|
I wanna point out that "GG led to Trump" seems particularly bizarre because millenial GOP voters do not skew Trump. For example, according to exit polling in the South Carolina primary, fuckin Kasich got his highest share amongst voters 17-29. They're the only age bracket that didn't go for Trump by a plurality, instead voting for Ted Cruz (let's leave that troubling fact alone). The demographics that went overwhelmingly for Trump were adults 45+. Trump is not a young person's candidate, Millenials in fact are one of the most skeptical and anti-Trump cohorts. The idea that the "alt-right" 18-35 year olds are behind Trump's rise is pure nonsense. Trump's greatest strength is with older adults, overwhelmingly.
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
Periodiko posted:I wanna point out that "GG led to Trump" seems particularly bizarre because millenial GOP voters do not skew Trump. For example, according to exit polling in the South Carolina primary, fuckin Kasich got his highest share amongst voters 17-29. They're the only age bracket that didn't go for Trump by a plurality, instead voting for Ted Cruz (let's leave that troubling fact alone). The demographics that went overwhelmingly for Trump were adults 45+. Trump is not a young person's candidate, Millenials in fact are one of the most skeptical and anti-Trump cohorts. I've heard part of it is due to younger GOP voters being somewhat less accepting of his sort of racist rehtoric, but I suspect it's more due to the fact that the peak of his fame before now was on the 80's.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I've heard part of it is due to younger GOP voters being somewhat less accepting of his sort of racist rehtoric, but I suspect it's more due to the fact that the peak of his fame before now was on the 80's. The Apprentice was pretty popular for a while too.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The Apprentice was pretty popular for a while too. If you were a Baby Boomer.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Yeah. The problem is these guys (the Trumpenprole losers) have a way too inflated self-worth, and society didn't do a good job treating them the same as the rest of the working class. Now they're getting angry their white/straight/Jesus privilege is getting pulled away and they have no identity of any value left. Actually they have the collected history of white civilization as an identity. Cheers.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Weird that in a white country white people are getting mad about mass immigration replacing them. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:Weird that in a white country white people are getting mad about mass immigration replacing them. Yeah, after all none of their forefathers came over as immigrants or anything. Oh wait...
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
e: didn't read the entire post. ignore. I'm an idiot. reactionary. FuzzySkinner fucked around with this message at 00:06 on May 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Yeah, after all none of their forefathers came over as immigrants or anything. Oh wait... I do seem to recall that there were some people here's before pasty Europeans decided to take over. Also explain exactly how white people as a whole have one single history or how having a 70% majority is so threatened by people darker than milk moving in? Should all of us move out so you feel more secure?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Yeah, after all none of their forefathers came over as immigrants or anything. Oh wait... Good point, this shows how important restricting immigration is.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I do seem to recall that there were some people here's before pasty Europeans decided to take over. Also explain exactly how white people as a whole have one single history or how having a 70% majority is so threatened by people darker than milk moving in? Should all of us move out so you feel more secure? You're responding to the wrong guy. I'm agree with you that NakedFanatic is some sort of crazy white nationalist, and we need to not be jumpy at all about the "flood of immigrants" coming to the US. My point was being fine with stopping immigration after your ancestors already got here is the height of hypocrisy.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:I'll elaborate (and hopefully won't get probated for it this time). What we are seeing is a split between liberalism and progressivism, two ideologies that are, at their core, quite different, but have become synonymous since the progressive era of the 1890s early 1900s. That's starting to change, however. I wrote more about this trend on my blog last year. liberalism and leftism have been different since 1848 you dummy
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:You're responding to the wrong guy. I'm agree with you that NakedFanatic is some sort of crazy white nationalist, and we need to not be jumpy at all about the "flood of immigrants" coming to the US. My point was being fine with stopping immigration after your ancestors already got here is the height of hypocrisy. I know. I was agreeing with you and arguing him at the same time. Sorry I wasn't clearl
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I do seem to recall that there were some people here's before pasty Europeans decided to take over. Also explain exactly how white people as a whole have one single history or how having a 70% majority is so threatened by people darker than milk moving in? Should all of us move out so you feel more secure? The material and cultural reality in the US today is that "white" is more or less a singular culture despite it's multi-ethnic European origin, that seems obvious enough. Whites are already or very close to a minority in the younger generations so I'm not sure what your point is, should nations not be concerned with massive demographic changes?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:Good point, this shows how important restricting immigration is.