Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Raavi

General US Politics Discussion

Recommended Posts

Clem Fandango

So you think it's a moral issue if someone dresses up as an indian at haloween? If you think so, you have sh*tty priorities.

Native American people consider it deeply offensive and disrespectful. I want to organise with these people so I care about what makes them upset. If you are going to ignore their grievances they simply won't work with you.

 

It has nothing to do with priorities. The Native organisations that protest for greater rights and autonomy- and fight infringes thereof- also dedicate time to things like Native American team names, which you consider trivial.

 

 

 

Those who are wealthy applaud you for your sh*tty and divisive priorities

What would be 'divisive' is if I looked Native people in the eye and told them I don't give a f*ck how they feel and that they should subordinate their grievances to the apparently more universal struggle for socialism. If anyone is divisive and applauded by the wealthy, it's brocialist demsocs that are incapable of organising with women and don't understand the varying intersecting power relations that maintain Capitalism. Demanding an end to feminism is far more 'divisive' than supporting it.

 

 

 

You also missed this part of the comment: And when you think about it, the whole practice of cultural appropriation is aimed at white people doing something non white. It doesn't apply to non white people doing something white.

I wouldn't discuss 'white culture' because 'white' is an arbitrary racial category. Anyone in the West is a part of Western culture and can use it how they like, because it belongs to them as much as it does us.

 

If you mean non-Westerners who appropriate Western culture (such as the use of Western imagery in Japanese culture and... well just that I guess) then I oppose that as I oppose the nationalism that leads to it. It has f*ck all to do with my life here though, so it's all whatever.

 

 

 

It is based on the idea that some cultures are fundamentally unique, and that white culture is non unique and neutral.

It is inherently non-unique in the West. Because it's Western culture. Hindu garb is inherently neutral in India, but not in foreign cultures, and not when appropriated by privileged, dominant groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

Native American people consider it deeply offensive and disrespectful.

 

I genuinely doubt whether a majority of them care. And even in the case that they do, I think it is beyond what is reasonable for anyone to want to have control over what other people wear. I also want to point out that when I talked about the divisive nature of the concept of 'cultural appropriation' I was also talking about for instance a white guy being assaulted by an African American girl for wearing dreadlocks, even though supposedly dreadlocks aren't unique to African or African American culture.

 

If people use cultural symbols in a lame ironic and gimmicky way, I think it's normal some people are offended. But the whole idea of 'cultural appropriation' has gotten out of hand to a regressive level, where cultural division in general is preached.

 

 

Native American team names, which you consider trivial.

 

Which is also uncertain whether Native Americans really care or think they are offensive, or whether it's a vocal minority that has been given a podium by elitist identity politics promoting media that want to distract people with non issues.

 

I wouldn't discuss 'white culture' because 'white' is an arbitrary racial category. Anyone in the West is a part of Western culture and can use it how they like, because it belongs to them as much as it does us.

If you mean non-Westerners who appropriate Western culture (such as the use of Western imagery in Japanese culture and... well just that I guess) then I oppose that as I oppose the nationalism that leads to it. It has f*ck all to do with my life here though, so it's all whatever.

 

If you listen to third wave feminists, even Western science is coming from a specific cultural perspective according to them. Is it cultural appropriation for other parts of the world to apply scientific methods invented in the West? I'm kind of wondering what the full extent of these regressive attitudes are, and whether anyone seriously wants to consistently apply them. Can I still make spaghetti at home, or does it offend Italians too much when I do it?

Edited by Eutyphro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

 

Native American people consider it deeply offensive and disrespectful.

 

I genuinely doubt whether a majority of them care. And even in the case that they do, I think it is beyond what is reasonable for anyone to want to have control over what other people wear.

I think it's beyond reasonable for arrogant whites to insist that their fashion choice is so sacred as to be immune from scrutiny. White people can do whatever they want, indigenous people raising their grievances is 'beyond what is reasonable' and tantamount to state repression. Ridiculous.

 

 

 

Which is also uncertain whether Native Americans really care or think they are offensive, or whether it's a vocal minority that has been given a podium by elitist identity politics promoting media that want to distract people with non issues.

You don't really seem to understand why this is important. I'd recommend you go out and talk to some Native Americans, none of them will join you in rolling your eyes at their peoples' indignation.

 

It is not 'identity politics', that is when you attribute cultural bigotry as the root of oppression rather than material factors. Simply resisting bigotry is not 'identity politics' and I have to question your understanding of the term.

