Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

"Well your resume looks good Mr. Stephenson, there's just one last question. Seeing how this is a job that advertises justice and fair play, do you agree to take any opportunity to uphold our secret government-wide conspiracy to maintain the secret white male hegemony?"

There's nothing secret about it. White supremacy is one of the biggest political forces in the US. Like, what the feth did you think gerrymandering was about? Why did you think black people weren't allowed to vote until the 60's and why do you think that those rights are being targeted now? What did you think that cutting welfare programs was about and what did you think that demonising the recipients of those programs as "welfare queens" was about? What did you think the Southern Strategy was? Why did you think that the right-wing has been so obsessed with blocking off the border to Mexico? What did you think the insane fear of Obama was about? What, precisely, did you think that the ultimate purpose of ICE was?


You don't want to see this because you find it ideologically unpalatable but it's all there, in plain view. Or what, did you think Russia was behind it?

I've just found out that there's a new Michael Moore film set to hit our screens.

I know Moore isn't everybody's cup of tea, but I like him, and at least he's not afraid to stick his head above the parapet.

As an outside observer, I readily confess to liking America and ordinary Americans, who are amongst the friendliest people I have ever met.

But in the wider context, I see a political system badly corrupted by money, utter buffoons at all levels of government, rampant inequality across the country, a bill of rights getting nibbled away, and the obvious social and cultural problems tearing away the fabric of American society.

I do wonder how long it will last...

Rosebuddy wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

"Well your resume looks good Mr. Stephenson, there's just one last question. Seeing how this is a job that advertises justice and fair play, do you agree to take any opportunity to uphold our secret government-wide conspiracy to maintain the secret white male hegemony?"

There's nothing secret about it. White supremacy is one of the biggest political forces in the US. Like, what the feth did you think gerrymandering was about? Why did you think black people weren't allowed to vote until the 60's and why do you think that those rights are being targeted now? What did you think that cutting welfare programs was about and what did you think that demonising the recipients of those programs as "welfare queens" was about? What did you think the Southern Strategy was? Why did you think that the right-wing has been so obsessed with blocking off the border to Mexico? What did you think the insane fear of Obama was about? What, precisely, did you think that the ultimate purpose of ICE was?


You don't want to see this because you find it ideologically unpalatable but it's all there, in plain view. Or what, did you think Russia was behind it?

So people not wanting to have their own culture taken over or replaced is white supremacy? So wanting sovereign borders is white supremacy?

Ice was around during Obama’s presidency, it’s only come to the for now due to people hatred of trump (rightly so in some cases), one of the biggest stories to come out about ice turned out to be nothing but lies too, personally I have no issue with a country having a deportation force for IIllegal immigrants however it also doesn’t help when you get stories like this.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ice-loses-1500-children-myth-shows-media-bias/

Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

 Formosa wrote:
Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

What he thinks/feels is not racism. He doesn't feel hatred towards a race at all. What he hates is America. He hates the entirety of it. He hates the ideals, he hates the structure, he hates literally everything that makes America what it is. He blames America for pretty much all the evil in the world, and this rhetoric isn't new. Look at his posting history in every US politics thread we've ever had, and it's been almost a steady stream of hate speech.

 Formosa wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

"Well your resume looks good Mr. Stephenson, there's just one last question. Seeing how this is a job that advertises justice and fair play, do you agree to take any opportunity to uphold our secret government-wide conspiracy to maintain the secret white male hegemony?"

There's nothing secret about it. White supremacy is one of the biggest political forces in the US. Like, what the feth did you think gerrymandering was about? Why did you think black people weren't allowed to vote until the 60's and why do you think that those rights are being targeted now? What did you think that cutting welfare programs was about and what did you think that demonising the recipients of those programs as "welfare queens" was about? What did you think the Southern Strategy was? Why did you think that the right-wing has been so obsessed with blocking off the border to Mexico? What did you think the insane fear of Obama was about? What, precisely, did you think that the ultimate purpose of ICE was?


You don't want to see this because you find it ideologically unpalatable but it's all there, in plain view. Or what, did you think Russia was behind it?

So people not wanting to have their own culture taken over or replaced is white supremacy? So wanting sovereign borders is white supremacy?

