ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, February 29, 2016

The mask comes off

Revealing the alien philosophy it concealed. It only took a few hours for the Transamerican School of National Identity to declare that disenfranchisement of actual Americans in favor of Ameriboos was desirable.
accordingtohoyt
This is VD’s bullshit. I can see it taking several generations to being fully civilized because part of it is a genetic selection thing, but in THAT case we’re all about somewhere close, myself included. Several generations to be fully American? Oh, take a powder. You need to be an idiot to believe that.

Amanda
I will take Sarah and all those like her who want to come to this country, who do so legally and who take all appropriate steps to become a citizen any day of the week over someone who looks down on them because they were not born here. Right now, Sarah looks much more “American” than you.

thewriterinblack  
"The immigrant becomes a citizen. The immigrant lays claim to now being American. Only by law, Sarah."

This statement demonstrates that Sarah is more American than you are. Because she believes in what makes America, America. And you don’t.

Stephen W. Houghton
My paternal ancestors have been here since before the war of independence. I say Americans are those who take the oath and stand with us. Traitors, those what ever their blood who do not.... Go and lick your Donald’s hand, may your chains lay lightly upon you, and may our posterity forget that you were our countryman.

Randy Wilde
Meh. She’s more American than many people born in the U.S. She actually believes in the ideals on which the country was founded.

Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard
Nope and by my standards, you’re not a Real American and Sarah is.

Nicki  
You’re a fucking moron, and you don’t DESERVE the citizenship of this great nation.

jccarlton
Here’s the thing, Vox, YOU don’t get a say in who’s an American, not anymore. You’ve given that up for a villa in Italy. I imagine that you enjoy it, that means that you no longer have to deal with America’s problems. All your problem are the problems of Europe and you are welcome to them. As for REAL Americans, I would rather have some of the people I’ve had the pleasure of knowing over the years than somebody who is as childish and cowardly as you, Vox. You ran from America’s problems and then had the unmitigated GALL to say that Sarah isn’t good enough to be an American.
My, these transamericans are certainly entitled, aren't they? Not only can they tell Americans what Real Americans are and are not, but they are going to kick out everyone who doesn't think like they do, no matter whose posterity they happen might be! Nations aren't genetically-related peoples, after all, but mere collections of similarly-minded groupthinkers.

Notice that I never said anything about Sarah being good enough to be an American. I never said anything about being American being something good, or even desirable. What I stated is a simple fact, one no more controversial than Sarah being female. She is Portuguese. She is not American. Becoming a U.S. citizen is paperwork; the mere fact that one has to become a U.S. citizen is sufficient to indicate that one is not an American. As it happens, I even know a few Americans who are not U.S. citizens.

Amongst all the emoting, hissy-fitting, posturing, and outrage, only one commenter, Ironbear, was sufficiently perspicacious to note how "the proposition nation" is not only ahistorical fiction, but in practice, must be intrinsically opposed to the genuine Rights of Englishmen on which the original Anglo-American nation was founded.
Is there a way to maintain and defend a nation of ideas without disenfranchising those who demonstrably don’t share those ideas, even though they be born here?

Saying that “We were able to sustain a nation of ideas as long as America remained a melting pot,” is true, but not useful in that context. The America that was is dead dead, and toxic ideas introduced, propagated, and made colour of law and custom by our supposed fellows murdered it – using the power of the vote, among other weapons.

I find Mrs. Hoyt’s concept of a prospective nation formed of ideas, ideals, and based upon shared experiences and principles to be aesthetically pleasing. I also see it as being extremely vulnerable, and demonstrably difficult to defend – unless one is willing to go all the way to the walls in eradicating ideas that are toxic to it, which our relatively recent ancestors didn’t. (I strongly suspect that they didn’t truly see the danger and the toxicity of Marxism until it was too late, or even really recognize what was killing us even then.)

