• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White America

Do you want to keep America White?

  • I want to keep America White

    Votes: 6 10.2%

  • I am happy with the present mix

    Votes: 10 16.9%

  • I am not opposed to the present trend toward ethnicity

    Votes: 43 72.9%
  • Total voters
    59
  • Poll closed .
RaleBulgarian said:
You make a lot of claims that are partly true/correct, mostly untrue, personal opinion, and pure hyperbole. I’m not going to answer/debate each point you attempted to make because causes and effects are more complicated than you acknowledge. America has not lived in a bubble for the last century +, and neither have other countries.

What I will do is highlight your most significant errors.

- Describing America’s population in the early 20th century as “monochromatic” is disingenuous at best. While it is true that about 90% of the population was white, that 90% was made up of several different ethnicities/cultures. From late 19th century through early 20th century there was massive immigration from throughout Europe. Much of America was white, but had different backgrounds, language, religions, etc.. Not nearly as homogeneous as you purport.

- Those immigrants were integral to the industrial revolution that made America an international trade success.

- Many American immigrants have made tremendous contributions to their adopted homeland. World renown genius Albert Einstein, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, U.S. Army General and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Songwriter and Composer Irving Berlin, World famous inventor Nikola Tesla, Industrialist and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie, and many, many more. All proof that diversity brings strength.

For the last century plus, the diversity of our population has been integral to our success globally, financially, militarily, and diplomatically. Clearly homogeny isn’t the key to success.
Click to expand...

Did you notice that the most insecure and defensive people are the ones that are against any diversity? Typical cowardice of racists.
 
beefheart said:
Did you notice that the most insecure and defensive people are the ones that are against any diversity? Typical cowardice of racists.
Click to expand...
Yep, and the ones who attempt to mask their bigotry with pseudo-intellectual babble are the most pathetic.
 
Bullseye said:
Never mind - more blather than I choose to wade into. The "World According to Checkerboard Strangler" isn't a book I care to review.
Click to expand...

You're like a movie reviewer who bases their review on seeing the trailer.
And you couldn't pass up the opportunity to make a snide remark about "Checkerboard Strangler", could you?
 
Bullseye said:
Never mind - more blather than I choose to wade into. The "World According to Checkerboard Strangler" isn't a book I care to review.
Click to expand...

Care to tell me how making private prisons a profit center DISCOURAGES illegal immigration?
Show us all how that works. Show us how a private prison profits when illegal immigration is reduced or eliminated.
Thrill us all with your business acumen and political derring do.
 
Ahlevah said:
Well, after having driven in Wyoming last year, where I saw a sign that read "Next services 81 miles," I have a clue about why that's true. Prairie dogs and pronghorn don't commit too many murders, especially where there's no one to murder. :lol:
Click to expand...

Population density of course plays a role, but the USA is going to reach 400M officially (unofficially perhaps decades earlier). Then my plan for buying up barren stretches of land and selling them later to developers will make me very rich :mrgreen:
 
joko104 said:
Try reading actual history, not the fantasy alternative reality the corporate fascists tell.
Click to expand...

I have been a student of history before you were born and I am 100% accurate in my assessment of your post. Maybe you should expand your sources of knowledge.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Biggest crock of **** I have ever read.
Who actually built the railroads, industrial empires, residential and commercial buildings, cars, made the steel, etc.
It wasn't JUST white people, I assure you.
In fact, the largest South to North migration in the country's history was blacks moving to the industrial North to get those good factory jobs.

Our nation's capital was built using slave labor, which by the way was NOT COUNTED accurately because slaves were three-fifths of a person and considered property. Maybe try getting your history from someplace other than Stormfront or Vdare.
Click to expand...

You not surprisingly miss the point entirely. Perhaps 90% of the blacks in the US today can trace back their ancestry here to the 19th century,
some even before. Of course they are Americans who help make this country great from Colonial times to current times.
They have nothing to do with the balkanization I eluded to they were always a part of the American story.

The industrial empires mentioned were formed over 100 years ago which put together the worlds greatest economy overtaking Britain,
far before diversity & multiculturalism which I'm assuming became a national treasure in your mind. At that time 1920's the USA along
with Canada & Argentina were the most homogeneous white society in the western hemisphere.

I'll grant you this. Besides for dominant ethnic groups at that time {white 89.7%} Black {9.9%} the Chinese did play a big part in
bringing East & West together. 2/3 of the workforce that constructed the transcontinental railroad over the dangerous Sierra Mountains
were Chinese & their efforts in that endeavor should not go unappreciated. Without the efforts of the Chinese workers in the building
of America's railroads, our development and progress as a nation would have been delayed by years.However they represented
{0.2%} of the American community, hardly a blip on the radar screen.