Ice was around during Obama’s presidency, it’s only come to the for now due to people hatred of trump (rightly so in some cases), one of the biggest stories to come out about ice turned out to be nothing but lies too, personally I have no issue with a country having a deportation force for IIllegal immigrants however it also doesn’t help when you get stories like this.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ice-loses-1500-children-myth-shows-media-bias/

Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

What is white supremacy is (at least a section of) the white majority insisting that American culture is exclusively white and cannot be allowed to accommodate non-white influences.

One example of this is the insistence that English should be the official language of the USA.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

"Well your resume looks good Mr. Stephenson, there's just one last question. Seeing how this is a job that advertises justice and fair play, do you agree to take any opportunity to uphold our secret government-wide conspiracy to maintain the secret white male hegemony?"

There's nothing secret about it. White supremacy is one of the biggest political forces in the US. Like, what the feth did you think gerrymandering was about? Why did you think black people weren't allowed to vote until the 60's and why do you think that those rights are being targeted now? What did you think that cutting welfare programs was about and what did you think that demonising the recipients of those programs as "welfare queens" was about? What did you think the Southern Strategy was? Why did you think that the right-wing has been so obsessed with blocking off the border to Mexico? What did you think the insane fear of Obama was about? What, precisely, did you think that the ultimate purpose of ICE was?


You don't want to see this because you find it ideologically unpalatable but it's all there, in plain view. Or what, did you think Russia was behind it?

So people not wanting to have their own culture taken over or replaced is white supremacy? So wanting sovereign borders is white supremacy?

Ice was around during Obama’s presidency, it’s only come to the for now due to people hatred of trump (rightly so in some cases), one of the biggest stories to come out about ice turned out to be nothing but lies too, personally I have no issue with a country having a deportation force for IIllegal immigrants however it also doesn’t help when you get stories like this.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ice-loses-1500-children-myth-shows-media-bias/

Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

What is white supremacy is (at least a section of) the white majority insisting that American culture is exclusively white and cannot be allowed to accommodate non-white influences.

One example of this is the insistence that English should be the official language of the USA.

I can see racism being a motivator for a small percentage of people, but when 80% of the country uses it as the primary language it's hard to argue against it being the official language of the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_United_States

Who knows though, if the spanish speaking population keeps growing I could see the US eventually becoming an official multilingual country like Canada.

A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

Mind posting the highlights of the story? I've hit my monthly viewing limit for the post already.

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

"Well your resume looks good Mr. Stephenson, there's just one last question. Seeing how this is a job that advertises justice and fair play, do you agree to take any opportunity to uphold our secret government-wide conspiracy to maintain the secret white male hegemony?"

There's nothing secret about it. White supremacy is one of the biggest political forces in the US. Like, what the feth did you think gerrymandering was about? Why did you think black people weren't allowed to vote until the 60's and why do you think that those rights are being targeted now? What did you think that cutting welfare programs was about and what did you think that demonising the recipients of those programs as "welfare queens" was about? What did you think the Southern Strategy was? Why did you think that the right-wing has been so obsessed with blocking off the border to Mexico? What did you think the insane fear of Obama was about? What, precisely, did you think that the ultimate purpose of ICE was?


You don't want to see this because you find it ideologically unpalatable but it's all there, in plain view. Or what, did you think Russia was behind it?

So people not wanting to have their own culture taken over or replaced is white supremacy? So wanting sovereign borders is white supremacy?

Ice was around during Obama’s presidency, it’s only come to the for now due to people hatred of trump (rightly so in some cases), one of the biggest stories to come out about ice turned out to be nothing but lies too, personally I have no issue with a country having a deportation force for IIllegal immigrants however it also doesn’t help when you get stories like this.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ice-loses-1500-children-myth-shows-media-bias/

Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

What is white supremacy is (at least a section of) the white majority insisting that American culture is exclusively white and cannot be allowed to accommodate non-white influences.

One example of this is the insistence that English should be the official language of the USA.

I can see racism being a motivator for a small percentage of people, but when 80% of the country uses it as the primary language it's hard to argue against it being the official language of the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_United_States

Who knows though, if the spanish speaking population keeps growing I could see the US eventually becoming an official multilingual country like Canada.

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

“ The result? A state justice system in which felony trials are held without the full participation of African Americans.”

Total nonsense when this is the key issue

“In a review of nearly 1,000 felony trials in the state, the New Orleans Advocate determined that 40 percent of jury verdicts were not unanimous.”

