Do you support the policy of expropriation without compensation?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Xenophon wrote:Ajax, the world you live in must be absolutely frightening. I can't imagine trying to get through my day with that much fear inside me.
Do you support the policy of expropriation without compensation?
If I honestly thought you understood or would consider any aspect of the nuanced debate about balancing the strength of the economy and correcting historical grievances while still respecting the rights of current owners I'd be happy to engage you on the topic. The subject has far more grey area than you've ever shown willingness to consider so I don't think it really worth the time.
Seriously though, what a crippling world view.
"If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation." -Xenophon of Athens
He can only see it as wrong if the invaders aren't Caucasian.
First of all Schmo I'm sure you have some Spaniard in your DNA so you carry some of the white guilt along with righteous brown amerind DNA.
It's indicative of the quality of your thought processes that you think guilt is a result of a certain kind of DNA rather than a broad consideration of circumstances.
ajax18 wrote:The new regime is probably more racist than the last, only in the reverse direction. Yet you're blind to reverse racism.
I'm blind to "reverse racism" because you've never articulated what you think that means, or why it's a coherent concept in the first place. It especially makes no sense in what you said here. I'm having a hard time distinguishing between "reverse racism" and simply "not racist."
ajax18 wrote:So let's just admit that it's still and always has been about military might and conquest and drop the illusions of either side holding a moral high ground.
According to whom? The voices in your head?
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
If I honestly thought you understood or would consider any aspect of the nuanced debate about balancing the strength of the economy and correcting historical grievances while still respecting the rights of current owners I'd be happy to engage you on the topic. The subject has far more grey area than you've ever shown willingness to consider so I don't think it really worth the time.
Yeah, I don't think these farmers are going to get very far taking their grievances to the moral elites of the left. Are these farmers even allowed to own guns? I guess disarming them was just the first step in the plan.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:Yeah, I don't think these farmers are going to get very far taking their grievances to the moral elites of the left. Are these farmers even allowed to own guns? I guess disarming them was just the first step in the plan.
Thanks for making my point, I guess. Perhaps looking to appeal to the "elites of the left"(whatever that is) isn't the right call, maybe this is an issue to be worked out between the citizens of South Africa and their politicians? Also, South Africa has a ridiculous high number of unregistered firearms (they are in the top 20 or 25 for just raw number of guns), I'm fairly confident at least a few of those are owned by farmers. Any other fantastical theories as to how this came to be?
"If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation." -Xenophon of Athens
ajax18 wrote:The new regime is probably more racist than the last, only in the reverse direction. Yet you're blind to reverse racism.
I'm blind to "reverse racism" because you've never articulated what you think that means, or why it's a coherent concept in the first place. It especially makes no sense in what you said here. I'm having a hard time distinguishing between "reverse racism" and simply "not racist."
And it's not lost on me that you likely still won't bother to define it, even after this latest opportunity to do so. If I were a betting man, I'd wager you likely know it to be a BS concept, and to define it would be to sacrifice some of the magic it has over you.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
I would agree with you that talk and dialogue is useless at this point.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Well. First of all racism is just racism. Reverse racism is a useless term meant to diminish racism. Yes, people can be racist regardless of whatever it is that they consider race (I'd argue it's really ethnocentrism since racism has been used by people in one racial category to be bigoted toward sub-ethnicities within their own racial category). Personally I'd rather people stick to 'bigoted' as a term since Leftists purportedly don't believe in race as a concept unless it's meant to categorize White people in that of an oppressor. But let's not speak practically and plainly, because “F” it, racism is super convenient as a thought-terminating cliché.
That said, Ajax, do you really believe there is a strong parallel between whatever it is White farmers in South Africa are experiencing versus what White Conservatives are experiencing here in America? You really need to draw a better picture for us because you're not making any sense, whatsoever. Also, you seem to be waffling between racialism or "race reality" and open-armed acceptance into Conservatives for minorities. Like. What is it? We're not going to divide ourselves into ethnostates, so you can forget that as a potentiality. What is it that you're driving at, and what is it that you hope the GOP can achieve? You might be better off starting with and hammering home moderate positions.
Take for example your position of wanting a Wall on the southern border. You'd be better off trying to explain how that's fiscally better for us. Or, perhaps, how controlling immigration is better for Big Business because we can then ensure, I don't know, immigrants pay taxes or whatever. If you're just basing your position on a gut feeling of ethnicity and the decline of a unified America then you're going to have to explain how America was great before whatever era you think it was at its pinnacle, or how it can be better by being inclusive, but moving forward in an organized, logical, and say, compassionate manner.
I mean, we get that you're an ethnic supremacist (which sub-group of Caucasian do you prefer?), so instead of pinging on how Sharqueisha gets too many handouts, or how Tyrone likes to beat Whitey senseless, why don't you start broadening your approach and figure out how we all can move forward that's palatable to you? Who knows? You might have some interesting takes on the various problems you seem to observe.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
I would agree with you that talk and dialogue is useless at this point.
There is no bridge between the real world and fantasy land. Rational people can disagree. Irrational people should be institutionalized... but then, where would we put them all?
I guess West Virginia's an option.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.