A quick quote from Jefferson

Post Reply New Topic

I am not bragging, merely noting I know different types of people and have gotten to like them. As a former New Yorker you cannot walk the streets more than a few yards without encountering all sorts of different people. It's an environment I grew up in and it made me see there is good and bad in every type and even within every individual. You cannot smear a whole ethnic or racial group with the same brush. That is the nature of America and it is potentially wonderful. I am not boasting that I have traveled, it was part of my finding work and the world, these days, is very small indeed.

Great. I'm happy for you that you fuction well in our current system.

As far as I go, I have AS and I feel I'll never understand the true concept of 'friendship.' I have many acquaintences though. Yes, I actually live in diversity now........... at least, the area I live in was not diverse 14 years ago.

I am 84 years old and no longer welcome in the working world. I am merely getting by but I have known a great many different types of people and found nothing to fear from the decent people in each classification. There are crooks and idiots and total bastards in every different group but they are not clearly labeled with skin color or religion or ethnic origins.

been to a lot of countries,,,,on six continents. don't think that has anything to do with a. s. it's hard to travel without dealing with humans, i would say impossible unless you have your own yacht. making friends? not possible for me. i do not think i have ever had a 'friend'. i've never loved anyone and i'm sure no human has ever loved me.

a. s. covers such a broad range of possibilities, i doubt if you could find any 2 with the same 'symptoms'. does anyone know of two n. t.'s that are alike. so, with a. s. you have the extra variable, right?

i love the way these forums just take off into unimagined directions. maybe tomorrow i'll be able to bring up animal rights. have to find a way to make it liberal, or right-wing, or a commie plot!

Of course not. The South accepted those amendments at gunpoint. They would never have done the right thing of their own accord.


I think it's already shameful enough that America was the last Western nation to abolish that barbaric institution. There's no reason why we should have wished to delay any further.


Again, I would not have seen that as an acceptable outcome, and no true American would have either.


You are claiming the "right" to enslave and oppress other people. That is not a legitimate right. It is not "reverse-fascism" or "totalitarian" to try to prevent oppression. Quite the opposite.

"[You] have no desire to impose dictatorial control on anyone" except for the people you think should be either enslaved or kept as second-class citizens. But I guess blacks aren't really people because they're "unevolved," right?

Some of the "ivory-tower" as you call it (I call it "civilized human beings") are intolerant of intolerance. I personally am not. I believe you have the right to be intolerant. But other people have the right to react accordingly to you when you act on those beliefs. In a multi-racial or multi-cultural society, tolerance is necessary if we are all going to get along together. If you are unable to function properly in society because of your prejudices, then there is an obvious problem.

And where in the world do you get "communist" anywhere in this discussion? You already called me a socialist earlier, despite the fact that I hadn't commented on economics. So like a right-winger to just shout "Communist, Socialist!" whenever someone disagrees with them.

Where the Frivolity did you get that from?

Brazil eliminated slavery in the late 19th century. However, it was done for economic reasons (it was a losing proposition) and it was accomplished without a civil war.

ruveyn

Perhaps Orwell considers Brazil not to be a Western nation even though it was a colony of Portugal at one time. IDK, I think for the most part on these forums people argue past each other and attack things which other people weren't trying to say, probably due to association of keywords leading to rash conclusions.

Since you are not of White British (or even White European) descent yourself, we should not really be too surprised that you feel this way.
And the "principle upon which the United States was established" did not stop Americans owning slaves for several decades, so I don't see why it should force America to conform to your vision.
I find it all quite laughable in fact!



You started off by arguing that race doesn't matter, and you finished by arguing that the USA should become more racially diverse. Gosh, it's all so confusing!



As they say on the internet: Epic Facepalm.

I must say that's presumptuous. My British passport tells me that I am a British citizen, and my parent's birth certificates certainly suggest that my origin is British. Last time I checked I was caucasian. But perhaps you know better.