This is not a race issue, this is a justice issue, no one should be convicted on less than a unanimous decision, no one at all, and that is the key issue, if it ONLY affected black people I would agree that it’s a race and racism issue.

This law is an affront to true justice and should be removed.

Not sur if this goes here.

Is it just me or does cultural and individual relativism helped produce a NA culture that romanticize plebs ?

Wherever I look all I can see are obese and vulgar people with almost no education or interest in high culture (yes, I consider that therr is a thing as high culture; no, not everything is equal and valuable).

Plus, just look at Trudeau and Trump. Dumb and dumber, that's how I'm calling it.

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

I wonder if you realise that by that logic you can go to any non English speaking nation and force them to adapt to our culture, otherwise they are just black/Asian supremacists.

See I still don’t understand what is wrong with not wanting illegal immigration?

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

Mind posting the highlights of the story? I've hit my monthly viewing limit for the post already.

If you use incognito mode, it bypasses that limit, but basically the 10-2 conviction standard was introduced when it became clear that the state could not keep non-whites from serving on juries, and thus the lower standard could continue to ensure convictions even with the inclusion of black jurors, thus reducing the impact of their inclusion. That system probably also has something to do with why Louisiana had a higher incarceration rate than almost any other place on the planet, imprisoning an order of magnitude more people per capita than China (though that's recently changed over the last year or two thankfully with some major reforms), and why Louisiana incarceration rates look so funky.

 Formosa wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

“ The result? A state justice system in which felony trials are held without the full participation of African Americans.”

Total nonsense when this is the key issue

“In a review of nearly 1,000 felony trials in the state, the New Orleans Advocate determined that 40 percent of jury verdicts were not unanimous.”

This is not a race issue, this is a justice issue, no one should be convicted on less than a unanimous decision, no one at all, and that is the key issue, if it ONLY affected black people I would agree that it’s a race and racism issue.

This law is an affront to true justice and should be removed.

It is all of those issues. It affects whites as well, but disproportionately affects minorities (as was the original intent of just about everything in the LA state constitution of 1898), as heavily evidenced by the monstrously skewed LA inmate population.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

Mind posting the highlights of the story? I've hit my monthly viewing limit for the post already.

If you use incognito mode, it bypasses that limit, but basically the 10-2 conviction standard was introduced when it became clear that the state could not keep non-whites from serving on juries, and thus the lower standard could continue to ensure convictions even with the inclusion of black jurors, thus reducing the impact of their inclusion. That system probably also has something to do with why Louisiana had a higher incarceration rate than almost any other place on the planet, imprisoning an order of magnitude more people per capita than China (though that's recently changed over the last year or two thankfully with some major reforms), and why Louisiana incarceration rates look so funky.

 Formosa wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
A better illustration of the issue

Stuff like this, allowing felony convictions on 10-2 non-unanimous jury returns, results in overwhelmingly disproportionate impacts on non-white defendants, and that was the point when it was implemented in 1898, along with a slew of things like poll taxes and the like.

“ The result? A state justice system in which felony trials are held without the full participation of African Americans.”

Total nonsense when this is the key issue

“In a review of nearly 1,000 felony trials in the state, the New Orleans Advocate determined that 40 percent of jury verdicts were not unanimous.”

This is not a race issue, this is a justice issue, no one should be convicted on less than a unanimous decision, no one at all, and that is the key issue, if it ONLY affected black people I would agree that it’s a race and racism issue.

This law is an affront to true justice and should be removed.

It is all of those issues. It affects whites as well, but disproportionately affects minorities (as was the original intent of just about everything in the LA state constitution of 1898), as heavily evidenced by the monstrously skewed LA inmate population.

I wonder how much of that affect is actually due to there being more poor black people in LA than white people, that has to be a large chunk of it since having a competent lawyer (and the money to hire one) can go a long way to winning a case.

https://datausa.io/profile/geo/louisiana/#economy

 Formosa wrote:

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

I wonder if you realise that by that logic you can go to any non English speaking nation and force them to adapt to our culture, otherwise they are just black/Asian supremacists.

..

No, it is not so. The situation you describe is not the situation that exists in the USA. The situation in the USA is that a minority of a majority population (white people) are insisting that their interpretation of culture must override all others.

