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.
Right, there definitely wasn't and isn't widespread, well-documented discrimination in employment, housing, etc.
Yes, we all realize things were great for white Christians. They were not great for everybody else.
If it was so great and everybody prospered, why do we still have ghettos filled with black people?
Democrats put black people in the ghetto, along with other immigrants and minorities.
John Conyers is a good example of reverse-racism by looking the other way to transgressions by someone put into power probably due to his minority status, while we the people are left to pay for his zipper repair.
Saying white Christian males are the root of our troubles is absolutely outted as fraud just as the claim that diversity is lacking in this fine nation.
You know that persecution of African Americans didn't end with the Civil War, right?
You still didn't respond to my statement regarding your location. Exactly how/why do you consider Caribou, ME to be diverse? I'm really curious to know...
You know that persecution of African Americans didn't end with the Civil War, right?
You still didn't respond to my statement regarding your location. Exactly how/why do you consider Caribou, ME to be diverse? I'm really curious to know...
You already have that information, in my earlier posts. But because you can't seem to comprehend too well:
Natives, Francos (the "blacks of the north".......or do you not know of Le Grande Derangement, Mr. Diversity Expert??..............), Swedes, Scots, Danish, Irish, Italians, even the dreaded Anglos..........all in relative harmony. Many not even speaking English. "Oh well" to their not speaking English--------and anything else that didn't involve working hard and making money.
But of course, nothing I've written in the above paragraph carries a single iota of weight to you. That's because I know full well what you were REALLY saying in your post (but couldn't or wouldn't come right and say it...........this whole Diversity scam has been around several decades now, you know..........it's not like any of this is new): you were saying there were not enough blacks. Or hispanics. (Asians don't really count in the Great Diversity Scheme of Things, do they??.......odd, that).
And yet, when thousands upon thousands upon thousands of blacks and Hispanics DID show up and integrate into the area, for fifty years..............well, ignore that. Pay no attention that man behind the curtain, I tell you! NO attention at all! We CAN'T pay attention to it, can we?? Because it doesn't advance the narrative.
Here's a narrative for you (as posted earlier by someone else): organic diversity is always good. Forced Diversity is always bad.
(Oh, by the way, we've added lots of Amish in the last twenty years. But again------yada yada yada. Amish folk don't advance the Narrative.............)
The only narrative I’m seeing here are people trying to convince others that cultural diversity is bad so they can progress to convincing everyone that a white ethno-state is the only acceptable solution....
You know how I can tell a white person who lives in an all-white community, has a an all-white social circle, and sends their kids to all-white schools (aside from the fact that this is pretty much all white people's situation)? It will be the ones who crow the loudest about how much they love "diversity."
This seems thread topic seems like post bait even more than some of the other threads. Are you one of these people who work-at-home posting online? A dime for every thread you start and nickel for every post in reply? If your area is Maine, in what old days was it diverse? When the Native Americans still had their land?
Of course it's not bait, you..............I'll be good.
I was just looking back at old media material about the harvest 60 years ago...........the way everybody just got their butt out of bed and worked ferociously hard to ensure prosperity (or at least a decent survival). Did not matter one bit "WHAT" or "WHO" you were...........only how many barrels you could pick, and how fast. Or how many skills you had around that equipment.
And it made me think (again) about how far we've fallen, thanks to the silly Diversity crap.
Man, bet your sorry you started this thread. The zombies came out and will shut you down for having such thoughts.
The goal is to transform our society just like Obama said. Take a look at Lewiston. Anything strange about that picture?
Stay the course.
EXACTLY! Mark this:
200, 150, 100 or even 75 years ago (still), if you wanted an honest living you somehow got your butt to my neck of the woods, by hook or by crook (shall I bore you with the stories of my personal, dirt poor, disempowered ancestors??) Then you worked. And you worked. And if you were lucky, you got a little bit of land. It was cheap! And then you kept working and by God, within ten or twenty years you could have a nice house and a solid life. A little more luck, and your family and children could take it to the next level, even. IT DID NOT MATTER WHO YOU WERE, with the following exception: the only "social engineering" going on was in 1872, when the state of Maine government decided it needed more immigrants to develop the land. After a TWO YEAR search for the "right people".......people who would be hard working, tough, Christian, and law abiding, they selected Sweden. Perfect fit. Then they brought them over and gave them some land. It worked out great.
Fast forward to 2017, when Big Social Engineering, Inc. continues to look for ways to help anybody from the Third (or even Second) World..........help them to a piece of the pie, that is. "Hey, the Somalis In Lewiston haven't been given enough yet! Let's ship some to the farm region and give them farms and a bunch of money to get started, so they can compete with the already-struggling farmers there!"
If you can't see the huge difference between the very nature of those two scenarios, then you WANT to be blind.
Last edited by maineguy8888; 11-27-2017 at 07:14 PM..
Unfortunately the South in many ways won the peace after the war. When Lincoln waz assassinated he was succeeded by Andrew Johnson, who was a Southerner who had opposed slavery on the grounds of it's ill effects on white working class people but who was also a virulent racist. Much progress that was made in the immediate aftermath of the war was rolled back and Jim Crow became the kaw of the land across the South, a situation that was cemented when President Grant refused to send federal troops into Louisiana to suppress extreme racial violence, followed shortly by a deal between the two parties that gave the South a free hand with the blacks in return for them accepting Hayes as the victor in the disputed 1876 presidential election.
.
I am not buying that you don't know about segregation.
Segre-WHAT-ion??
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.
)