The extremes required to protect those ideas from those who would destroy them with toxic ones are unpalatable as well, and not the least bit aesthetically or otherwise pleasing to me. I find that to be depressing, and without hope of a resolution that is not borne of fire and blood.
He is correct to be dubious. Their "proposition nation" is not even theoretically possible without the sort of thought police that their self-definitive ideals must reject. Defining a nation as a proposition is as intrinsically absurd and self-negating as feminism or communism or open-borders libertarianism. These transamerican idealists consider themselves to be intelligent and well-educated, and yet they have observably failed to even begin to think through the necessary consequences of the very values they erroneously claim makes one American.

And that, my dear Sarah, is one thing that you really should learn from me: ruthlessly thinking through the logical consequences of your foundational assumptions. As it stands, her core position is fundamentally illogical. On the other hand, at least she does seem to have changed her mind about my finally understanding Europe.
He’s become European through and through. He doesn’t wish the US well (doesn’t take much reading to see him gloating at potential destruction of the US. And all I have to do to attract his attention and unhinge him is say the US will survive, even though I don’t direct it at him.)

Under those circumstances for any American to follow his lead on things like presidential nominations is insane.

I don’t wish VD any harm — in fact, he’s pretty much irrelevant to me, in any way our paths intersect — and his ideas might yet win out in Europe. For America they’re a poison pill and as bad as Obama’s.
(Spreads hands and smiles.) Unhinged? Quite the contrary. Sarah and her commenters have beautifully demonstrated exactly what I intended from the start. Their naive USian ideals are fundamentally and functionally antithetical to the historical American ideals they ape so clumsily.

Depending upon how one reckons it, we stand on the verge of the fourth America. I count them as follows:

America 1.0: Constitutional America 1789-1865
America 2.0: American Empire 1865-1913
America 3.0: Republican US 1913-1941
America 3.1: Early Imperial US 1941-1965
America 3:2: Latter Imperial US 1965~2033 (est)
America 4.0: Post-US~2033

Sarah and her defenders are confusing America 2.0 for America 1.0, and are completely unaware that they living in an America 3.2 that is rapidly laying the groundwork for the Post-US. And while I still value the ideals of America 1.0, with a very few exceptions they simply don't exist in the USA anymore. As for what Sarah calls my "ideas", they will win out in both the USA and in Europe for the simple reason that they are not my ideas, they are simply my observations of what is already happening.

It is easy to know that I am much more likely to be correct than they are. Lacking imagination - ironic given how many SF writers are there - they assume the future will be the status quo extended into the future. And it will not be. Whatever it will be, it will most certainly not be that, not after the largest invasion in human history.

Labels: , ,

242 Comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 242 of 242
Blogger DBetti February 29, 2016 1:21 PM  

I’ve been following the dispute with Hoyt about the roots of America as a nation. I’ll add this: America was founded (America 1.0) as an ethnic nation of Englishmen but it included the proposition that “All men are created equal.” I still marvel at the phrasing- why did they not write “All Englishmen” or “All Britons are endowed with their rights…” or some other language to convey the historical, cultural, and otherwise ethnic roots of their political association. Some of them did believe in universalism. Of course “All men” did not include the African slaves and some others, but the Founders still rallied around that idea of universalism, which was a powerful idea within their culture at the time.


I still wonder why/how the Continental Congress chose the phrase of universalism. Only a few years earlier, Jefferson wrote “A Summary of the Rights of British America” in which he argued for the rights of the British colonists in America because they were British- they held their rights through history and culture more than through any appeal to universal human nature. And then he wrote the Declaration, and suddenly all men were equal. But do not fail to see that those English Founders included the proposition of universalism in their foundational documents- disagree with it or no.

During the Lincoln-Douglas debates (on the verge of America 2.0), those two candidates explicitly argued about what “All men” meant. To Lincoln, it was an expression of universal rights, but not universal political inclusion or social equality. ‘Africans should not be enslaved, but they should not stay in America either’ was Lincoln’s position more or less. Douglas, on the other hand, argued that “All men” meant all Britons, Englishmen, Anglo-Saxon- the posterity of the Founders. He held your (Vox's) view of America as an ethnic nation, whereas Lincoln held variations of both the proposition and the ethnic root of the nation.

That idea of universalism in American political culture has driven the nation’s history from its foundation to the present. Now, the ethnic component is derided and the universalism is totalitarian. 'Why, if you don’t think all (hu)men(s) are equal, then you are not human at all!' It is absurd. But don’t forget or fail to notice that the idea of universalism was within the ethnic group identity from the start.

By the by, I am a third generation American of Italian, Irish, Sicilian, and Bohemian descent. Still, I think of Alexander Hamilton and George Washington as my ancestors, not Garibaldi or Mazzini. I find myself in a strange situation, agreeing with the ethnic roots of nationality but finding myself defined out of what I thought was my group- American. America is a mess right now in a number of ways.

Blogger CarpeOro February 29, 2016 1:34 PM  

@SciVo
"SciVo wrote:The children and grandchildren of trade unionists and Trotskyites now talk about the importance of liberal society and free markets; in the intellectual pilgrimage of Irving Kristol, what is usually a multigenerational process has been compressed into a single, brilliant career."

Kristol lauded? Sorry, but that puts the work as a whole on the questionable list. Neo-cons aren't in favor with many here for the simple reason that people like Irving Kristol went from world-wide Trotskeyite revolution to world-wide democratic revolution. The results of neither have been beneficial to the nations they have been pushed upon.

Blogger VD February 29, 2016 1:38 PM  

For crying out loud, the Declaration of Independence was a political PR rhetoric, not a definitive philosophical document.

This is what happens when pedants take rhetoric for dialectic.

THERE IS NO INFORMATION CONTENT IN RHETORIC.

I still wonder why/how the Continental Congress chose the phrase of universalism.

Because it sounded good. It's obviously meaningless, as their actions prove.

Anonymous Trojan Whores February 29, 2016 1:40 PM  

accented a point of definition by alienating what I had seen as a real friend and supporter [Sarah Hoyt]

Until she exposed herself openly as historically, culturally, and ethnically illiterate and proud of it. Poor Mr Beale, losing and withholding all that support.

Anonymous Con Text February 29, 2016 1:46 PM  

was a political PR rhetoric VD

It has best been described as "the spirit of the thing", and as for the egal thingy, they were specifically arguing withing the narrow context and confines of White Euros and Christianity only. This is only difficult for would be usurpers.

Blogger Sheila4g February 29, 2016 1:48 PM  

"Barack Obama, like many blacks, in fact hates America."

Actually, I'd argue blacks hate Americas 1.0 - 3.2, which they conflate because White. They have mixed feelings about America's later incarnations. Some of them have great "patriotism" - if one can term a mixture of black pride and limited sympathies with Sailer's "America of the fringes" - patriotism. Despite their generations of American birth they have not - indeed cannot - internalized any sense of independence, self-reliance, or allegiance to constitutional ideals. They are American neither in the blood and soil sense nor the idea/proposition sense.

I have read and enjoyed Sarah's books as good stories despite her increasing over-emphasis on "we're all the same underneath" theory, highlighted by various mixed human/alien/race/sex characters proclaiming constitutional American ideals. What really irritated me was the hugely emotional tone of her post and her followers' comments. Lots of butthurt mixed with arrogance or defensive pride. While I hardly agree with anyone here on everything, I greatly appreciate logical and rational explications of reality. That too many conflate the nation and the state as identical and mix in a toxic belief in magic dirt and magic papers doesn't change the original definition, by which Sarah is not American. This entails no judgment whatsoever regarding her character or goodness as a person or citizen, and she and others condemn themselves by considering it a personal attack.

As others have noted, it takes blood and soil and generations and an internalized ideology, and for some it takes longer and for some it never takes at all. Their allegiance to past generations, or sense of being part of a different nation, is what renders 99% of American-born Jews non-American. The totally different blood and culture of Asian Americans as well as the current physical presence of their extended families in their home countries is what prohibits them from ever being American.

@89 Sam quotes: "Great energy went into persuading Americans that America’s pedigree was not what it had seemed to be. America, they asserted, was not an outgrowth and continuation of Western classical and Christian civilization, as mediated by British culture, and affected also by more recent ideas. America represented a departure from or outright rejection of the bad old days of Europe. America was based not on a rich, complex, slowly evolved European heritage, but on abstract, ahistorical principles..."