 Formosa wrote:

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

I wonder if you realise that by that logic you can go to any non English speaking nation and force them to adapt to our culture, otherwise they are just black/Asian supremacists.

See I still don’t understand what is wrong with not wanting illegal immigration?

Well you seem to be confusing "our" with white so that could be your problem. But uh if you went to an African or Asian country and tried to force what you believe to be white culuture on them, that would be white supremacy by definition. Because forcing one culture to accept another culture wasn't what people were talking about. One culture refusing to accept the existence of other cultures despite them co-existing and then trying to make laws to keep and force their culture accendant would be ethnic supremacy. If the culture you identify with you consider to be white and your trying to force others who occupy the same cultural space as you to accept your culture as dominant then that would be white supremacy. And yes if you have any other ethnic identity that you try to force on others through law and intimidation then that would be (whatever) kind of supremacy.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

I wonder if you realise that by that logic you can go to any non English speaking nation and force them to adapt to our culture, otherwise they are just black/Asian supremacists.

See I still don’t understand what is wrong with not wanting illegal immigration?

Well you seem to be confusing "our" with white so that cpuld be your problem. But uh if you went to an African or Asian country and tried to force what you believe to be white culuture on them, that would be white supremacy by definition. Because forcing one culture to accept another culture wasn't what people were talking about. One culture refusing to accept the existence of other cultures despite them co-existing and then trying to make laws to keep and force their culture accendant would be ethnic supremacy. If the culture you identify with you consider to be white and your trying to force others who occupy the same cultural space as you to accept your culture as dominant then that would be white supremacy. And yes if you have any other ethnic identity that you try to force on others through law and intimidation then that would be (whatever) kind of supremacy.

I’m not white and I consider it our culture, because western culture is not white culture, no matter how much people try to claim it is some white supremacy, the US and U.K. are melting pots of all kinds of influences, it’s great.

Now speaking on laws, I am still yet to see a law in the U.K. and US that specifically restricts legal US and U.K. citizens based on race, that law posted up previously was created with bad intentions but affects everyone, not just black people, deporting illegal imigrants is not denying their culture and asking them to adapt to fit into the primary culture that they have moved to is not racism, if you move to America, you should adapt to the primary culture, it should not adapt to yours.

It can integrate your culture, which it has done with Mexican culture, anyone who has been to Texas knows this, but Mexican culture should
Not be allowed to force the greater culture to adapt to them, that’s what Mexico is for.

Now here is something no one wants to talk about.

say there is a town with 2000 people in it, call them Belgiums or whatever, over the space of 5 years Germans move in and suddenly its 2000 belgiums and 1500 Germans, is it not fair for those Belgium’s to be upset that thier town has changed so much and be worried that the Germans culture has taken over ? Now crack on another few years and it’s 2000 belgiums and 2200 germans, the Belgium’s have been saying for years they are worried and now their culture is in the minority, now what if they Belgium’s find out that 1200 of the Germans are their illegally, how happy do you think they would be.

This is a problem I see time and time again, people are voicing their fears that thier culture is being subsumed in their own country, but they are called racist for voicing that concern and because of the fear of being labelled a racist no one talks about the problem.

 Formosa wrote:

So people not wanting to have their own culture taken over or replaced is white supremacy?

The idea that white people are being actively replaced is a lie and nazi propaganda. Whites are not having anything taken over. What is happening is that white Americans are, due to entirely predictable demographic shifts, turning from a majority into a plurality. This frightens many white Americans deeply because they fear becoming a minority since they know how they themselves view and treat minorities. That they're gonna be around, be the biggest group, speak the biggest language and just generally exist as the largest of one of several groups to live in the US is not much comfort to them, for some reason. It's just overreaction to even the hint of equalising. Acknowledging that millions speak Spanish and that many services would be able to better fulfill their obligations by offering information in Spanish is an entirely reasonable thing to do but it freaks out people who are used to being the only ones to count, the only ones to have things for them.

 Formosa wrote:

So wanting sovereign borders is white supremacy?

Sovereignty does not mean building a colossal wall and patrolling it with armed militias to keep brown people away. Sovereignty does not mean terrorising asylum seekers by stealing their children from them. That you seriously argue that building a wall is about sovereignty only further cements that you are not a leftist because leftists care for people over borders.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Trying to put everything at the foot of white surpremecy is wrong and frankly racist Rosebuddy.