Historical racial and ethnic demographics of the United States - Wikipedia

Until 1965 Immigration laws were written with one goal to preserve the European character of the country.' That year Ted Kennedy
reassured the congress that the new law he & Lyndon Johnson were championing would not alter the nations ethnic character.
'Contrary to the charges in some quarters this bill will not inundate America from the most populated & deprived nations of Africa
& Asia.' Senator Ted Kennedy, asserted that the bill would not affect US demographic mix.

'The 1965 act brought in the poorest of the poor from around the globe. Non-English-speaking peasants from wildly
backward cultures could be counted on to be dependent on government assistance for generations to come continuing
up to day' Trump is making a stand to counter this law which put America in the position to become a boarding house for 3rd worlders.

The point I made in the post you replied to was to a poster who asked:
'If diversity through immigration was bad for America, as you assert, we wouldn’t be the world leader that we are.' which is nonsense.

It's established that we became the world leader in GDP when the
USA was one of the most monochromatic nations if not the most monochromatic nation in the entire western hemisphere.
Many stats indicate that we have fallen behind China already or soon will. The last 50 years have been a trend downward.

Japan & China practice economic & ethnonationalism' & we have not in the last half century. Their recent success is there
for all to see, Trump zeroed in on this & we need a heavy dose of it to stop the bleeding!

"Pity the nation divided into fragments, each fragment deeming itself a nation' gibran 1934

BTW, don't get into the shrink business You seem to have a less than
adequate grasp of what's going on inside the heads of people you've never met.
I heard of Stormfront never check in out, never heard of Vdare. Never
even on Facebook don't have time for nonsense.
 
Last edited:
RaleBulgarian said:
You make a lot of claims that are partly true/correct, mostly untrue, personal opinion, and pure hyperbole. I’m not going to answer/debate each point you attempted to make because causes and effects are more complicated than you acknowledge. America has not lived in a bubble for the last century +, and neither have other countries.

What I will do is highlight your most significant errors.

- Describing America’s population in the early 20th century as “monochromatic” is disingenuous at best. While it is true that about 90% of the population was white, that 90% was made up of several different ethnicities/cultures. From late 19th century through early 20th century there was massive immigration from throughout Europe. Much of America was white, but had different backgrounds, language, religions, etc.. Not nearly as homogeneous as you purport.

- Those immigrants were integral to the industrial revolution that made America an international trade success.

- Many American immigrants have made tremendous contributions to their adopted homeland. World renown genius Albert Einstein, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, U.S. Army General and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Songwriter and Composer Irving Berlin, World famous inventor Nikola Tesla, Industrialist and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie, and many, many more. All proof that diversity brings strength.

For the last century plus, the diversity of our population has been integral to our success globally, financially, militarily, and diplomatically. Clearly homogeny isn’t the key to success.
Click to expand...

You're trying & you're not alone in your position I watch CNN & NSNBC too but about:

'Describing America’s population in the early 20th century as “monochromatic” is disingenuous at best. While it is true that about 90% of
the population was white, that 90% was made up of several different ethnicities/cultures. From late 19th century through early 20th
century there was massive immigration from throughout Europe. Much of America was white, but had different backgrounds, language,
religions, etc.. Not nearly as homogeneous as you purport.'

Here is the story which reveals to most why my point is valid:

The immigrants in question were all white, all European and almost all were Christian.
'After each wave of immigration there were long periods of little or no immigration
giving time for the Americans to assimilate the newcomers.
Their children passed through deeply patriotic schools where they were
immersed in the language, literature, history & traditions uniquely American.
These were the reasons that the immigrations of that particular era worked.
Far different situation today.

Those statesmen you mentioned did bring strength to America but here again you are only
proving my point. They were among the group I stated built the country in the last paragraph.
Albright, Berlin, Tesla, Carnegie, Einstein & Shalikashvili were as I stated were all white, all European and almost all were Christian.
The only one you mentioned who would not have been able to come to America was Sundar Pichai of British Indian extract part
of the influx of immigrants who America became available too after the Immigration Act of 1965 which led to multiculturism
of the last 50 years.

