Reply by November 12, 20182018-11-12
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:10:08 +1100, Chris <c@b.a> wrote:

>On 11/11/2018 6:32 pm, Robert Baer wrote: >> John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >>> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the >>>>>>>>> devil I >>>>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off >>>>>>>>> a good >>>>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they >>>>>>>>> attempt >>>>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and >>>>>>>> China, >>>>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, >>>>>>> Iraq, >>>>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how >>>>>>> they >>>>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. >>>>>>> These >>>>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and >>>>>>> state >>>>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by >>>>>>> arrogant >>>>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and >>>>>>> totally >>>>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas.&#4294967295; It is not easy >>>>>>> trying >>>>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long >>>>>>> history of >>>>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and >>>>>>> pretending >>>>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> the way to do it.&#4294967295; By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> China is a different matter.&#4294967295; Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of >>>>>>> media >>>>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture.&#4294967295; Openness and more democratic >>>>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow >>>>>>> change. >>>>>>> &#4294967295;&#4294967295; You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden >>>>>>> change - >>>>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before >>>>>>> because they >>>>>>> don't know any different. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems >>>>>> to be >>>>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>>>> >>>>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>>>> >>>>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>>>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>>>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>>>> >>>>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>>>> >>>>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>>>> being different. We need different. >>>>> >>>>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>>>> American. >>>> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a >>>> rant. >>>> >>>> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >>>> voting friends over the weekend.&#4294967295; He was so angry about it (the caravan) >>>> that it was not possible.&#4294967295; (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >>>> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >>>> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >>>> work, to come here.&#4294967295; (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >>>> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >>>> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >>>> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >>>> >>>> Attack away. >>>> >>>> George H. >>> >>> Legally, they are not citizens of the USA. Of they cross our borders >>> without peoper paperwork, they are violating US law. >>> >>> A billion people would enter the USA if they could. Heck, a billion >>> people would move to San Francisco if they could. >>> >>> A reasonable immigration policy would admit a sensible number of >>> qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, >>> and get productive. >>> >>> >> &#4294967295; "Learn English"? >> &#4294967295; My, how racist! >> &#4294967295; Intellectual snob! >> &#4294967295; How dare you pollute a culture! >> > > >> qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, > >That's fine & dandy but then the U.S.A'ns would have to learn English too...
That's absurd and illogical. ...typical Europeon.
Reply by Chris November 12, 20182018-11-12
On 11/11/2018 6:32 pm, Robert Baer wrote:
> John Larkin wrote: >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the >>>>>>>> devil I >>>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off >>>>>>>> a good >>>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they >>>>>>>> attempt >>>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and >>>>>>> China, >>>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, >>>>>> Iraq, >>>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how >>>>>> they >>>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. >>>>>> These >>>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and >>>>>> state >>>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>>> >>>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by >>>>>> arrogant >>>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and >>>>>> totally >>>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas.&nbsp; It is not easy >>>>>> trying >>>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long >>>>>> history of >>>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and >>>>>> pretending >>>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly >>>>>> not >>>>>> the way to do it.&nbsp; By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> China is a different matter.&nbsp; Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of >>>>>> media >>>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture.&nbsp; Openness and more democratic >>>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow >>>>>> change. >>>>>> &nbsp;&nbsp; You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden >>>>>> change - >>>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before >>>>>> because they >>>>>> don't know any different. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems >>>>> to be >>>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>>> >>>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>>> >>>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>>> >>>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>>> >>>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>>> being different. We need different. >>>> >>>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>>> American. >>> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a >>> rant. >>> >>> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >>> voting friends over the weekend.&nbsp; He was so angry about it (the caravan) >>> that it was not possible.&nbsp; (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >>> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >>> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >>> work, to come here.&nbsp; (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >>> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >>> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >>> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >>> >>> Attack away. >>> >>> George H. >> >> Legally, they are not citizens of the USA. Of they cross our borders >> without peoper paperwork, they are violating US law. >> >> A billion people would enter the USA if they could. Heck, a billion >> people would move to San Francisco if they could. >> >> A reasonable immigration policy would admit a sensible number of >> qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, >> and get productive. >> >> > &nbsp; "Learn English"? > &nbsp; My, how racist! > &nbsp; Intellectual snob! > &nbsp; How dare you pollute a culture! >
>> qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, That's fine & dandy but then the U.S.A'ns would have to learn English too... -- Cheers, Chris.