What he thinks/feels is not racism. He doesn't feel hatred towards a race at all. What he hates is America. He hates the entirety of it. He hates the ideals, he hates the structure, he hates literally everything that makes America what it is. He blames America for pretty much all the evil in the world, and this rhetoric isn't new. Look at his posting history in every US politics thread we've ever had, and it's been almost a steady stream of hate speech.

I do not hate "the entirety of America". That's a lot of people and a pretty big dang chunk of land. What I do hate is the imperialism, the racial oppression and the rampant cruelty of US power structures. I want its peoples to be able to live in peace, to have a nice and quiet life, to tend to the tremendous reserves of nature and to express themselves in full. I don't want the US to rule the world with an iron fist.


But I will at least thank you for seeing that I am not motivated by racism.

Is it a melting pot or are they being subsumed in their own country? Sounds like quite the paradox, certainly when you want to go for something vague as the 'primary' culture.

Also how many Belgians does each Belgium contain in that example

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

If 80% of the people use English as their primary language why do people need to insist it should be the official language?

Simply because the people who do so are the small percentage of racists who are afraid of white supremacy being lost due to the growth of the Spanish speaking population.

I wonder if you realise that by that logic you can go to any non English speaking nation and force them to adapt to our culture, otherwise they are just black/Asian supremacists.

..

No, it is not so. The situation you describe is not the situation that exists in the USA. The situation in the USA is that a minority of a majority population (white people) are insisting that their interpretation of culture must override all others.

I will grant you that a very vocal minority (and they are an extremely small minority) are against any language besides English being spoken in the US but that isn't really the issue at hand here. Take the racial optics out of the equation for a moment, heck even take the US being the country in this example out. The issue is what is the default (official) language of the country, the one that everyone should be able to speak at some level so that we can all communicate effectively. If 80% of your population is using a specific language as their primary language then that is the one that the country should be using as the default until another language gets closer to being used by 50%.

The idea that white people are being actively replaced is a lie and nazi propaganda. Whites are not having anything taken over. What is happening is that white Americans are, due to entirely predictable demographic shifts, turning from a majority into a plurality. This frightens many white Americans deeply because they fear becoming a minority since they know how they themselves view and treat minorities. That they're gonna be around, be the biggest group, speak the biggest language and just generally exist as the largest of one of several groups to live in the US is not much comfort to them, for some reason. It's just overreaction to even the hint of equalising. Acknowledging that millions speak Spanish and that many services would be able to better fulfill their obligations by offering information in Spanish is an entirely reasonable thing to do but it freaks out people who are used to being the only ones to count, the only ones to have things for them.

This clearly shows you don’t really understand the issues of the American and US people, you are essentially boiling it down to racism...

Sovereignty does not mean building a colossal wall and patrolling it with armed militias to keep brown people away. Sovereignty does not mean terrorising asylum seekers by stealing their children from them. That you seriously argue that building a wall is about sovereignty only further cements that you are not a leftist because leftists care for people over borders.

Interesting, very interesting, you have basically said that to be a leftist you must be as far left as you, which is just false, politics is a spectrum and it’s not as black and white and you want us to believe, the Americans have every right to not want illegal imigrants flood their nation, they are under no obligation to take these people in just because they share a border, you as a far leftist may not believe in borders, I as a moderate leftist understand the need for a well defended border.

I do not hate "the entirety of America". That's a lot of people and a pretty big dang chunk of land. What I do hate is the imperialism, the racial oppression and the rampant cruelty of US power structures. I want its peoples to be able to live in peace, to have a nice and quiet life, to tend to the tremendous reserves of nature and to express themselves in full. I don't want the US to rule the world with an iron fist

Ah finally we agree on something, it took a long time but here it is, we disagree on how to implement such a thing but at least we can agree on anti imperialism and racial oppression, of any kind, here’s hoping we can find other things to agree on.

 Formosa wrote:
Interesting, very interesting, you have basically said that to be a leftist you must be as far left as you, which is just false, politics is a spectrum and it’s not as black and white and you want us to believe, the Americans have every right to not want illegal imigrants flood their nation, they are under no obligation to take these people in just because they share a border, you as a far leftist may not believe in borders, I as a moderate leftist understand the need for a well defended border.