Secondly I agree that a few of the immigrants of the last 50 years from third world or former 3rd world states nationalities
have benefited the country. As even the key restrictionist, the great statesmen from Colorado William Valle agrees with you
on that note, to paraphrase his speech championing the immigration act of 1924:

What we do claim is that the northern European and particularly Anglo-Saxons made this country. Oh, yes; the others helped. But … [t]hey came to this country because it was already made as an Anglo-Saxon commonwealth. They added to it, they often enriched it, but they did not make it, and they have not yet greatly changed it.

We are determined that they shall not … It is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves."[5] -Cong. Rec., April 8, 1924, 5922

Valle no doubt is turning over in his grave now at what has become of has become of this country.
 
slick said:
The immigrants in question were all white, all European and almost all were Christian.
Click to expand...
The majority of immigrants were Catholic/Roman Catholic. From 1850 - 1906, the Catholic population in America grew from 5% to 17%. And although today Catholics are considered to be Christians, back then they most certainly weren’t, and were not welcomed in many places. Also during that time, a considerable portion of immigrants (Italians, Greeks, Poles, Hungarians, Slavs) weren’t considered white and were mistreated/shunned. Many Americans mistakenly believed that the immigrants were bad for our country.

Any of the above historical perspective sound familiar?
White immigrants weren’t always considered white — and acceptable — The Undefeated
Roman Catholics and Immigration in Nineteenth-Century America, The Nineteenth Century, Divining America: Religion in American History, TeacherServe, National Humanities Center
Religions of Immigrants to the US, Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries (National Institute) Genealogy - FamilySearch Wiki
Religious Issues in American Immigration - ELCA

slick said:
Those statesmen you mentioned did bring strength to America but here again you are only
proving my point. They were among the group I stated built the country in the last paragraph.
Albright, Berlin, Tesla, Carnegie, Einstein & Shalikashvili were as I stated were all white, all European and almost all were Christian.
Click to expand...
The people I listed did not all help build the country during the latter part of the 19th and early 20th centuries. They were either born later or were just children back then.

Most of what you’re saying is bad for America and Americans isn’t. You, and others like you, are the same type that have consistently railed against immigration throughout our history, declaring that foreigners would ruin America. That belief proved to be wrong a century ago and will be proven wrong again.
 
joko104 said:
I can not think of any non-white majority country anywhere on earth I would want to live. I wish the USA would stay a white majority, but it won't. The Democratic Party open war on white people by unlimited opposition to BOTH diversity and white people assures it.

Understand that the Democratic Party RADICALLY opposed diversity. Our legal immigration system is for diversity, meaning quotas of people from all over the world to assure diversity. The DEMOCRATIC PARTY furiously opposes diversity in immigration. They do NOT want anyone BUT Latinos. You NEVER hear ANY Democratic official ranting for increasing legal immigration quotas from AROUND THE WORLD. The ONLY rant on behalf of those coming across the Southern border as illegal immigrants.

Why? The Democratic Party is RACIST - and Latinos are considered somewhat closer to being white. The CORE of the Democratic Party has always been and is racism. Second, they want desperately poor, uneducated Latino men - as cheap immigrant labor for their corporate super rich fascist owners, so they can still have their inferior servants and foreign slaves since they can no longer directly OWN slaves due to losing their attempt to create a Democratic Party slave-nation, and because poor, uneducated non-Americans are easier to sell corporate-fascism to politically.
Click to expand...

Why? Why do you want America white when you and your ancestors are the immigrants into what was a non-white nation? Despite your desperation to paint Democrats as racists it is you and those like you, who are the racists. Your post and your pathetic attempt at projection are clear evidence to that fact.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
The majority of immigrants were Catholic/Roman Catholic. From 1850 - 1906, the Catholic population in America grew from 5% to 17%. And although today Catholics are considered to be Christians, back then they most certainly weren’t, and were not welcomed in many places. Also during that time, a considerable portion of immigrants (Italians, Greeks, Poles, Hungarians, Slavs) weren’t considered white and were mistreated/shunned. Many Americans mistakenly believed that the immigrants were bad for our country.

Any of the above historical perspective sound familiar?
White immigrants weren’t always considered white — and acceptable — The Undefeated
Roman Catholics and Immigration in Nineteenth-Century America, The Nineteenth Century, Divining America: Religion in American History, TeacherServe, National Humanities Center
Religions of Immigrants to the US, Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries (National Institute) Genealogy - FamilySearch Wiki
Religious Issues in American Immigration - ELCA


The people I listed did not all help build the country during the latter part of the 19th and early 20th centuries. They were either born later or were just children back then.

