"The Republic is Dead"

And isn’t open borders also a libertarian position?

Who the Hell knows any more - because I don’t know what a libertarian is. There have always been at least two strains - the freedom loving “classical liberal” types and the not-really-libertarian reactionaries who talk about liberty but are more animated by fear and hot rage at Communists and Muslim terrorists and “invading” Mexicans hiding just around every street corner they see and think young kids who like socialism are enemies of the state.

When the latter talk about liberty, they lie. These aren’t liberty lovers. They want freedom only for people exactly like them. That’s authoritarian.

Republicans will complain about illegal immigration but honestly, they know it’s good for business so they really are in favor of it.

The problem is that Democrats want to treat illegals like human beings which ends up interfering with profits.

2 Likes

It is not a logical assumption to make that the Founding Fathers would have seen “diversity” and “multiculturalism” in the same manner as its current form, which is the importation of 10s of millions of people from any society on Earth; with immigration running at well in excess of a million people every year without fail.

I’m sure you or someone will find a way to twist things, but as I imply, the sane and logical assumption of what they would have thought, is obvious.

As far as “equality” is concerned, I think a logical assumption can also be drawn that the castration of males, with the addition of artificial breasts, in order to become ‘females’, and amongst other things, thus gain “equality” with biological females, may also have raised some eyebrows with the FF. But as can no doubt be argued, who really knows?

Or the round the clock promotion of abortion or gay rights in all areas of mainstream education and popular culture in the “fight for equality.” Again, I can say well the logical assumption would be that they would not really view any of this as promoting “equality” at all, but a counterargument will be put forward, for no honest reason.

1 Like

Why have you, twice in this thread, equated Communism with anti Semitism?

It’s coming…

My point was that the FFs understood freedom and were comfortable with pluralism, multiculturalism, the marketplace of ideas, and freedom of expression - and you think those are things that should be extinguished.

What you promote is not freedom but conformity, the kind of reactionary conformity that sees fear in everything different, even that other thing is a healthy by-product of freedom.

No thanks. It ain’t the American way.

1 Like

I’ll see your anti-Semitism prediction and raise you that we’re probably only five posts ways from a “but see, blacks have lower IQs”.

1 Like

Yep, as soon as someone uses the word Bolshevik, you know it’s coming.

“My point was that the FFs understood freedom and were comfortable with pluralism, multiculturalism, the marketplace of ideas, and freedom of expression - and you think those are things that should be extinguished.”

You are significantly changing your initial point, with this comment.

“you think those are things that should be extinguished.” No.

“What you promote is not freedom but conformity.” No.

“reactionary conformity that sees fear in everything different.” No.

“It ain’t the American way.” Wrong, again.

“I’ll see your anti-Semitism prediction and raise you that we’re probably only five posts ways from a “but see, blacks have lower IQs”.” Wrong again. Shame you types can never put an actual cogent argument together, ever!

1 Like

You have mentioned Jews three times now.

Why do you equate the Bolsheviks, Communism, or any of the topics mentioned in this thread, with anti Semitism?

This thread is about the demise, or otherwise, of America. No one has mentioned Jews, apart from you.

You are making a constant connection between what is being said, and Jews. How come? I’m intrigued as to how you believe these issues could be connected. Are you suggesting Jews are somehow involved in the complaints about America in the OP link or some of the other posters’ comments?

Look forward to your illuminating response.

1 Like

No, I’m not. Diversity and what’s called “multiculturalism” (really, pluralism) are two important pillars of the American concept of freedom and have been since the birth of the country.

You’re just dying to say it.

He isn’t American so he obviously has a limited understanding of our history.

“No, I’m not.”

  • Yes, you are changing your statements. The bulk of your 2nd comment did not focus on multiculturalism.
  • You have now added “diversity” back into this comment, changing your focus again.

“Diversity and what’s called “multiculturalism” (really, pluralism)…”

Pluralism and multiculturalism are not the same. Pluralism is based on universal values shared across society. Multiculturalism does not share this concept, at all. It posits there are no universal values or dominant culture.

Neither was America founded on pluralism, in the manner you are suggesting. “Freedom of religion” etc was never, let’s be sane and honest, intended to mean that unlimited millions of non Christians would move to America.

It is simply not credible to presume the FFs would have been fine with literally tens of millions of non Christian, alien culture people moving in. Obviously, for the sake of simply arguing, this could be disagreed with.

But I’m simply taking the common sense approach here.

You already missed that. He’s like 500+ posts deep into black IQs in another thread.

You’re arguing with EU Raj, fwiw. This one just uses bullet points and can’t figure out the quoting fuction.

2 Likes

Wrong.

Multiculturalism is just more of the same cultural Marxist nonsense.

It is why there are Western communities that don’t know how to respond when Muslim immigrants refuse to have “gay rights” taught to their children. When the natives complain, it is bigotry, but when the newcomers complain, it is about having “tolerance.”

It is a good example of how doomed multiculturalism already is and will turn out to be. Shown in the mind control propaganda of:

  • diversity is our strength
  • tolerance, not hate
  • a nation of immigrants
  • one race, the human race
  • etc

If diversity was a strength, no one would ever need say it, as it would be self evident.

Have a group of fundamentalist Muslims living alongside some pink haired non binaries, with both groups believing it is “their” nation and see how long the tolerance lasts.

As immigration increases and every aspect of society becomes ever more “diverse,” all of a sudden “hate” and “hate crime” become an ever hotter topic. Funny that.

In a true multi-culture with no dominant group, which is what is happening with each passing year in America, each group will resort to more entrenched identity politics and tribalism. Conflict is guaranteed.

Everybody already knows this is how things actually work, including all the happy-clappy liberals. It is why O’Rourke chooses a fake name. It is why Biden screams about whites.

The Right see multiculturalism as simply making a nation not about people or society at all anymore, but solely about creating an efficient economic zone that increases the GDP. Import X million poor ones to clean the toilets and import X million smart ones to work at Google.

Lefts are so deranged that it is impossible to tie them down to even a handful of motives. But each one of their ideas is either complete lunacy or idiocy or both.

Either way, under no circumstances was America ever a “multi-culture,” but it is going to become much more of one than it already now is.

For almost its entire history it was made up of similar background European Christians with a smattering of working Africans around the place, and a tiny amount of Chinese, etc.

The delusion is strong with those who outright deny this fact and/or claim that anyone who touches the soil instantly becomes an American. Forgetting the obvious caveat that this would mean nobody was in fact an American at all anymore.

WTF is cultural Marxism? You creeps just love making up words.

Yup, I am - you mentioned diversity and multiculturalism. That’s what I’ve been referring to.

Sure it was. The country was essentially a hodge podge of various other cultures and subcultures when it was founded, and we still see those influences today. That America has continued to do that and add more (and different) cultures to the hodge podge isn’t a betrayal of the American vision - it’s an extension of it.

And if you’re at all right, the FFs would have enshrined the values you say they had in the Founding document - and created, say, a religious test for immigrants (and even citizens). They didn’t, because they didn’t have the intent you ascribe to them.

You’re missing my point - my point is that the FFs didn’t create a country based on the authoritarian conformity you think they did. A free country - with a First Amendment - guarantees a pluralistic, diverse populace. That’s not a bug of our nation, it’s a feature - the Founding generation had every opportunity to impose the conformity you desire and rejected it im favor of actual liberty.

To repeat, what you propose ain’t the American way.