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:He commanded that his chair should be set on the shore, when the tide began to rise. And then he spoke to the rising sea saying “You are part of my dominion, and the ground that I am seated upon is mine, nor has anyone disobeyed my orders with impunity. Therefore, I order you not to rise onto my land, nor to wet the clothes or body of your Lord”. But the sea carried on rising as usual without any reverence for his person, and soaked his feet and legs. Do you suppose immigration is some natural untamable force and not a consequence of conscious political policies?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I know. I was agreeing with you and arguing him at the same time. Sorry I wasn't clearl Sorry, I thought I was somehow unclear about thinking this guy was an rear end in a top hat. Being sarcastic on the internet doesn't go through very well sometimes. TheNakedFantastic posted:Whites are already or very close to a minority in the younger generations so I'm not sure what your point is, should nations not be concerned with massive demographic changes? Not really. Race isn't some scientifically existing thing, so it's just some arbitrary difference of no actual importance. Except maybe if your job is treating melanoma.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:The material and cultural reality in the US today is that "white" is more or less a singular culture despite it's multi-ethnic European origin, that seems obvious enough. A nation that supposedly prides itself on diversity actually reaching the point where it isn't completely dominated by one vague racial group sounds like a positive to me.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:Do you suppose immigration is some natural untamable force and not a consequence of conscious political policies? TheNakedFantastic posted:The material and cultural reality in the US today is that "white" is more or less a singular culture despite it's multi-ethnic European origin, that seems obvious enough. What do you think is the sticking point here? 
Assepoester fucked around with this message at 00:51 on May 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Not really. Race isn't some scientifically existing thing, so it's just some arbitrary difference of no actual importance. Except maybe if your job is treating melanoma.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:A nation that supposedly prides itself on diversity actually reaching the point where it isn't completely dominated by one vague racial group sounds like a positive to me. The US priding itself on diversity is mostly an invention of the last 30 years, mostly for reasons of increasing corporate profit via immigration.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:Please tell us how the Native Americans/First Nations could have restricted immigration to your liking Cardboard Box A posted:If "white" is already a multi-ethnic European cultural melting pot, then why does there appear to be so much resistance to assimilating more people of European cultural origin?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:The US priding itself on diversity is mostly an invention of the last 30 years, mostly for reasons of increasing corporate profit via immigration. TheNakedFantastic posted:Do you expect me to answer this seriously? TheNakedFantastic posted:I can only assume you're referring to mestizo people here, which are significantly different genetically and culturally than the US experience with European immigration.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:The US priding itself on diversity is mostly an invention of the last 30 years, mostly for reasons of increasing corporate profit via immigration. The last 30 years watch some movies from the 40s. Lol it's been going on a lot longer.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:So it's a plot hatched by, uh, Reagan and the Globalist Capitalist Overlords? Cardboard Box A posted:You mentioned them as examples of "how important restricting immigration" is. Would you like to see where that analogy takes you? I suppose I would. If you're saying Native Americans would have driven out European settlers in the same fashion as earlier Scandinavian colonies, then ok that seems like a pretty reasonable thing for them to do? Cardboard Box A posted:So the issue, again, seems to be the various Native (North) Americans and their genetic and cultural legacy eh? What do you think their genetic and cultural legacy is?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:How do you suppose the obvious and significant differences in appearance of geographically isolated groups of human are accounted for if not by genetics? Saying race doesn't exist isn't particularly useful or correct since it's trivially obvious there are genetic differences between ethnic groups and race is generally the word biologists would use were they to describe these differences in animals. It's not used scientifically today for political reasons and its association with more rigid ideas of race from the 19th century. Materialistically it follows that different groups of people may manifest in different characteristics of nations or peoples, or at least that they interact with each other differently than genetic in groups which has significant social consequences. But this isn't at all how "race" has been traditionally used? Historically, race has been tied to completely superficial physical characteristics, wrapped up in what is in hindsight laughably transparent pseudoscience. There's never been any meaningful attempt by political forces which used the concept to actually square them with any kind of biological reality. It's not used by science for the same reason no one uses Lamarckism or Phrenology or whatever: it's a long debunked concept, superceded by scientific advancement. Race as a political concept pretty obviously has no scientific meaning. Trying to draw a connection between paper bag tests, or arbitrary declarations of certain European nationalities as not being "white" with actual genetic differences between human populations is incredibly silly. The whole thing is pretty transparently the sort of thinking that only arrives from deciding your conclusion, then working backwards trying to find justifications. ie. the history of racial pseudoscience. Periodiko fucked around with this message at 01:41 on May 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:How do you suppose the obvious and significant differences in appearance of geographically isolated groups of human are