Most of what you’re saying is bad for America and Americans isn’t. You, and others like you, are the same type that have consistently railed against immigration throughout our history, declaring that foreigners would ruin America. That belief proved to be wrong a century ago and will be proven wrong again.
Click to expand...

I'm old enough to remember seeing "no blacks or Irish" in flophouse windows in London. I never want to see that again. There are several Americans here who would welcome it.

'It Was Standard To See Signs Saying, 'No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish' - RightsInfo
 
snakestretcher said:
I'm old enough to remember seeing "no blacks or Irish" in flophouse windows in London. I never want to see that again. There are several Americans here who would welcome it.

'It Was Standard To See Signs Saying, 'No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish' - RightsInfo
Click to expand...
Yep, same **** most everywhere immigrants went to build a better life.

Antique sign from the late 1800’s displayed at a Massachusetts bar.
1BA42ADD-BAAD-4683-96D8-E741AEDA6002.jpg

More anti immigrant cartoons printed in periodicals of that time, intended to evoke anger and fear in Americans. Disgusting.
EB1D8BFF-C46D-46BA-8848-18CE54026ACD.jpg
172A7388-BC3A-49E8-B4B4-D187ECA71673.jpg
BED6FDBB-D028-4FD3-A219-147DF0A71B2C.jpg
 
Casper said:
Specifics?
Click to expand...

Wanting to incrementally weaken gun rights and take away firearms for starters. How much taxation do you think would be required to give free healthcare to all illegal immigrants and free college to everyone? What do you think would happen to the US economy if some draconian attack was made on the fossil fuel industry? This is just for starters. Harris and others actually advocate this stuff.
 
veritas1 said:
Wanting to incrementally weaken gun rights and take away firearms for starters. How much taxation do you think would be required to give free healthcare to all illegal immigrants and free college to everyone? What do you think would happen to the US economy if some draconian attack was made on the fossil fuel industry? This is just for starters. Harris and others actually advocate this stuff.
Click to expand...

Really? Where's the alleged proposed legislation for taking away your guns? Any amount tax you pay for universal healthcare will be tiny in comparison with the absurdly inflated rates you pay to insurers who have zero clinical interest in you. Of course you're free to explain why France with its demonic, socialist healthcare system currently ranks top place in the WHO global healthcare quality assessment, and America, with your chaotic private system can only manage 36th behind Slovenia? Because socialized healthcare is such a disaster that countries are going bankrupt? Don't think so.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Yep, same **** most everywhere immigrants went to build a better life.

Antique sign from the late 1800’s displayed at a Massachusetts bar.
View attachment 67260269

More anti immigrant cartoons printed in periodicals of that time, intended to evoke anger and fear in Americans. Disgusting.
View attachment 67260270
View attachment 67260271
View attachment 67260272
Click to expand...

I commend your sincerity & willingness to reach pretzel like contortion to get a point across. Know this, I agree, the colonists were white nationalists
who eventually created a society of white men & women with black slaves who without moral qualms drove the indians over the mountains. And as the years
went by and other European white became part of the fabric most all were discriminated against, but of all who came those who entered the mainstream
most easily were the Irish. Most of the founding fathers and signers of the Declaration of Independence were of Great Britain ancestry but by far
the Irish had the second most representation among the founders. 48 of the 56 signers were born in America. 5 were born in Britain & 3 in Ireland namely:
George Taylor, Matthew Thornton & James Smith from Northern Ireland. 9 of the 56 were of Irish heritage with Charles Carroll being the only catholic among them.
Very few remember that nine of the men who signed the document that is arguably the greatest statement of freedom ever penned were Irish Americans.

The Irish-American Signers of the Declaration of Independence - The Wild Geese

Acknowledging that the predominately catholic Irish who came here after the 1850's did have a hard time of it, they were even less appreciated in their
homeland because of British rule. The Duke of Wellington who was sometimes dissed by being reminded that he was in fact born in Dublin responded
with 'Being born in a stable does not make one a horse.' & his noble contemporaries regarded the Irish as human swinery.

However the great waves of immigrants from Ireland, Southern & eastern Europe from 1860 to 1920 despite nativist animosity where successfully integrated
into the nation because of crucial elements that made it work. They had a lot more in common with those that came before them than those who
have flooded our country after the Immigration act of 1965. In fact the first president of not of pure British ancestry. Andrew Jackson was Irish.