Reply by Robert Baer November 11, 20182018-11-11
John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold > <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>> >>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>> >>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >>>>> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >>>>> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >>>>> don't know any different. >>>>> >>>> >>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>> >>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>> >>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>> >>> >>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>> >>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>> >>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>> being different. We need different. >>> >>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>> American. >> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >> >> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> >> Attack away. >> >> George H. > > Legally, they are not citizens of the USA. Of they cross our borders > without peoper paperwork, they are violating US law. > > A billion people would enter the USA if they could. Heck, a billion > people would move to San Francisco if they could. > > A reasonable immigration policy would admit a sensible number of > qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, > and get productive. > >
"Learn English"? My, how racist! Intellectual snob! How dare you pollute a culture!
Reply by George Herold November 1, 20182018-11-01
On Thursday, November 1, 2018 at 6:33:31 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
> On 11/01/2018 09:27 AM, George Herold wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote: > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:24:26 -0700 (PDT), George Herold > >> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 8:47:07 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote: > >>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold > >>>> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: > >>>>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I > >>>>>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good > >>>>>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt > >>>>>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, > >>>>>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep > >>>>>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged > >>>>>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, > >>>>>>>> Libya and Syria. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to > >>>>>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they > >>>>>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These > >>>>>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state > >>>>>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant > >>>>>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a > >>>>>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally > >>>>>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying > >>>>>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of > >>>>>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending > >>>>>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not > >>>>>>>> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian > >>>>>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and > >>>>>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept > >>>>>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media > >>>>>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler > >>>>>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic > >>>>>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. > >>>>>>>> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - > >>>>>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they > >>>>>>>> don't know any different. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be > >>>>>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after > >>>>>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the > >>>>>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are > >>>>>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, > >>>>>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated > >>>>>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European > >>>>>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general > >>>>>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would > >>>>>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors > >>>>>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately > >>>>>> people who only date back six or eight generations? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for > >>>>>> being different. We need different. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is > >>>>>> American. > >>>>> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. > >>>>> > >>>>> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump > >>>>> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) > >>>>> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) > >>>>> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. > >>>>> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to > >>>>> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) > >>>>> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, > >>>>> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, > >>>>> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." > >>>> > >>>> Except, that even if we could accommodate everyone on the planet who > >>>> wants to come here, for the most part they do _not_ want to be > >>>> Americans. There is no intention of "melting". > >>> > >>> Hmm I guess you are free to have whatever opinion you want. > >>> I don't know the people in the caravan, so this is in some > >>> ways a 'feel good' story to tell myself. > >> > >> Of course, you can lie to yourself but it's a sickness. > >>> > >>> But all the immigrants I've met, seem mostly happy to melt into America. > >>> (the first generation will always carry some of the 'homeland'.) > >> > >> Of course they're happy to be here. They're fed and living off the > >> fat of the land. That doesn't mean they have any interest in being > >> Americans. > > All are hard working members of the community AFAICT. > > Sometimes more-so than the local poor white trash. > > (Though I'm not dissing poor white trash, there's some hard working > > people there too... and I am middle class white trash myself, > > but for the grace of god, it could be me.) > > > > George H. > > > > What's so great about "being American" anyway, what do all the middle
Huh, OK no one is forcing you to stay. I guess I mostly feel lucky to be here, Canada or Australia would be OK too... country-wise. If not here and now, where would you want to be?
> class people I see glomping around in their absurd luxury SUVs day in > day out do with their time on average which is so noteworthy or worth > having such pride in, they invent a better light bulb or something? > > There are hard working people everywhere most of whom receive far less > for far more effort
Aren't you too young to be so bitter? Cheer up, life is short. George H.