accounted for if not by genetics? Saying race doesn't exist isn't particularly useful or correct since it's trivially obvious there are genetic differences between ethnic groups and race is generally the word biologists would use were they to describe these differences in animals. It's not used scientifically today for political reasons and its association with more rigid ideas of race from the 19th century. Materialistically it follows that different groups of people may manifest in different characteristics of nations or peoples, or at least that they interact with each other differently than genetic in groups which has significant social consequences. So why aren't Latinos also considered white, since Spaniards are and the Spanish interbred with the native american population to form the bulk of the modern Latino ethnicity? How many non-"white" ancestors are you allowed to have and still call yourself white? And most importantly, what is the objective test to determine race? The paper bag test doesn't exactly work, since you'd have a hard time putting Black Africans into the same category as dark-skinned Asian Indians, for instance. The only real answer you can give here is "I received a subpar or non-existent level of biology classes when I was in school, and thus am enough of an idiot to believe races are a physically real thing". Go to school and get educated into a decent human instead of whatever mockery you pass off as right now.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Whoops quoted wong post.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:The last 30 years watch some movies from the 40s. Lol it's been going on a lot longer. 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
It's both funny and sad watching racists try to justify their racism.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
East Asians are going to be white people in no more than 20, 30 years tops
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Squalid posted:East Asians are going to be white people in no more than 20, 30 years tops They will at best be kinda but not really as long as China is the most relevant threat to US interests. And even they are (and they break for the GOP like good ol' Europeans) that still is only like a 5% shift, tops (and they hardly vote right now too).
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
I'd prefer it if everyone stopped thinking racially. Less clueless morons all round.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:How do you suppose the obvious and significant differences in appearance of geographically isolated groups of human are accounted for if not by genetics? Saying race doesn't exist isn't particularly useful or correct since it's trivially obvious there are genetic differences between ethnic groups and race is generally the word biologists would use were they to describe these differences in animals. It's not used scientifically today for political reasons and its association with more rigid ideas of race from the 19th century. Materialistically it follows that different groups of people may manifest in different characteristics of nations or peoples, or at least that they interact with each other differently than genetic in groups which has significant social consequences. Whoa hold on do biologists use the term or not? Now I'm confused. Help me out with this race thing. Can you tell me what race these guys are supposed to be? thnx   
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
TheNakedFantastic posted:The material and cultural reality in the US today is that "white" is more or less a singular culture despite it's multi-ethnic European origin, that seems obvious enough. What about Arabs, Turks, Amish, and Hasids? If you're willing to look past minor differences like, you know speaking medieval German and tooling around in horse drawn buggies, I guess all white people do seem alike. quote:Whites are already or very close to a minority in the younger generations so I'm not sure what your point is, should nations not be concerned with massive demographic changes? If we were willing to go so far as admit Italians I think we can accommodate Hispanics too  . If white people are becoming scarcer just grant a few model minorities whiteness, bam white demographic problems solved. It just took a little creativity is all.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Whoa hold on do biologists use the term or not? Now I'm confused. 1. Asian / Pacific Islander 2. North African guy, probably Algerian 3. Euro/Asian mix, probably from a 'stan country
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:I wanna point out that "GG led to Trump" seems particularly bizarre because millenial GOP voters do not skew Trump. For example, according to exit polling in the South Carolina primary, fuckin Kasich got his highest share amongst voters 17-29. They're the only age bracket that didn't go for Trump by a plurality, instead voting for Ted Cruz (let's leave that troubling fact alone). The demographics that went overwhelmingly for Trump were adults 45+. Trump is not a young person's candidate, Millenials in fact are one of the most skeptical and anti-Trump cohorts. I agree - and I think part of the interesting bit here is we're calling it 'right wing populism' as if it's a monolith, but in the past decade we've started to see multiple strands of separate populisms work together. On the one hand there's the edgelords from the alt-right, and on the other there's the standard reactionary GOPer. I think the major difference between the two is the pseudo-intellectualism of the alt-right versus the anti-intellectualism fostered by the GOP. There are people who walk the fine line between the two, and those are probably the ones to be wariest of.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
White Americans, despite Their best efforts, have *never* had their 100% English Whitebread country and never, *ever* will! Welcome to the USA; it's already great! 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
Armani posted:
This is what liberals actually believe!
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
rkajdi posted:My point was being fine with stopping immigration after your ancestors already got here is the height of hypocrisy.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:16
|
|