My mom's ancestors came here as Catholics from Ireland in the 1860's & I heard the stories about the hardships. My dad's father was the last of
my grandparents to come here. He was a Northern Ireland protestant who was and a junior officer in the British Navy. Luckily just before WWI
he landed in Halifax Canada then came here and from that time till the war piloted Pure Oil tankers from the Delaware Bay to Beaumont & Port Arthur
Texas & back, he built a company in that time which has benefitted our entire family up until this day. Became a caption in the Coast Guard in WWII.
So the Irish story is a mixed one not one to emphasize as tragic.
 
Last edited:
slick said:
I commend your sincerity & willingness to reach pretzel like contortion to get a point across. Know this, I agree, the colonists were white nationalists
who eventually created a society of white men & women with black slaves who without moral qualms drove the indians over the mountains. And as the years
went by and other European white became part of the fabric most all were discriminated against, but of all who came those who entered the mainstream
most easily were the Irish. Most of the founding fathers and signers of the Declaration of Independence were of Great Britain ancestry but by far
the Irish had the second most representation among the founders. 48 of the 56 signers were born in America. 5 were born in Britain & 3 in Ireland namely:
George Taylor, Matthew Thornton & James Smith from Northern Ireland. 9 of the 56 were of Irish heritage with Charles Carroll being the only catholic among them.
Very few remember that nine of the men who signed the document that is arguably the greatest statement of freedom ever penned were Irish Americans.

The Irish-American Signers of the Declaration of Independence - The Wild Geese

Acknowledging that the predominately catholic Irish who came here after the 1850's did have a hard time of it, they were even less appreciated in their
homeland because of British rule. The Duke of Wellington who was sometimes dissed by being reminded that he was in fact born in Dublin responded
with 'Being born in a stable does not make one a horse.' & his noble contemporaries regarded the Irish as human swinery.

However the great waves of immigrants from Ireland, Southern & eastern Europe from 1860 to 1920 despite nativist animosity where successfully integrated
into the nation because of crucial elements that made it work. They had a lot more in common with those that came before them than those who
have flooded our country after the Immigration act of 1965. In fact the first president of not of pure British ancestry. Andrew Jackson was Irish.

My mom's ancestors came here as Catholics from Ireland in the 1860's & I heard the stories about the hardships. My dad's father was the last of
my grandparents to come here. He was a Northern Ireland protestant who was and a junior officer in the British Navy. Luckily just before WWI
he landed in Halifax Canada then came here and from that time till the war piloted Pure Oil tankers from the Delaware Bay to Beaumont & Port Arthur
Texas & back, he built a company in that time which has benefitted our entire family up until this day. Became a caption in the Coast Guard in WWII.
So the Irish story is a mixed one not one to emphasize as tragic.
Click to expand...
No contorting was required. Just a basic knowledge of American history and knowing where to look for additional information, but thanks for the backhanded compliment anyways.

Interesting that you chose a very gentle euphemism to describe our ancestors treatment of native Americans. Also interesting, how you focused most all of your post on the Irish, and none on other ethnicities or pervasive religious bias in the new world. Understandable, as you would have had to do quite a bit of contorting, yourself, to make others treatment seem as mild as you did the Irish who, regardless of your cherry picked narrative, for the most part were not welcomed with open arms.

As for your central point that the European immigrants had more in common with Americans than the Northern Triangle immigrants do, there’s no denying that obvious difference. It’s also worth keeping in mind that like the immigrants of more than a century ago, if given the opportunity, the incoming immigrants are just as capable of contributing to America.

If we could just get past the bigotry of those with small minds and no compassion.
 
veritas1 said:
Wanting to incrementally weaken gun rights and take away firearms for starters. How much taxation do you think would be required to give free healthcare to all illegal immigrants and free college to everyone? What do you think would happen to the US economy if some draconian attack was made on the fossil fuel industry? This is just for starters. Harris and others actually advocate this stuff.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know all the promises. That said you know as well as I that: wishing (promises) ain't gettin.
This is Exactly why I want a New Political Party, one based on the Constitution, Common Sense, and what is good for the Nation as a whole. If I outline my vision of what I believe they would stand for would Conservatives and Liberals even listen, I doubt it. Because in today's America it everything or nothing, no compromise, no discusion, no listening. Sadly I doubt we as a Nation will learn to work out our differences or acknowledge where we agree, meaning polarization to the point where the only choice left in manys mind is a split. Sad but that is where I see us all heading.i am just grateful that I live where I do.
 
snakestretcher said:
Really? Where's the alleged proposed legislation for taking away your guns? Any amount tax you pay for universal healthcare will be tiny in comparison with the absurdly inflated rates you pay to insurers who have zero clinical interest in you. Of course you're free to explain why France with its demonic, socialist healthcare system currently ranks top place in the WHO global healthcare quality assessment, and America, with your chaotic private system can only manage 36th behind Slovenia? Because socialized healthcare is such a disaster that countries are going bankrupt? Don't think so.
Click to expand...