What leads you to believe that I am neither white nor British?



Which rather demonstrates my point that societies evolve and grow. The United States great strength has been its adaptability and inclusivity. It was at its weakest when it was closed and stratic. Why repeat those errors?



You started off by arguing that race doesn't matter, and you finished by arguing that the USA should become more racially diverse. Gosh, it's all so confusing![/quote]

I didn't say that race doesn't matter. I said that race is polarizing. So long as people are classified by others, race is going to be a social factor.

I don't say that race shouldn't be important, I say that racial diversity should be embraced.

It seems that this is what you are doing actually, I mean, it looks like your are misinterpreting that part of Orwell's post.


I don't see any indication that Orwell implied that, rather the opossite to my perspective, as it seems to me that he stated that it was shameful that Brazil solved the issue before the US did (last western nation).

Well, if slavery ended in 1865 in the United States and in 1880 in Brazil, then the United States ended slavery before Brazil did. However, Orwell claimed the United States was the last Western Country to abolish slavery, so in effect Orwell also claims that Brazil is not a Western Country.

hmmm, well, I was on the idea that he may have thought Brazil was earlier (as a possible unfamiliarity with brazilian history) given ruveyn's reply, rather than not acknowledging Brazil as a western nation, but yeah, it is a western nation.

It was only my hypothesis that an indepedent CSA would have set up an Apartheid system and have maintained it for as long as possible. I'm not saying such an outcome would have been positive or negative.

Then again, with an independent CSA, it would be totally futile to even begin to say with any accuracy how the history of the world from the 1860's would have played out. A USA consisting of only the North, midwest, and west would have been able to intervene much less decisively and with force in World Wars on the European continent or be so dominant in world economics in the 20th century.

Its also likely that an independent CSA dominated by an aristocracy would have continued to produce outstanding generals. An independent CSA would likely have Prussianized millitarily and have effectively tied down large numbers of Union Northern troops to prevent them from sending large armies overseas.



Great. I am quite capable of responding to my opposition.



No thanks to the social engineers who facilitated this problem in the first place after WWII. Psychiatrists like Dr. Ewen Cameron were able to begin to impliment many of their hairbrained schemes to rewire Western citizens to internalize multicultural values. Their goal was to eliminate nationalism, which they saw as the main driving force behind the WWars. Instead(starting with children as guinea pigs in desegragated schools,) there was a determination to recreate individuals who would instead only acknowledge "the human race" and be devoid of any ethniic allegiances.

A "multicultural" identity would be established for the mass of citizenry, and they would adhere to this instead of a nationalist identity. If you believe in multiculturalism though, you in a sense accept 'everything,' so in the end, you believe in nothing.



TBH, I've seen a few sentences from guys like you and Ska stated verbatum on Revleft. My misake though.



Exactly, race is acknowledged by liberals when convenient for them, like when pushing for minority quotas or trying to get their bloc-vote and all of that stuff.

Also, its obvious that to be accepted in PPR, you apparently must have at least 10 or so minority friends. You have to sort of collect them like stamps.

Funny though that people with AS who apparently tolerate those who wish to withdraw from the world can at the same time chide people for not having enough social and cultural experiences and all of that.

I am "racialist" in the sense that I acknowledge the fact that racial issues are still alive and well in this world. Many people may no longer acknowledge religious and racial differences. However, many other peoples who are apparently our opponents, like Arab Muslims, still regard these differences. So until everyone internalizes global-utopian values, racial differences will still be an issue.

Orwell himself stated earlier that "Put an Englishman and an Irishman next to each other; you can see the difference." So he can see these differences, but yet when it comes to minorities it is a different story?

Or do you just acknowledge ethnic and cultural differences between white peoples?

A nation that has 2 sets of rules and has double standards for whites and minorities is no longer any sort of united nation

I agree. So what's your plan to fix the sentencing disparity between whites and minorities who commit the same crimes?