This, to me, perfectly defines the conflict between Vox and Sarah. Vox hews (correctly, IMHO) to the view that to be American requires birth, blood, and/or a number of generations. Sarah hews to the later definition, contrived by the new inhabitants of America 2.0 to rationalize their existence, and to redefine their replacement of the original as rather an enhancement.

Blogger Elocutioner February 29, 2016 1:50 PM  

Part of the problem is some are arguing original language in the current context rather than the original context of the founding. The debate over the term nation is a product of the evolution and corruption of the language.

The Founders would reject the proposition nation idea. Those of us grew up with the melting pot idea already rejected it, do you think the people who CREATED the country, fought and bled for it, and risked their lives for it would just give it all away to anyone who landed on our shores speaking any language from anywhere in the world instead of defend it for their children? Laughable.

Blogger Trid February 29, 2016 2:11 PM  

"Oy vey ignore what this goy vox day is saying, after all he is saying the same things that this one irrelevant group you've been conditioned to hate once said!"

Put a sock in it lad. The quality of ideas is separate from their progenitor, and trying to pull this shit just makes you look dumb.

Blogger CarpeOro February 29, 2016 2:13 PM  

I may quibble a bit with the timeline (the or want to identify the peaks maybe), but it is fairly workable. For those deriding the idea of the American Empire time frame:
1) Don't get stuck on the idea that these are strict time frames - ideas and frame of mind are something that adjust over time. Even during the height of a Zeitgeist the seeds of the next can be seen, as our remnants of the prior.
2) When did you go to school? Just curious because I was miseducated in the 1970s-1980s and they still mentioned the phrase "Manifest Destiny" in school. Look it up.

Blogger bruce February 29, 2016 2:22 PM  

OT, I recommend Saturn's Run by John Sandford and Ctein for both the Campbell and the Hugo Novel. Excellent hard SF first contact story. Best new hard SF spaceship I've seen in years, and the space eggs are good too. Sandford is very good with cockhound main characters. Everyone who liked the Niven/Pournelle collaborations will like this. (Niven gave the book a nice puff). This book is the only real SF that might make the ballot.

Ctein is a new writer, eligible for the Campbell. Sandford has written bestsellers for thirty years, the Prey series and the Fool's Run series, but he's new to SF. Not for sure he's eligible, but I'd like to see him get a Campbell and a Hugo.
The Hugo award library buys will mean nothing to Sandford, since most libraries automatically buy the new Sandford, like buying the new Steven King (gave a nice puff) or Lee Child (gave a nice puff). I don't see the moralists at Making Light or File 770 attacking Sandford, who is rich, and forty years a very well connected Democratic party media operative.

Anonymous Sam the Man February 29, 2016 2:51 PM  

As a chap who has felt his entire life that my world view was out of sync with the current general American values, I note that I do not feel out of sort with pre 1898 American values, or at least with the values of the late 19th century liberals. I have some sympathy for the progressives of that era, except the results they achieved were very poor.

That said I also have a lot in common with Pre 1945 eastern Germans in thought and culture, which is kind of odd given my families religious background. When in Sweden in 1999 I found my self very much at home, while an earlier trip to the UK that year, I felt I was in a strange land, even though I spoke the language. There is a definite aspect to culture that transcends language.

By the way some parts of my family (the Swiss part) have been in the US since 1741 and 1890, and the east German part since 1929. Still not Englanders.

Anonymous Hezekiah Garrett February 29, 2016 3:09 PM  

@Bob, Nate, etc

Piggly Wiggly was founded in Memphis, and initially spread across the South. The first self serve grocery store, the business practices of Piggly Wiggly were incredibly cutting edge, not only spawning most of the National brands we shop at today (both Kroger AND Safeway are spinoffs of Piggly Wiggly, as was Jitney Jungle, which has an even better name) but their inventory practices led to the rise and dominance of Toyota and other Japanese auto manufacture.

Now spread across the country, Piggly Wiggly is as southern as drinking from the hosepipe, or a whupping with a hickory switch.

