don’t see myself as a “victor” in that context.
The bolded gives me an opportunity to emphasize that I don't believe any (or at least most) of us are in favor of the porous border situation we have with Mexico. I spent much of my life traveling to Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Jakarta, and Burma. Everywhere I went, including the couple of years I lived in Thailand as an expat, I had to follow legal border procedures with a passport and visa, and when I became an expat in Thailand had to follow laws about having a particular sum of money in Thai banks, and had to report to immigration every 3 months for a visa check. What's happening at the southern border needs to be stopped, and I've yet to see a presidential administration do anything to fix it, other than to make it a dog whistle.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 12-03-2022 at 09:07 AM..
Reason: Inserted 'believe' after 'emphasize that I don't'
And you want to do that by restricting or even eliminating personal freedom of people who don't look or think like you. Perhaps your grammatical error in that last sentence tells us where you mind really is.
I stopped being a spelling police years ago. I will admit I did it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
All of your arguments in this thread are no different than the arguments made by racists against Blacks and Latinos being part of the American culture....or for that matter the prejudice against certain white European groups in the 1800s and early 1900s (for example the 'Irish canal diggers', the Italians, and the Chinese, the latter of which led to racial exclusion acts). It is the age-old excuse used by the majority against almost any minority, whether it be a racial minority or a sexual minority. It's the same concept of there being a 'good old boys' club. And that concept has caused whole groups of people as well as individuals to suffer greatly over the decades and even centuries.
The fact that racists use arguments doesn't mean the arguments are racists. I'm Jewish. Am I a Nazi if I drive on the Autobahns? Balance of my response is to your next post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
The bolded gives me an opportunity to emphasize that I don't believe any (or at least most) of us are in favor of the porous border situation we have with Mexico. I spent much of my life traveling to Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Jakarta, and Burma. Everywhere I went, including the couple of years I lived in Thailand as an expat, I had to follow legal border procedures with a passport and visa, and when I became an expat in Thailand had to follow laws about having a particular sum of money in Thai banks, and had to report to immigration every 3 months for a visa check. What's happening at the southern border needs to be stopped, and I've yet to see a presidential administration do anything to fix it, other than to make it a dog whistle.
You made my point. Why is the United States different from other states that religiously enforce their immigration rules and laws? Other countries don't want to be swamped with people seeking public assistance. Other countries don't want to be under pressure to sacrifice their national working (as opposed to official) languages. Other countries don't want to be forced to surrender their cultures. Why is the U.S. required to do these things?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