Reply by November 1, 20182018-11-01
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 09:39:36 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, November 1, 2018 at 11:09:56 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: >> >> >On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >> >> >>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >> >> >>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >> >> >>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >> >> >>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >> >> >>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >> >> >>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >> >> >> Libya and Syria. >> >> >> >> >> >> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >> >> >> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >> >> >> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >> >> >> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >> >> >> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >> >> >> >> >> >> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >> >> >> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >> >> >> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >> >> >> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >> >> >> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >> >> >> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >> >> >> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >> >> >> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >> >> >> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >> >> >> building up pressure for when the top blew. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >> >> >> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >> >> >> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >> >> >> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >> >> >> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >> >> >> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >> >> >> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >> >> >> don't know any different. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >> >> >heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >> >> >the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >> >> > >> >> >Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >> >> >Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >> >> >unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >> >> >homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >> >> >to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >> >> >Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >> >> >authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >> >> >indeed prefer a dictator or king. >> >> > >> >> >I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >> >> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >> >> people who only date back six or eight generations? >> >> >> >> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >> >> >> >> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >> >> being different. We need different. >> >> >> >> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >> >> American. >> >Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >> > >> >I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> >voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> >that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> >First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> >Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> >work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> >And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> >walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> >"Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> > >> >Attack away. >> > >> >George H. >> >> Legally, they are not citizens of the USA. Of they cross our borders >> without peoper paperwork, they are violating US law. >> >> A billion people would enter the USA if they could. Heck, a billion >> people would move to San Francisco if they could. >> >> A reasonable immigration policy would admit a sensible number of >> qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, >> and get productive. > >Right! We've been settled by people who had enough gumption to get >up and leave their country. It's just my opinion, but I feel we want >those people with gumption. >(gumption, where does that word come from?)
But you don't care that they have enough "gumption" to follow the laws of the land. Any of the laws, in fact.
Reply by November 1, 20182018-11-01
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 06:27:58 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote: >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:24:26 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: >> >> >On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 8:47:07 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote: >> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >> >> <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >> >> >> >>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >> >> >> >>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >> >> >> >>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >> >> >> >>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >> >> >> >>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >> >> >> >>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >> >> >> >> Libya and Syria. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >> >> >> >> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >> >> >> >> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >> >> >> >> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >> >> >> >> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >> >> >> >> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >> >> >> >> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >> >> >> >> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >> >> >> >> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >> >> >> >> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >> >> >> >> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >> >> >> >> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >> >> >> >> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >> >> >> >> building up pressure for when the top blew. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >> >> >> >> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >> >> >> >> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >> >> >> >> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >> >> >> >> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >> >> >> >> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >> >> >> >> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >> >> >> >> don't know any different. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >> >> >> >heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >> >> >> >the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >> >> >> >Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >> >> >> >unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >> >> >> >homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >> >> >> >to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >> >> >> >Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >> >> >> >authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >> >> >> >indeed prefer a dictator or king. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >> >> >> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >> >> >> people who only date back six or eight generations? >> >> >> >> >> >> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >> >> >> >> >> >> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >> >> >> being different. We need different. >> >> >> >> >> >> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >> >> >> American. >> >> >Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >> >> > >> >> >I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> >> >voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> >> >that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> >> >First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> >> >Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> >> >work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> >> >And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> >> >walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> >> >"Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> >> >> >> Except, that even if we could accommodate everyone on the planet who >> >> wants to come here, for the most part they do _not_ want to be >> >> Americans. There is no intention of "melting". >> > >> >Hmm I guess you are free to have whatever opinion you want. >> >I don't know the people in the caravan, so this is in some >> >ways a 'feel good' story to tell myself. >> >> Of course, you can lie to yourself but it's a sickness. >> > >> >But all the immigrants I've met, seem mostly happy to melt into America. >> >(the first generation will always carry some of the 'homeland'.) >> >> Of course they're happy to be here. They're fed and living off the >> fat of the land. That doesn't mean they have any interest in being >> Americans. >All are hard working members of the community AFAICT.