Y'all Yankees that enjoy your local Piggly Wigglies are all welcome.

ROLL TIDE!!!

Blogger tz February 29, 2016 3:13 PM  

Many whites have enough reason to see through the indoctrination - on the sexes it is called MGTOW. It takes a few steps back out of the progressive minefield to get back to Jacksonian.

The Basques will always be there - Don't put all your Basques in one exit.

I think the Hoyt view is a narrow version of the "moderates" and why they can't be trusted.

Another example is MADD, DUI, implied consent, and the 4th amendment. There cannot be any such thing as implied consent, or if there is, someone should tell Jackie and Mattress girl.

Blogger AureliusMoner February 29, 2016 4:33 PM  

The Declaration of Independence describes the founders' justifications, to the worldwide community of nations, for daring to assert their independence. "All men are created equal," hence, they had the right to govern themselves.

But when it came time to draft the Constitution specifically for this nation, they didn't imagine universal American citizenship for all, equal men; rather, they said:

"We the people of the United States, in order to (do lots of nifty things) and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

"To ourselves and our posterity."

Now, I am a Catholic and a Reactionary, and I reject Egalitarianism, Democracy, Popular Sovereignty, "Rights" abstracted from the norms of objective morality, etc. But, for the record, the people who founded this nation did not think they were founding a charity. They were looking out for their kids, and grandkids, etc.

My (paternal) ancestors came on the Providence, one of William Penn's ships; I wonder: if my radical Quaker ancestors, who would not so much as doff their hats to a king, could see me now, would they still be glad they bequeathed a nation to me? Or would they prefer to give it to infanticidal Jewesses who wanted to preserve their privacy and liberty of choice? Probably, they'd prefer to light both of us on fire. But, the fact is that they thought they were leaving a country to me, and not to her... for whatever that's worth.

Blogger Chent February 29, 2016 4:38 PM  

"You know what else is a proposition nation? Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella put together a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation, and came up with the idea of the proposition that Spain belonged together because it was there to be Catholic. Religion justified them. And, barring a few persecutions, expulsions, revolts and civil wars, and Portugal wandering in and out, its worked for 524 years so far, in spite of most Spaniards, in the last 150 years or so, being about as religious as a hunk of jamon serrano. Inertia is a powerful thing. Ole. Viva Su Majestad el Rey Don Felipe VI."

Not true. I am a Spaniard and Catalan is my native language (although, as every Spaniard, I speak Spanish very well).

Although I am a devout Catholic and Catholicism is the real soul of Spain (the same way Puritanism is the real soul of the United States, even for atheists, read Albion's seed or Mencius Moldbug), Catholicism is not the rule to consider somebody Spaniard. A Catholic Italian that comes to Spain is an Italian. A Catholic Polish that comes to Spain is Polish. None of them is considered Spaniard, even if they get the legal nationality. Nobody will accept they are going to give lessons about who is Spaniard or not. If a Polish immigrant (we have some of them) told us that he was a Spaniard in his heart when he was born in Poland, everybody would laugh at him. But they don't say that: it is unthinkable. This kind of silliness is only specific of United States, where any nonsense goes.

Moreover, Spain is becoming an atheist country (a great mistake in my opinion) but atheist Spaniards are considered Spaniards even by Catholics like me. There is no doubt that my brother-in-law, who is atheist, is Spaniard. His family has been in Spain forever and his culture is Spanish. Nobody would doubt that.

Ferdinand and Isabella gathered several nations (that were similar in geography, religion and way of being but had different laws and languages) and made a multinacional state, not a "proposition nation". Something similar to today's Switzerland but languages and customs were not that different. So you were a Spaniard because you were Catalan, Castilian, Galician or Basque, not because you adhered to Catholicism.

After 500 years and lots of intermarriage and living together, Spain emerged as a nation, although some parts retained their particularities (this is why Catalonia wants to get independence now, although the issue is too complex to explain it here).

Blogger Escoffier February 29, 2016 5:22 PM  

NateFebruary 29, 2016 10:39 AM
'They'll tell you to your face about how their writ of membership in the U.S. explicitly gave them a right to secede, and how they'll use it if they want to."

which is peak retard. Its like saying you were explicitly given the right to breath by the US Government.