1. The legislation will come after we give them the power. We don't intend to do that.

2. Oh really? And the government has a clinical interest? If the VA is a demonstration of their clinical interest, then we'll stick with our private insurers and doctors. BTW, my Mom had double cataract surgery a few years back. Her appointment took a week to get. My friend in Canada had his father need the same surgery. The appointment time was 14 months. No thanks.
 
joko104 said:
I can not think of any non-white majority country anywhere on earth I would want to live. I wish the USA would stay a white majority, but it won't. The Democratic Party open war on white people by unlimited opposition to BOTH diversity and white people assures it.

Understand that the Democratic Party RADICALLY opposed diversity. Our legal immigration system is for diversity, meaning quotas of people from all over the world to assure diversity. The DEMOCRATIC PARTY furiously opposes diversity in immigration. They do NOT want anyone BUT Latinos. You NEVER hear ANY Democratic official ranting for increasing legal immigration quotas from AROUND THE WORLD. The ONLY rant on behalf of those coming across the Southern border as illegal immigrants.

Why? The Democratic Party is RACIST - and Latinos are considered somewhat closer to being white. The CORE of the Democratic Party has always been and is racism. Second, they want desperately poor, uneducated Latino men - as cheap immigrant labor for their corporate super rich fascist owners, so they can still have their inferior servants and foreign slaves since they can no longer directly OWN slaves due to losing their attempt to create a Democratic Party slave-nation, and because poor, uneducated non-Americans are easier to sell corporate-fascism to politically.
Click to expand...

Everything said in this quote is right on the money. Does this sums up the definition of what America should be by the lowly liberal/Demo ? They are just getting started with their delusional ideas on how America should work. Our President has gotten started way ahead of the lowly liberal/Demo. 2020 is just around the corner and so is our President's second term.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
No contorting was required. Just a basic knowledge of American history and knowing where to look for additional information, but thanks for the backhanded compliment anyways.

Interesting that you chose a very gentle euphemism to describe our ancestors treatment of native Americans. Also interesting, how you focused most all of your post on the Irish, and none on other ethnicities or pervasive religious bias in the new world. Understandable, as you would have had to do quite a bit of contorting, yourself, to make others treatment seem as mild as you did the Irish who, regardless of your cherry picked narrative, for the most part were not welcomed with open arms.

As for your central point that the European immigrants had more in common with Americans than the Northern Triangle immigrants do, there’s no denying that obvious difference. It’s also worth keeping in mind that like the immigrants of more than a century ago, if given the opportunity, the incoming immigrants are just as capable of contributing to America.

If we could just get past the bigotry of those with small minds and no compassion.
Click to expand...

You're on the wrong track with this highfalutin flourish:
'Interesting that you chose a very gentle euphemism to describe our ancestors treatment of native Americans.'

Surprise, I am somewhat agreeing with you that the Native Americans were shamefully treated, treaties were broken
and the carnage approached genocide! The Indians however were almost contributors to their own demise.

In fact my avatar on this site is a rendering of William Weatherford, (Lum-Chate the Red Eagle) son of a Creek princess and a Scots trader
who amassed a fortune in land & money. Weatherford renounced his fathers wealth to seek his future with his mother's
people, and as Creek warchief lead them to astonishing victories against the government of the United States. He is one of my 5 most
admired men ever born on American soil.

During the War of 1812 Tecumseh tried to unite all the tribes to fight with the British with moderate success. Red Eagle war chief of the Creeks signed on
but he had a unexpected problem. He had sought to bring about a war in which the whole Creek Nation would be united against the whites but what he
brought about was a very different affair. What he found was a war between part of the Creeks on one hand & the rest of the Creeks along with the whites
onr the other. As it was fighting against some of his nearest friends became a much less attractive pursuit. This was always the problem the clasp the whites
held over some Indians & the Indian tribes failing to unite. This was the only time the Indians may have had a chance to stem the whites move westward
with success but as usual they could not unite & they failed. They had the leader they needed who had the wear with all and the girth of being to battle
the US army and Andrew jackson toe to toe until his quest for power & glory was ended at Horseshoe Bend.

The plains indians & Apache who have been most written about didn't have a chance against the emerging pioneers & the US Armies 50 years later
they were mere mop up duty.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom