If i were your leader i would partition off the whole southern portion of texas and turn it into a mexican and south american immigrant processing center. I'd call it little mexico. Immigrants would enter, be assigned to housing and a job, and be able to go to school to learn english and a skill set. Eventually they would transition into the states from little mexico and become full citizens.
Almost everything south of that red line is nuthin but fields and brush with an occasional trailer park. Build a wall on that line and turn everything south of it into little mexico. And u don't even have to develop the area before the mexicans get there. That's what they do. They'll literally go immediately to work building, farming, producing textiles, everything. They'd have their own police force, run for political office and vote for state officials. A central bank, treasury and printing press will make and distribute little mexico's very own currency. U do this so american dollars don't get all mixed up down there. Essentially you'd be making a temporary new country for the sole purpose of processing mi amigos and preparing them for entry. When they graduated they'd be given some credit to start out with in the states which they'd pay back incrementally over time.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 4:48 pm
^^^ dude's got a point.
The real ones may be hiding among the fake ones.
Ew here's a good one: the grand conspirators propagate fake conspiracy theories over time in the media on purpose to generate public skepticism toward conspiracy theory in general so they can then initiate the big real ones later on, and nobody will believe they're happening.
That's smaht af tho, ain't it? Thank u, atla. I have a new found respect for the big conspirators now.
I don't know if this is intended sarcasm or not, but yes this is exactly how it was done for decades now.
I suspect that for example the "reptilian shapeshifter", the "flat Earth" and the "whole Moon landing program was faked" conspiracy theories were funded from above by the big conspirators themselves. They seem to have grown unusally big and popular unusually fast, even though they are completely insane. But I could be mistaken, maybe after all these years I still underestimate human stupidity.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 10:20 pm
"Maybe you could find work there teaching Ebonics?"
That would be dope.
I used to be a sophisticate who spoke the king's English but I lost all faith in forum philosophers and reverted back to my prison dialect.
I used to have pretensions to The King's English and many others as well. Then I came to this forum. As a result I have signed up for a crash course in chimpanzee dialect -- and you know what? It is surprisingly rich and subtle!
I realized i was a pedrophile nearly thirty years ago when i began doing construction work. While most of my redneck ermerican coworkers would criticize and belittle the illegals who were forcing the wages down, i actually sympathized with em; hell yeah, if i were pedro, i'da done the same thing. Jump the fence and get a job in ermerica under the table framing houses. Fuck the policies and proper immigration procedures, I'm sick of being broke down there in mexico and i ain't tryna wait two years before i can get citizenship.
Pedrophilia is working class consciousness and sympathy for those in my class. If u wanna call that perverted, i don't care.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 5:58 pm
Yup, and what do we always hear from people opposed to immigration?
That’s one sensationalist scare-tactic certainly. But it is definitely not the only argument used.
What has recently been happening is massive illegal immigration — not immigration through legal channels.
Why do all conversations here always become partisan arguments between factions?
The issue in its fullness has to be outlined fully and then thought about, discussed.
People migrate. The Macedonians migrated southward, just as the Dorians had done before them. For those who want to survive in peace, the most reasonable tactic is to try to get along. The rest are welcome to migrate someplace else if they don't like the new neighbors. Then they can become someone's annoying immigrants too. Most people in the US these days are only a few generations away from being immigrants ourselves. And many of the people coming north from Mexico are descended from indigenous natives somewhere along the line. They speak Spanish but there are not many there from Spain.
The problem with "Replacement Theory" (which you have talked about) is that it says nothing other than "don't migrate", Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be a realistic expectation. "Replacement" has been happening since the dawn of time. There's nothing new and spectacular about it and most of us are descended from people who replaced someone else. Just live with it. It's reality.
Last edited by Gary Childress on Thu Feb 29, 2024 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A lot of American expats have been moving abroad as well. It's a free exchange. There are lots of places to go. Costa Rica is a hotbed of expats if I've heard correctly.
It is pretty exhausting to attempt to reason with the Left-Progressive general orientation. It is possible to offer a coherent countering stance to what you’ve written, Gary, but ultimately it is a wasted effort.
You select one *fact* you see as genuine and perhaps dominant — that peoples, historically, have migrated. And because that idea seems unassailable it therefore justifies while also explains the illegal immigration of millions of people into the country (and any country by extension).
Returning to Renaud Camus and the demographic and sociological description (replacement) he offers, all of it could not be perceived by one operating with your core justifying idea. You would not be able to review, assimilate nor even think through his thesis. It is all negated before the fact.
What do I do? I notice this structure of mind, deeply informed by ideological predicates. That is all I can do (in a sort of philosophical approach).
There is an entire counter-argument to that which legitimizes mass illegal immigration and also cultural dilution. But it is a problematic and difficult one. And it is weak against a far more predominant view (ideology, sense of rightness and goodness) such as that which you, Gary, hold to.
Factually, I don’t disrespect you for having (what I believe are) superficial views. I rather fault the purveyors of views and ideological constructs that, as Gramsci pointed out, marched through the institutions and dominated them. This has a long history in our nation. That is, the subversion of education.
And right there I’ve entered controversial territory since, as implied, there is a former education that has been subverted.
It requires much time and careful discourse to explain these positions, and more and more there are fewer and fewer interested in, and sometimes capable of, receiving the ideas, when simplistic glosses will suffice.