The US Government doesn't give rights.


Thank you. This cannot be emphasized enough.

Blogger Nate February 29, 2016 5:23 PM  

"
ROLL TIDE!!!"

Roll Tide.

Blogger Escoffier February 29, 2016 5:38 PM  

DBetti
I find myself in a strange situation, agreeing with the ethnic roots of nationality but finding myself defined out of what I thought was my group- American. America is a mess right now in a number of ways.


To paraphrase Pat Buchanon "race isn't everything but it isn't nothing either."

Blogger Escoffier February 29, 2016 5:50 PM  

DBetti
I find myself in a strange situation, agreeing with the ethnic roots of nationality but finding myself defined out of what I thought was my group- American. America is a mess right now in a number of ways.


To paraphrase Pat Buchanon "race isn't everything but it isn't nothing either."

Anonymous Malwyn's apprentice February 29, 2016 7:27 PM  

Becoming a U.S. citizen is paperwork; the mere fact that one has to become a U.S. citizen is sufficient to indicate that one is not an American.


I'd never really thought about the difference btw Americans & US citizens (we're taught they're synonymous) until this topic came up a few days ago. However, once I started to think about the various US states, this concept made sense.

I was born & raised in Washington (the State!), and no matter where I live, I'll always be a Washingtonian. Having lived in New York and New Jersey, I can certainly see the cultural differences (some of which make my teeth grind). Despite the time I've lived in these other states, I've never considered my self as a native New Yorker or New Jersian -- I'm a visitor from another state.

Blogger praetorian February 29, 2016 7:27 PM  

were you born in america? Were your parents born in america? Were your grand parents born in america?

Me FW I'm a potato nigger mischling non-american...

'Tis like another potato famine...

Blogger dfordoom February 29, 2016 7:29 PM  

@72. Nate

Australians are not Englishmen. And Australians never shot at Brits.

Australians still thought of themselves as being vaguely British up until the 1960s. We still thought of Britain as the Mother Country and we identified as being culturally British. And we were proud of it.

That started to fade in the 1970s. Actually it didn't start to fade - it was aggressively undermined by deliberate government policy (most aggressively by the "conservative" Fraser Government) and by the intellectual class.

Now we have no identity at all. Australia today is just a geographical expression.

Blogger dfordoom February 29, 2016 7:37 PM  

@80. Mr.MantraMan

"A multi-cultural political entity has to be propositional and propositional must limit speech."

A propositional nation must eventually become a totalitarian nation. The old Soviet Union was essentially a propositional nation.

Anonymous Discard February 29, 2016 8:34 PM  

210. Hezakiah: There was a Piggly Wiggly in Los Angeles 60 years ago at the corner of Vanowen and White Oak. No doubt there were more of them around, but that's the one I remember. We called it "The Pig", as in, "I'm going to the Pig to buy some milk". When I last went by the spot, it was a halal market. True fact. Nyuk nyuk.

Blogger JaimeInTexas February 29, 2016 9:46 PM  

Also include the conquest west of the Sabine River to the Pacific.

Blogger JaimeInTexas February 29, 2016 9:54 PM  

The annexation treaty preempted the Constitutional requirement that a State seek approval of the FedGov to split.
Secession is a totally different animal.
The authority to secede belongs to the States.

Blogger Neanderserk February 29, 2016 10:11 PM  

The Constitution, being a document designed to maximize human liberty, enslaved the descendants of its Revolutionary signatories' in perpetuity, should they prove unable to meet the duly defined procedural requirements for its modification, even as it is administered in breach.

Did you eat an apple whilst starving, indentured servant? 7 more years on your sentence, thief, and never mind that I starved you.

Letter for thee, and spirit for me. Thus ever saith the Pharisee.

Anonymous Hezekiah Garrett February 29, 2016 10:36 PM  

@222

That's some sweet irony there.

In God's Country, we are known to call it the Hoggly Woggly, as well as The Pig.