 

 

 

If you listen to third wave feminists, even Western science is coming from a specific cultural perspective according to them.

You'd have to ask someone that supports third wave feminism ie not me. But yes, there are assumptions in Western science (evopsych and economics being the most obvious) that are rooted in spurious Western ideology. This is not controversial.

 

 

 

Is it cultural appropriation for other parts of the world to apply scientific methods invented in the West?

...

 

 

 

Can I still make spaghetti at home, or does it offend Italians too much when I do it?

Don't take the piss, Italians are not offended by you eating spaghetti! There is no power dynamic between Dutch and Italians, and even if there were, food is not a cultural symbol. Nobody is saying you should avoid necessities like food and scientific methods lmao. I'm saying don't abuse cultural symbols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mythical_Lotus

Trump said he has great respect for Obama. I think even he had to cringe internally as he said that.

That's irrelevant. Cringing is a natural byproduct of many diplomatic meetings. Trump is behaving in a presidential manner, as he promised he would.

 

I do want to mention that he could have avoided the term "respect" and instead say he recognizes Obama's merits as a man who loves his country.

 

If we have to go to the first humans, Humanity is built on incest and the only thing that changed the features is that people got whiter skin the more they moved to the cold.

I don't see the logic of being "pure" because it never was there in the first place and we are all brothers and sister technically.

You are grossly misinformed if you believe humanity is the result of incest. If we all descended from a common parentage, those would be the microbes wriggling in the primordial ooze, or at best some extinct species of primate.

 

Also, we are NOT brothers and sisters, either in a technical way or in some abstract philosophical sense.

I have no responsibility towards you and you don't have any responsibility towards me. We share no bond of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triple Vacuum Seal

spout some vapid bullsh*t about us all being "one race"?

 

But we are. Cosmopolitanism is an ancient idea too. It's not some postmodern gibberish. Race and ethnicity are not the same thing. A culture moves towards being a caricature of itself to the extent that it defines identity in terms of race. Aside from arbitrary factors like color, race is often defined by states anyway. Cultures need space to develop more obvious differences and distinctions, but not much else. The overall utility of culture suffers when divisions reach a critical mass. This is probably why broadly speaking, the archetypal culturally rich nations - much of the Middle East, parts of Africa, China, Russia, and India just to name a few - are incredibly racist by modern standards despite otherwise impressive contributions to human history. Culturally rich, pure, etc. is really just a euphemism for being intolerant to outside influence.

 

 

The growing sentiment that excessive contact between different cultures waters down both doesn't hold up to much scrutiny. Culture isn't some zero sum game where we either do things our way, or their way. In fact, cultures owe their supposed improvements to integration and exposure to outside influence...hence the term "cultured". It's no coincidence that the most globally exposed cultures have grown to become the most dominant.

 

Even if we managed to identify a culture too diverse and compare it to say...North Korea, there's clearly a lesser of the two evils.

Edited by Triple Vacuum Seal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

 

Also, we are NOT brothers and sisters, either in a technical way or in some abstract philosophical sense.

I have no responsibility towards you and you don't have any responsibility towards me. We share no bond of any kind.

 

It takes a special kind of misanthropic reactionary to scoff at vague appeals to human unity. Oh look your member titles actually says 'misanthropist' lmao. It's little wonder how someone like you can give yourself body and mind to the state: I'd probably rely on nationalist fictions to make my heart swell too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

Or how about African-Americans straightening their hair, to make their hairstyle appear more 'caucasian'? Is this offensive too? I don't think it is. Which proves the fact that the whole cultural appropriation riot is an excessive form of white guilt. What is assumed is that by the mere fact of being white you have a higher amount of guilt and responsibility for certain things than by being non white, which is a regressive and racist idea.

I thought the whole idea of anti racism was that we try to consider each other as 'people' and that I don't consider the black people I know 'black people', but just people... That we judge each other by the contents of each others character, and not by the color of each others skin. That we don't have different norms according to your skin color. It's just completely regressive really.

Edited by Eutyphro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chiarii

the "American left" isn't any more dead than the American right was after Obama.

those who control Congress are not representative of the American left. apparently you didn't realize this, but the Congressional Democrats are not the Left. they're Center-right sellouts. Hillary was not my candidate, she's who we were left with after the DNC f/cked up. she's not the Left. just because they lost one election cycle (after winning several in a row) doesn't mean that Liberals just disappear. the same way Conservatives didn't disappear just because Obama won.

