Kurtofan posted:

Scotch-Irish

oystertoadfish posted:

i think the german/irish/italian/etc-identifying americans arrived in the 19th century, while the american-identifying area was settled by southerners, the descendents of british/irish who mostly arrived in the 18th century, and didn't see much impact from the big ellis island-style migration. the extra century-plus in-country results in lower relevance for the origin-based identity

there might be something about a 'dixie' culture subsuming origin-based identity, in which case you'd have a tie to slavery and racism, since it's possible that northern 18th-century immigrants held onto their identities more strongly than southern 18th-century immigrants, but it's not strictly necessary to explain the data. we'd need to factor out post-1860 or so immigrants to get a good comparison and that would be hard to do

etalian posted:

The South didn't attract much immigrants which is another reason why it lost the Civil War against the more industrialized higher population north.

Urbandale posted:

Liberation of oppressed nations can take a lot of forms. Revolutionary integration, not separation, is the goal, but where I live is largely a series of military bases designed to keep an eye on the chican@ population with a big rear end fence dividing what is really one city into two separate ones on opposite sides of the border. Out here, we do things like water drops in the Sonora desert, because people die crossing it every year, and the Minutemen come by and slash the water jugs. We march on the border and they come out in uniform, trucks and shotguns pointed at the front of the march.

When things start getting worse, when conditions start exacerbating, and they will, we recognize there may come a point where revolutionary integration with some nations is not desired by said nations. Maybe the Minutemen step up their terror campaign against the population and start bombing peoples houses. Its not unheard of - several were arrested a few years back with bomb making materials. Maybe Chican@s raise an independent Aztlan as a demand again. Maybe they don't want it independent, but rather some sort of new, federated relationship to the US as a whole. Maybe its simpler than that, and becomes simply another state. Its up to them, their destiny should no longer be decided by whites in Washington.

Personally I'm a fan of a soviet-style house of national representatives based on plurality in a given geographical area, but revolutionary intercommunalism is also a popular concept, since it was largely designed to accommodate the partial shift of the black nation from the agricultural black belt to urban industrial and post-industrial multicultural cities.

Karl Barks posted:

So the end of the union as we know it?

Karl Barks posted:

So the end of the union as we know it?

Fullhouse posted:

Saurus is a white nationalist socialist who shilled for Trump for months here despite himself being an illegal immigrant so it is safe to assume he meant white genocide, yes

Urbandale posted:

Every time I bring this up in a candidate class there's usually one or two white people who sheepishly ask if they're gonna get genocided. That's basically the question you're getting at with the trial of tears comment, right? The fear of just desserts?

Urbandale posted:

they were scared that what they did to other(s) would then be done collectively to them.

The Saurus posted:

lol you loving what??

Bryter posted:

lol that's the only part of the description you dispute, huh?

The Saurus posted:

I don't see anything wrong with being a socialist who is also a nationalist.

Bryter posted:

lol that's the only part of the description you dispute, huh?

The Saurus posted:

I'm certainly not a "white nationalist" or a "national socialist"

I believe in redistribution based on wealth and class lines, and that would obviously favour non-whites the most as they are the most screwed over by capitalism in the West.

I believe some elements of nationalism, such as preventing a flood of immigrants through various channels to the benefit of corporations to weaken the bargaining position of the working class and tariffs to support domestic industry, are good.

Homework Explainer posted:

hell yes this is my poo poo right here *huffs this post* god drat

rudatron posted:

The irony here is that Urbandale is expressing exactly the same sentiment, only more dressed up, yet people aren't (but should be) aggressively rejecting it.

rudatron posted:

The peoples of the united states are already codependent, and thinking that any separation is going to be productive or go smoothly (read: without ethnic cleansing and balkanization) is being naive. Talking about 'revolutionary integration', while advocating policy that would prevent that goal from happening, is just the hypocritical icing on the cake.

Odobenidae posted:

I'm not sure how Urbandale is saying anything even remotely nationalist other than the fact that he proposes that there are already nations within the united states.


He's not advocating separation, and explicitly mentions that in his posts. He also explicitly mentions that there doesn't need to be any movement of different races/ethnicities for liberation to occur. Are we reading the same posts here? What policy does he supposedly advocate that would prevent revolutionary integration?

quote:

if you were referring to the US splitting into multiple countries, thats only one of many possible scenarios.

quote:

lol:

The Saurus posted:

Wow Sanders actually had a very good day, one landslid and a solid win.

Most of the states that have a lot of dumb black people have already voted now right? Time for Sanders to start making up the gap. Whether he can manage it with the anti-demiocratic superdelegates I'm not sure, he needs to start building momentum from victories fast.

The Saurus posted:

You'd be dumb too if you were descended from ex-slaves and one of poorest, most oppressed groups in one of the shittiest parts of the country.

It's not racist to accept obvious facts about a group of people so long as you understand it's nothing innate and derives from history and socioeconomic circumstance, hth

DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:

Rudatron, you're not participating in the conversation in good faith

GunnerJ posted:

Reminder:

tsa posted:

The bernout thread was filled with thinly or not at all veiled racism against black people in the south.

DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:

Ormi posted:

It's a little strange to profess support for national liberation when the people of the "nation" haven't expressed any desire to be "liberated". Other than that minor detail, I fully support the autonomy and self-determination of all peoples, which is why the nation-state must be smashed.

rudatron posted:

Wouldn't 'not seeing' what 'folks are plainly talking about' be ignorance instead of bad faith? Regardless, I do see it, it's dumb, I've stated why. You can't simply accuse someone of bad faith, because they don't agree with you.

I mean the whole project is counter to the legacy of the civil rights movement and all that, right, "we are citizens who are being disrespected, having our rights denied, we want inclusion & respect inside US society" was the message, not "we want a separate state because we don't trust things to ever get better", which is what is being presented here, that was the fringe.

Ibogaine posted:

Agreed, anything that seperates those who don't own the means of productions while pitting them against each other and creating the illusion of shared interests with their oppressors needs to be smashed.