Anonymous SevenCrimes February 29, 2016 10:47 PM  

Sarah is so extremely True American (tm) and Libertarian that her entire political philosophy is the regurgitated groupthink of International Marxism. She's so wholly enveloped by its paradigm that she can't even conceptualize political theories outside of her Globalist cage, and yet she considers herself an enlightened free thinker.

Blogger bob k. mando February 29, 2016 10:49 PM  

128. The Original Arrogant Steelers Fan February 29, 2016 9:51 AM
America never qualified as an Empire because it never reveled in Empire.



that's weird. i look up the definition of 'empire' and for some strange reason ... who could imagine why ... they don't include 'reveling' anywhere in there.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire?s=t

one may as well assert that it was not an empire because we never had an emperor.

hur dur.



130. Gaiseric February 29, 2016 9:54 AM
It was ONE of MANY despotic rulings by the Mexican government against the Anglo-Texan settlers. It wasn't even the one that sparked open revolt—that would be Santa Anna's brother-in-law, General Martin Perfecto de Cos landing with troops at Copano and the march to and subsequent battle of Gonzalez.



this may have escaped your attention, but landing at Copano and combat at Gonzalez are NOT "rulings".

also, WHY were the troops there?

because there had been growing settler unrest and Mexican government didn't think they should leave a cannon with them? unrest over WHAT issues?

uh huh.



138. Jack Ward February 29, 2016 10:04 AM
by alienating what I had seen as a real friend and supporter [Sarah Hoyt].



because Sarah has done nothing to alienate or patronize Vox.




145. SciVo February 29, 2016 10:17 AM
What is this, a pop quiz? Fine, I'll bite:



1 - Naturalized
2 - Citizen ( vanilla )
3 - Natural Born

"Naturalized" and "Natural Born" are mutually exclusive categories or subsets of "Citizen".

Naturalized is a foreign national who immigrates to the country, abides by our naturalization and residency requirements and paying whatever fees necessary acquires all of the Rights of Citizenship.

all of the Rights but not the Privileges.

a Citizen is a person accorded representation in Congress and, assuming they meet the State requirements, almost always has the voting franchise today. current US law is that anyone born Jus Soli acquires US citizenship regardless of competing Jus Sanguinis citizenship which may be simultaneously offered by another nation.


Natural Born is the category of citizenship which enjoys all the Privileges inherent to citizenship to the United States. what privileges you ask? well, there is only one: you are permitted to run for the office of President / VP of the Federal government.

so, in a nation whose population has certainly totaled well over 500 million people since it was founded, only 44 of them have become President. that's not a Privilege many of us take advantage of.



170. Gaiseric February 29, 2016 11:20 AM
Laredo? That's your benchmark?



the train is fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L14UKBjC5Is




204. Sheila4g February 29, 2016 1:48 PM
While I hardly agree with anyone here on everything



why you uppity wench! somebody get me some smelling salts forsooth, she's given me the vapors.


213. Chent February 29, 2016 4:38 PM
This kind of silliness is only specific of United States, where any nonsense goes.



*ouch*

uh, so i take it to mean that your post is to take Sarah's side, that she's been nonsensically American since birth?

Blogger Hrodgar February 29, 2016 10:55 PM  

Am I the only one who sees in the very idea of a "proposition nation" borderline blasphemous, in that it is effectively an attempt to create a "kingdom not of this world?"

Blogger praetorian February 29, 2016 11:41 PM  

Does anyone know the history of the term "proposition nation"?

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY March 01, 2016 12:16 AM  

" Me FW I'm a potato nigger mischling non-american..."

"'Tis like another potato famine..."
But lassie in the ad's with her ripe melons makes up for pathethic Pee-Wee Herman writhing in a green carpet that he's wearing.
Negro Patate, indeed.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY March 01, 2016 12:23 AM  

"In God's Country, we are known to call it the Hoggly Woggly, as well as The Pig."
THERE'S AT LEST 4-5 of of them in a 100 mile radius where Ilive . I trades often at'em.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY March 01, 2016 12:26 AM  

at least, dammit.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY March 01, 2016 12:35 AM  

praetorian,
It's what they propose, you have no say in this , at all.
That's what they are all about, according to Hoyt, et al.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY March 01, 2016 12:47 AM  

"229. Hrodgar February 29, 2016 10:55 PM
Am I the only one who sees in the very idea of a "proposition nation" borderline blasphemous, in that it is effectively an attempt to create a "kingdom not of this world?"
Not at all. Portygee. Luurrves it. Says she luurves America, but only willing to say your a real one if you see it in her way. 'Cause she chose it, not born into it which makes speshul, dammit.