A lie!
>Sometimes more-so than the local poor white trash.
Wow! We have a racist in our midst. Not surprising. Leftists *ARE* racist. We're stuck with our trash. We don't need more.
>(Though I'm not dissing poor white trash, there's some hard working >people there too... and I am middle class white trash myself, >but for the grace of god, it could be me.)
No, it couldn't. But you want others to be their worst.
Reply by bitrex November 1, 20182018-11-01
On 10/31/2018 04:25 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
> onsdag den 31. oktober 2018 kl. 21.02.37 UTC+1 skrev George Herold: >> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>> >>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>> >>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >>>>> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >>>>> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >>>>> don't know any different. >>>>> >>>> >>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>> >>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>> >>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>> >>> >>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>> >>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>> >>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>> being different. We need different. >>> >>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>> American. >> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >> >> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> >> Attack away. > > Some see it from a different perspective; if everyone with the brain and drive to improve are allowed to move to the US those poor countries are only going to get more miserable left with only those too poor, dumb, weak to leave. > I've heard some argue that the "open" border is a safety valve protecting corrupt governments in that those most dissatisfied and with drive leave rather than revolt >
Yes, if we let all the best people in the poor countries will become too miserable. That's what they say: <https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/31/politics/donald-trump-immigration-paul-ryan-midterms/index.html>
Reply by bitrex November 1, 20182018-11-01
On 10/31/2018 04:25 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

>> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> >> Attack away. > > Some see it from a different perspective; if everyone with the brain and drive to improve are allowed to move to the US those poor countries are only going to get more miserable left with only those too poor, dumb, weak to leave. > I've heard some argue that the "open" border is a safety valve protecting corrupt governments in that those most dissatisfied and with drive leave rather than revolt >
You're making the assumption that the US only attracts people who are somehow the "best"; the Trump administration surely does not base the words it says about why it is implementing the immigration policies on the idea that everyone showing up is "too good" by a long shot. I see little evidence for generalities either way. I'd offer that if one is upset that one's country only seems to attract criminals (unlikely to be the case but that appears to be the narrative) perhaps look at one-selves and ask why that should be so.
Reply by bitrex November 1, 20182018-11-01
On 10/31/2018 04:41 PM, George Herold wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 4:25:45 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >> onsdag den 31. oktober 2018 kl. 21.02.37 UTC+1 skrev George Herold: >>> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >>>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >>>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >>>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >>>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >>>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >>>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >>>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >>>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>>> >>>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >>>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >>>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >>>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >>>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >>>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >>>>>> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >>>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >>>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >>>>>> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >>>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >>>>>> don't know any different. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >>>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>>> >>>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>>> >>>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>>> >>>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>>> >>>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>>> being different. We need different. >>>> >>>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>>> American. >>> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >>> >>> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >>> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >>> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >>> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >>> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >>> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >>> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >>> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >>> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >>> >>> Attack away. >> >> Some see it from a different perspective; if everyone with the brain and drive to improve are allowed to move to the US those poor countries are only going to get more miserable left with only those too poor, dumb, weak to leave. > Well not to be heartless, but that's a problem for the other country > to fix. We mostly make things worse when we try and 'help'.
The right calls are usually never the easiest calls to make. And whether it's "easiest" to let people in with open arms or keep them out at gunpoint will depend on who you ask.
Reply by bitrex November 1, 20182018-11-01
On 11/01/2018 11:09 AM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:02:31 -0700 (PDT), George Herold > <gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 3:06:26 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:17:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/31/2018 12:25 PM, David Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> There's some wisdom to the "better the devil I know than the devil I >>>>>>> don't"-style diplomacy but dictatorial leaders tend to piss off a good >>>>>>> fraction of their population regardless of how benevolent they attempt >>>>>>> to be or what kind of change-of-heart they have in later years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some places - like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, probably Syria and China, >>>>>> would collapse into tribal warfare without a brutal dictator to keep >>>>>> everyone under control. And a dictator can often be slowly leveraged >>>>>> towards better behavior, if the tribes can go along. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, the slow leveraging technique worked /so/ well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, >>>>> Libya and Syria. >>>>> >>>>> You are right that countries like these required a tough dictator to >>>>> keep them from collapsing into tribal warfare - as is seen by how they >>>>> /did/ collapse when the dictator died or lost effective control. These >>>>> states stayed relatively stable when people hated their ruler and state >>>>> authorities more than they hated their neighbours. >>>>> >>>>> The source of the problems was the artificial states created by arrogant >>>>> western countries (the UK was a prime motivator here, with the USA a >>>>> willing partner) interested in money and strategic control and totally >>>>> uninterested in the people living in those areas. It is not easy trying >>>>> to encourage peace between neighbouring peoples with a long history of >>>>> grudges and disagreements - forcing them into one country and pretending >>>>> that means one language, one culture and one religion is certainly not >>>>> the way to do it. By doing this and putting a strict authoritarian >>>>> dictatorship on top, they were just bottling in the problems and >>>>> building up pressure for when the top blew. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> China is a different matter. Democracy is mostly an unknown concept >>>>> there (the people arguing or fighting for democracy get a lot of media >>>>> coverage in the west, but they are a very small group) - strict ruler >>>>> hierarchy is engrained in the culture. Openness and more democratic >>>>> leadership takes time to establish, through generations of slow change. >>>>> You can't force it on people, and you can't make it a sudden change - >>>>> otherwise people merely vote for the rulers they had before because they >>>>> don't know any different. >>>>> >>>> >>>> My superficial impression is that the modern Right in the US seems to be >>>> heavily composed of white immigrants whose families arrived well after >>>> the Civil War. The Trump family is German post 1900 for example. >>>> >>>> Much of my own family has lived in New England since prior to the >>>> Revolution, I feel these Johnny-come-lately European immigrants are >>>> unaware of how America was intended to operate, have a bizarre, >>>> homegrown heavily authoritarian religion (Evangelism) mostly unrelated >>>> to my own family's Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, or historical European >>>> Christianity at all for that matter, and are in general >>>> authoritarian-by-nature, resent representative democracy, and would >>>> indeed prefer a dictator or king. >>>> >>>> I feel little "cultural identity" with these people. >>> >>> >>> Do you really think that the values of your 12th-generation ancestors >>> influence you? And that's superior to the values of Johnny-come-lately >>> people who only date back six or eight generations? >>> >>> You sound awfully New England snobby and intolerant to me. Tribal. >>> >>> Species survive through genetic diversity. Don't blame people for >>> being different. We need different. >>> >>> Our culture isn't where our ancestors came from. Our culture is >>> American. >> Yup, since this thread has gone full monty politics-wise, I've got a rant. >> >> I was trying to talk about the 'caravan' in Mexico with one of my Trump >> voting friends over the weekend. He was so angry about it (the caravan) >> that it was not possible. (We use to be able to talk about this stuff.) >> First off I don't want open borders and I don't want floods of people. >> Our immigration policy is a wreck, and I do want more people who want to >> work, to come here. (Pay taxes, reduce the debt.) >> And I look at these people (in the caravan) leaving their homes, >> walking a thousand miles in hopes of a new life, and I think to myself, >> "Those people are Americans, they're just not here yet." >> >> Attack away. >> >> George H. > > Legally, they are not citizens of the USA. Of they cross our borders > without peoper paperwork, they are violating US law. > > A billion people would enter the USA if they could. Heck, a billion > people would move to San Francisco if they could.
Nonsense. Most people prefer to stay where they are, where their home is and has been, where the things they know are and where their family and friends are. Modern humans prefer that and migration is generally an option of last resort, not of first resort.
> A reasonable immigration policy would admit a sensible number of > qualified people per year and make sure they settle in, learn English, > and get productive.