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 grew up in a very nice beach community here in orange county california. I also lived in japan and Germany for many years when I was a child.
In my opinion, bill oreilly told the truth when he said "the country is divided by class, not race."
There is no such a thing as free lunch. If one wants to send his/her children to a better school, one needs to pay to live in a nice neighborhood with higher housing price.
Better everything = higher price. Diversity has never made a neighborhood safer or nicer. People come from similar cultural and financial backgrounds can normally coexist. They might not have mad love for each other, but they can live together peacefully.
"People come from similar cultural and financial backgrounds can normally coexist"
Not always. I lived in a waterfront communities where the houses on the water cost a WHOLE LOT MORE the the other houses.
We also had old beach cottages NOT on the water which sold very cheap.
We had engineers, CEOs, V.Ps and laborers, different Faiths and everything in between.
We had people live there from all over the country.
Wiki has described what these terms mean today and how these terms are used today. You might be wise to catch up. The old meanings you learned back in the day are no longer valid. Use of the term "white nationalist" is disturbing to most people today. It is considered synonymous with "white supremacist." It is racist.
Right, they aren't valid with the liberal left. They twisted the meaning of a nationalist to include "white" supremacy in it to fit their narrative. Surprise, surprise!
Dictionary be gone! I'll make up my own definition says the liberal left.
There is nothing racist about putting your own country and its citizens first which is what nationalism is regardless of how you and yours want to spin it.
What you are ignoring is one could pick any race or ethnic group and find a highly qualified person within that group of candidates for whatever the job or position is. This is not the 1950s anymore when only whites were highly educated and experienced.
That's not what is happening! Are you purposely being obtuse???? Again, Biden said he would pick a black female for the SC irregardless of whether or not she was the best qualified. What part of that aren't you getting?
As for the 50's it was wrong to only consider whites for positions also. So you want to repeat the same racist agenda today only in reverse? I am sure back then there weren't as many qualified women and minorties for political positions as there were white ones back then either. Maybe you should consider that also!
Yes, but why specifically go looking for a particular race? It would be ignorant to suggest by any means, that this was anything other than literal racism. It means that "race" was the qualifying factor FIRST. Which does not make any sense to me at all.
I've done a lot of hiring in the various companies I've worked for. I look for attitude and enthusiasm above all-else first, and then look at things such as experience. Even if someone was extremely qualified, if they had a chip on their shoulder, they're useless.
I don't have a problem with Ketanji Jackson, but I do have a problem with Biden defining the sex and race of the person he intended to nominate as the very first thing he mentioned ... which you seem to be ignoring, and is literally everyone's point here.
Thank you, and you're right he/she is completely ignoring that point which is a valid one. I swear liberals have cotton in their ears and wear blinders over their eyes if a valid point doesn't fit their agenda.
Right, they aren't valid with the liberal left. They twisted the meaning of a nationalist to include "white" supremacy in it to fit their narrative. Surprise, surprise!
Dictionary be gone! I'll make up my own definition says the liberal left.
There is nothing racist about putting your own country and its citizens first which is what nationalism is regardless of how you and yours want to spin it.
You may consider the meaning of the term has been twisted. But it is what it is. Word meanings change all the time.
You may consider the meaning of the term has been twisted. But it is what it is. Word meanings change all the time.
They are changed by those with an agenda that don't like or reject their true meanings. You know, like you and yours with an agenda especially when you associate nationalism as only a white and negative thing.
They are changed by those with an agenda that don't like or reject their true meanings. You know, like you and yours with an agenda especially when you associate nationalism as only a white and negative thing.
I am not the one who wrote the wiki article. I am not the one who started associating the term "white nationalism" with "white supremacy."
Anyone who keeps using that terminology based on the old definitions is going to be seen as racist in today's world.
I am not the one who wrote the wiki article. I am not the one who started associating the term "white nationalism" with "white supremacy."
Anyone who keeps using that terminology based on the old definitions is going to be seen as racist in today's world.
There is always an agenda behind the changing of definitions.
If you are on board with that agenda, you will go with the new definition.
If you are not on board with that agenda, the only recourse you have is to stick with the original definition.
In this case, the agenda is for globalists to turn nationalism into a negative connotation.
The only way to fight that, is for a critical mass of people to just not care about being seen as "racist". I know I am not racist, and I know that you are only calling me racist to get me to capitulate to your political agenda. So, not only don't I accept your new definition of nationalist. I dig my feet in deeper and use the term even more to describe myself.
And THAT is why we have the great political divide we have now.
Because rather than debate ideas, the left constantly tries to shame the right into capitulation. And the right sees the trickery, and will have no part of it.
Which for most people who are two generations away from the "motherland" will be:
Safety
Schools
Economic class
Commute
In my case, schools aren't a priority. I don't have any children. Safety is a priority. Having good neighbors is a good thing.
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.
They twisted the meaning of a nationalist to include "white" supremacy in it to fit their narrative. Surprise, surprise! 