Blogger SciVo March 01, 2016 9:24 AM  

Nate wrote:"It was a colony, if you will, of Greater Appalachia."

easy... using the term Greater Appalachia betrays a tacit affection for a particularly terrible map of the supposed regions of the US.

it implies that the mountains of East TN have the same kind of people as Arkansas and west TN... and it is laughable. In reality much of east TN was unionist during the war.

Appalachia should actually be separate.. and it should be two seperate states. Northern Appalachia.. with eastern KY.. western VA and WV, and southern appalachia that would be East TN and West NC.


I think your distinction is too fine. What sides they took is not as important anymore as what culture they have.

VD wrote:alienating what I had seen as a real friend and supporter

If someone can be alienated by a simple statement of fact, they are not a real friend and supporter. Who is, and who is not, a [fill-in-the-nation-name] is going to be one of the single most important questions being asked and answered in the next two decades.

Families and friendships are going to be torn apart over it. If you find this mild and civilized disagreement to be difficult, you are going to have a very hard time of it in the years to come.


Now that is true. I've already begun to try to find a county from eastern Oregon/Washington to a good port, because I identify more with the inlanders. Maybe somewhere northern California.

Blogger SciVo March 01, 2016 9:52 AM  

Chent wrote:Ferdinand and Isabella gathered several nations (that were similar in geography, religion and way of being but had different laws and languages) and made a multinacional state, not a "proposition nation". Something similar to today's Switzerland but languages and customs were not that different. So you were a Spaniard because you were Catalan, Castilian, Galician or Basque, not because you adhered to Catholicism.

After 500 years and lots of intermarriage and living together, Spain emerged as a nation, although some parts retained their particularities (this is why Catalonia wants to get independence now, although the issue is too complex to explain it here).


It has been well explained to us that Catalonia should get what it asks for good and hard, so that it never pretends to want independence ever again, when it is actually a weak little dependent.

Blogger SciVo March 01, 2016 10:05 AM  

bob k. mando wrote:145. SciVo February 29, 2016 10:17 AM

What is this, a pop quiz? Fine, I'll bite:


1 - Naturalized

2 - Citizen ( vanilla )

3 - Natural Born


No. That is not what I said.

SciVo wrote:What is this, a pop quiz? Fine, I'll bite:

1. Resident

2. Native

3. Decider

#1 gets to live there, #2 belongs, and #3 answers questions such as by voting (or by social influence if not in a democracy).


So fuck you and the horse you rode in on. You do not get to re-write my words, asshole. You have an agenda, propagate it on your own dime.

Anonymous kfg March 01, 2016 4:33 PM  

@238 SciVo: "I've already begun to try to find a county from eastern Oregon/Washington to a good port, because I identify more with the inlanders."

Make sure you get a squirrel gun as soon as you get there. My prediction is that you're going to need it.

Anonymous zzzz April 11, 2016 1:57 AM  

@#40 "What many of you living in America probably don't realize is that they are pushing the same bullshit in the Scandinavian countries. They are actually saying that Denmark and Sweden are nations of immigrants and that opposing immigration is against Danish and Swedish values."

I heard a Romanian girl call in to Stefan Molyneaux's radio show a few weeks ago and she kept talking about Romania's past as though they in particular had committed some great crimes or something and then I began to think OMG its the same thing they've been doing to us here in the U.S. - trying to shame the population for some reason - to control us. She talked about the execution of Ceaucescu as though it was some bad thing - where did she get an idea like that? 20 years of brainwashing by the media on behalf of the ruling class to make sure it never happens again?

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 242 of 242

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts