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.
There have been some people who have tried to play "ancestor gotcha" as they find someone who believes in enforcing immigration laws and shifting away from low-skill immigration and then pull out the family tree and find out that their ancestor in the 1800s came to America as a low-skill immigrant and not legally under different historical contexts (surplus factory jobs, no welfare state, etc...). All to say gotcha, say they've been "clowned," and proclaim some sort of hypocrisy based on what someone did before that person was born, by an ancestor in a bygone era, under different laws and different historical contexts.
Should One's Ancestors' Actions/Beliefs Dictate What One Does/Believes Today?
(1) If we must hold true to the actions and beliefs of our ancestors would we ever make progress as a society? Would things like civil rights be as far along? Then we must all become strict originalists in interpreting the constitution?
(2) If it is okay to play ancestor gotcha on immigration, can't I do it for other issues?
-Hey Pro-Choice person, I did some genealogical work and your great-great-grandma was going to have an abortion, but then didn't - you wouldn't have been born. "You've been clowned!" You must be pro-life now, or you are a hypocrite.
-Hey person who opposes tariffs, I did some genealogical work and your great-great-great-grandfather was pro-tariffs and his business flourished 150 years ago in a totally different economic era because of it and your family is better off today from that wealth having been built up. You've been "clowned!" You must be pro-tariff now, or you are a hypocrite.
-Hey German who despises fascism, shut up, I found out your grandpa was a Nazi party member! Is this where the logic takes us?
-etc...
I find this whole "ancestor gotcha" nonsense as illogical at best. We live in the here and now under our own lives and circumstances.
I can see both sides of it, to some extent. For example, as much as I dislike Trump, the whole "Nobody in his family served in the military!" doesn't make sense. Trump is only responsible for *his* draft dodging. Not his father's, grandfather's, great-grandfather's, so on and so forth. He had no control over that (and in some instances, didn't even exist at the time.)
However, I do know that that a relative on my dad's side of the family (predominantly Irish Catholic) and I had a slightly heated discussion about Middle Eastern Muslims, with their take being pretty much, "They don't believe the same things we do, and they're a violent people." My response was, "You do realize that once upon a time, people were saying that about our Irish Catholic ancestors, right?"
However, in the second case, I wasn't trying to hold us accountable for our ancestors so much as trying to point out that once upon a time, it was *us* who were the hated and unwanted, so maybe we should try to practice a little more of the compassion and understanding that our ancestors would have wanted. Make sense?
I can see both sides of it, to some extent. For example, as much as I dislike Trump, the whole "Nobody in his family served in the military!" doesn't make sense. Trump is only responsible for *his* draft dodging. Not his father's, grandfather's, great-grandfather's, so on and so forth. He had no control over that (and in some instances, didn't even exist at the time.)
However, I do know that that a relative on my dad's side of the family (predominantly Irish Catholic) and I had a slightly heated discussion about Middle Eastern Muslims, with their take being pretty much, "They don't believe the same things we do, and they're a violent people." My response was, "You do realize that once upon a time, people were saying that about our Irish Catholic ancestors, right?"
However, in the second case, I wasn't trying to hold us accountable for our ancestors so much as trying to point out that once upon a time, it was *us* who were the hated and unwanted, so maybe we should try to practice a little more of the compassion and understanding that our ancestors would have wanted. Make sense?
Your second case doesn't conflict at all with what I am saying. You are saying don't judge by the group, which is different than judge by one's ancestors.
Sure we should have compassion - including the compassion to allow one to formulate their own thoughts free from people who died before we were born.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maf763
This site really needs a snowflake icon to mark these threads.
Care to explain? Is any questioning of bad logic a snowflake now?
I think Mendelsohn's goal is to emphasize the connection we all have to the immigrant experience, not to play ancestor gotcha. Personally, I love the attention Mendelsohn's Twitter feed is focusing on genealogy. As a passionate family historian, I think it's an incredibly fun and fulfilling avocation, and, as far as I'm concerned, the more people who discover the appeal, the better.
If my father stole from your family and I now am benefiting from the exploits of that theft, then I would feel obligated to adequately compensate either you, or your family, for your family's loss.
If my father was a thief, I would not have any desire to follow in his footsteps by causing others to suffer loss.
I think it's fairly hypocritical for a family to successfully immigrate with low skills to the US years ago, only to require future immigrants to possess higher skill levels. That's especially so when those current immigrants happen to be people of color and have been recently insulted by our president.
Let's just allow all those law-abiding immigrants who are here within 10 miles of our borders, a path to immediate citizenship. All those immigrants currently outside the 10 mile limit, remain outside.
If my father stole from your family and I now am benefiting from the exploits of that theft, then I would feel obligated to adequately compensate either you, or your family, for your family's loss.
My ancestors stole from non-Americans, by moving to America?
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeliner
If my father was a thief, I would not have any desire to follow in his footsteps by causing others to suffer loss.
So you agree with me that we should not be judged by our ancestors nor should we be tied to their beliefs!
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeliner
I think it's fairly hypocritical for a family to successfully immigrate with low skills to the US years ago, only to require future immigrants to possess higher skill levels. That's especially so when those current immigrants happen to be people of color and have been recently insulted by our president.
How is that hypocritical? In most cases it isn't even the same people...as their ancestors moved here often a very long time before they were born. Times change. Laws change. Economies change.
I could give any number of examples of how it is not fair that I can't do X, Y, and Z, when people of past generations have been able to do it. We need to strengthen squatters rights laws, how hypocritical that families benefitted from this for years and now want to take it down.
Times change. Laws change. Economies change. I don't want to get stuck in a system where policies must always stay the same, because it isn't fair if it changes, because of "era bias?" Will era bias be a new thing now?
The purpose of the government is to do what is best for its own people. Is it best right now to not follow national law? Is it best right now to be admitting a million mostly low skill people into the country a year on top of the illegal immigration. We'll always have immigration and we always should, but immigration policy has ALWAYS BEEN CHANGING and should be focused on what is best for the American people. The discussion should be on the merits of immigration today, not what it might have been in the past or what your ancestors thought or did to tie you into a specific position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeliner
Let's just allow all those law-abiding immigrants who are here within 10 miles of our borders, a path to immediate citizenship. All those immigrants currently outside the 10 mile limit, remain outside.
So you are for open borders? Anyone who can get within 10 miles of our border should get immediate citizenship?
Last edited by michiganmoon; 05-15-2018 at 08:39 PM..
I think Mendelsohn's goal is to emphasize the connection we all have to the immigrant experience, not to play ancestor gotcha. Personally, I love the attention Mendelsohn's Twitter feed is focusing on genealogy. As a passionate family historian, I think it's an incredibly fun and fulfilling avocation, and, as far as I'm concerned, the more people who discover the appeal, the better.
It is gotcha and people do take it as gotcha.
You have posters talking about how she "clowned" someone over what their ancestors did. You have posters talking about how it is "hypocritical" to have a position that could be interpreted as at odds with what an ancestor may have done in the 1800s.
Someone says we should enforce the laws and then she finds or claims to find an example of an ancestor breaking the law, which is why so many take it is "gotcha" "clowning" and showing of "hypocrisy" - which I think is absurd logic to think that someone must be in lockstep with what an ancestor did...what happens when various ancestors did differing things? Pick the one that follows the party line the best?
I think it's fairly hypocritical for a family to successfully immigrate with low skills to the US years ago, only to require future immigrants to possess higher skill levels. That's especially so when those current immigrants happen to be people of color and have been recently insulted by our president.
I do think the hypocrisy is something people are trying to point out. The aforementioned relative in my previous post and I had several discussions on such subjects. One of their complaints was the 'not learning English right away and sticking to their own language' bit. Now, while most of that side of the family is Irish, there is a German branch that immigrated to St. Louis at some point between 1830 and 1840. And at the time, there were several German-language newspapers in St. Louis, and schools where the children were taught in German. The town I grew up in (a modern suburb of St. Louis) spoke French on the north side and German on the south side as late as the 1880's. So we're not necessarily talking a single person's individual ancestors--we're talking large communities in America that had settled in a well-populated city, and were doing their own thing for several generations. And we grew up in those communities. Granted, by the time we were growing up, it was the 1970s/80s, and English speaking held sway, but some of our older relatives remembered their German-speaking neighbors from when they were kids, or the Italians speaking Italian on the Hill.
I don't think it's so much a case of "Holding one to the standards/beliefs/actions" of one's ancestors so much as it's "Remember that once your ancestors were in this position as well. How would you have wished for them to be treated?" In order to remind people that compassion and understanding are of great importance in these matters by helping them remember their origins and relate.
My ancestors stole from non-Americans, by moving to America?
What?
Quote:
So you agree with me that we should not be judged by our ancestors nor should we be tied to their beliefs!
Depends...
Quote:
How is that hypocritical? In most cases it isn't even the same people...as their ancestors moved here often a very long time before they were born. Times change. Laws change. Economies change.
I could give any number of examples of how it is not fair that I can't do X, Y, and Z, when people of past generations have been able to do it. [i]We need to strengthen squatters rights laws, how hypocritical that families benefitted from this for years and now want to take it down.
Just change the laws, but don't do it due to some Alt-Right agenda to keep people of color out!
Quote:
Times change. Laws change. Economies change. I don't want to get stuck in a system where policies must always stay the same, because it isn't fair if it changes, because of "era bias?" Will era bias be a new thing now?
Seems kinda convenient all of a sudden with Trump's Alt-Right staff serving as advisors...
Quote:
The purpose of the government is to do what is best for its own people. Is it best right now to not follow national law? Is it best right now to be admitting a million mostly low skill people into the country a year on top of the illegal immigration. We'll always have immigration and we always should, but immigration policy has ALWAYS BEEN CHANGING and should be focused on what is best for the American people. The discussion should be on the merits of immigration today, not what it might have been in the past or what your ancestors thought or did to tie you into a specific position.
Like I said, if you're within the 10 mile limt, you got 24 hours to cross. After that, nobody gets in....
Quote:
So you are for open borders? Anyone who can get within 10 miles of our border should get immediate citizenship?
Yes, just this one time!
If you're in, then you're in....
That's it!
Last edited by zeliner; 05-15-2018 at 09:04 PM..
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.