This is severely lacking in solidarity, one of the core leftist principles. Leftism means something. Socialism and anarchism alike are founded on the idea that all peoples are, ultimately, equal and that your function in the economic system is a greater commonality than the language you speak. So to balk at the impoverished because they come from another state is to divide the working class, to distance yourself from people whom you ostensibly share a common cause with.

 DrGiggles wrote:

I will grant you that a very vocal minority (and they are an extremely small minority) are against any language besides English being spoken in the US but that isn't really the issue at hand here. Take the racial optics out of the equation for a moment, heck even take the US being the country in this example out. The issue is what is the default (official) language of the country, the one that everyone should be able to speak at some level so that we can all communicate effectively. If 80% of your population is using a specific language as their primary language then that is the one that the country should be using as the default until another language gets closer to being used by 50%.

80 / 20% is nearly exactly the ratio of English - French speakers here in Canada, and we have two official languages.

America would only be made stronger by adopting Spanish as it's second official language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Khornate25 wrote:
Not sur if this goes here.

Is it just me or does cultural and individual relativism helped produce a NA culture that romanticize plebs ?

Wherever I look all I can see are obese and vulgar people with almost no education or interest in high culture (yes, I consider that therr is a thing as high culture; no, not everything is equal and valuable).

Plus, just look at Trudeau and Trump. Dumb and dumber, that's how I'm calling it.

Hilarious that you rail against fat, slovenly low culture types, and lump our fit, well spoken, extremely well educated, high culture loving PM in with them, just two short simple statements apart. Cognitive dissonance that strong could give you whiplash

Point of fact - there is no official language of the United States. English is the primary language spoken and written, but there's really no reason not to use other common languages in official paperwork and so forth.

Manafort's defense literally rested w/o presenting anything after the prosecution. Whooo boy.

Jim Sciutto
‏
Verified account

@jimsciutto
Follow Follow @jimsciutto
More
Breaking: Paul Manafort's team will not present a case nor call any witnesses in his defense. The defense rested at 11:53 am

8:58 AM - 14 Aug 2018

 whembly wrote:
Manafort's defense literally rested w/o presenting anything after the prosecution. Whooo boy.

Jim Sciutto
‏
Verified account

@jimsciutto
Follow Follow @jimsciutto
More
Breaking: Paul Manafort's team will not present a case nor call any witnesses in his defense. The defense rested at 11:53 am

8:58 AM - 14 Aug 2018

Why bother? Just wait for Trump to pardon him after he's convicted.

 whembly wrote:
Manafort's defense literally rested w/o presenting anything after the prosecution. Whooo boy.

Jim Sciutto
‏
Verified account

@jimsciutto
Follow Follow @jimsciutto
More
Breaking: Paul Manafort's team will not present a case nor call any witnesses in his defense. The defense rested at 11:53 am

8:58 AM - 14 Aug 2018

Bold strategy. They've got to be hoping to make a plea deal or something.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Manafort's defense literally rested w/o presenting anything after the prosecution. Whooo boy.

Jim Sciutto
‏
Verified account

@jimsciutto
Follow Follow @jimsciutto
More
Breaking: Paul Manafort's team will not present a case nor call any witnesses in his defense. The defense rested at 11:53 am

8:58 AM - 14 Aug 2018

Why bother? Just wait for Trump to pardon him after he's convicted.

...not a great idea for Trump either. If Manafort is pardoned, he could be compelled to give up the deets w/o 5 amendment protection, as he would not be in legal jeopardy anymore (notwithstanding any state charges).

 DrGiggles wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Manafort's defense literally rested w/o presenting anything after the prosecution. Whooo boy.

Jim Sciutto
‏
Verified account

@jimsciutto
Follow Follow @jimsciutto
More
Breaking: Paul Manafort's team will not present a case nor call any witnesses in his defense. The defense rested at 11:53 am

8:58 AM - 14 Aug 2018

Bold strategy. They've got to be hoping to make a plea deal or something.

Maybe... or, it's more common that one would think:
From a trial lawyer:

@Popehat
Follow Follow @Popehat
More
Ok. So. Why would the Manafort defense team not put on a defense, and how unusual is it?

It's not unusual at all. It's common. Here are some possible reasons why. /1

9:08 AM - 14 Aug 2018
304 Retweets 523 Likes Hank GreelySkeptical Dog

A bold move indeed. That's ahhh...interesting.