 

You're taking my comment literally; I'm saying that Trump can fill up the supreme court with 30-something-year-old right wing radicals (and he probably will) keeping the supreme court right leaning for most of the rest of your life. Look at who is on the bench, look at their ages, look at Trump's senate majority. You understand that your party is in real trouble here right? Also, there are more democrats in congress up for reelection in 18 than republicans and some of them are in red states. Trump will likely have a free pass to do whatever he wants.

 

 

There's actually a lot of momentum for the American left right now, but due to the fact that the spectrum ranges from the right to the far right (Obama is not a leftist by any measure) it will be a difficcult struggle.

 

'You might think Antarctica is cold but it's actually quite warm. The moon is much colder.' This is your argument. I don't know why you think the spectrum in whatever country you're in is somehow the standard for the United States.

 

 

>Republican

 

 

So are you done pretending to be a radical?

 

 

I advocate for the economic system that is currently in place and would favor enhancing it by going a step or two down the path we are already on. Somehow in your strange, little mind this is radical. I never said I was one and I do not consider myself to be one. I also do not bind myself to any party.

 

Don't send me a notification by quoting me unless you have something interesting.

 

 

Which is run by James O'Keefe, who made his name by editing manipulating covert footage designed to discredit political causes he doesn't agree with, and who did such a poor job of it he was forced to pay a six figure settlement to one victim having been found to have basically made sh*t up.

 

Just to set the record straight he was sued for entering a federal building under false pretenses/recording without consent in a state that requires consent from all parties. It had nothing to do with editing. Also editing is not something that is unique to veritas... all journalists on both sides edit.

 

BTW wikileaks has burned republicans too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

Or how about African-Americans straightening their hair, to make their hairstyle appear more 'caucasian'?

You've got a lot of balls mate! Hair straightening has long been considered a symptom of self-hatred, so for you to compare it to culturally appropriation is pretty insulting.

 

 

 

Which proves the fact that the whole cultural appropriation riot is an excessive form of white guilt.

The only thing that statement proves is how removed you are from the struggles of PoC and how little you care.

 

 

 

I thought the whole idea of anti racism was that we try to consider each other as 'people' and that I don't consider the black people I know 'black people', but just people... That we don't have different norms according to your skin color.

Oh no, that's 'colour blind' knee jerk white guy liberalism. A competent anti-racist would accept that white people benefit from a power dynamic with PoC and this renders us inherently dense and unreflective, like all privileged groups. What we don't do is cry reverse racism at anything that tries to restrict our behaviour, rather we acknowledge our privileged position and conditional status as allies.

 

Somehow in your strange, little mind this is radical.

You call yourself an 'anarchist' my God! Don't lolbertarians at least pretend that they want a massive restructuring, or does 'anarcho'-Capitalism to you just mean you support more neoliberalism without even opposing the state at all?

 

 

 

Don't send me a notification by quoting me unless you have something interesting.

Cheers mate but I think I'll continue to snark at your terrible posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
X S
Alternatively, you can ask; perhaps the United States is too big for its own good?

 

This is an interesting question. Possibly, and maybe one of the primary reasons we've been so hesitant to add on more states, regardless of the various territories and commonwealths and their status within US sovereignty, ie. Puerto Rico.

 

Actually, Federalist no. 10 provides the rationale and background for stifling the factions and differences between individuals, and the size of the republic, but it's also largely antithetical to leftist class struggle because it suppresses direct democracy.

Edited by X S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jatiger13

 

 

I too come from a small all white town in Finland and 90% of all blue collar men express negative views about immigration

So you admit you don't actually have to deal with the consequences of immigration, or have any real direct experience of it because of your location...yet still maintain strongly distrustful views of it. And that doesn't strike you as ridiculous in any way?

Since when does something have to impact you directly, for you to have an opinion on it? Are people not allowed to have opinions on global warming unless they live on a tiny Pacific island which is under imminent threat? Nobody can have an opinion on the Heathrow expansion unless they live near it?

Wow, I've never seen anyone miss a point by this large of a margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jatiger13

Socialized medicine is cancerous, a system plagued by corruption, interminable waits for treatment, prohibits competition from private medicine and ultimately destroys the quality of medical care.

 

Lmao. You have no clue what you're on about.

 

 

God I'm so euphoric the White House won't be occupied by a Leftist anymore.

President Obama is NOT a "leftist", neither would Clinton have been. The fact that you think that, shows how little you know about the political spectrum.

 

 

The thought of the United States becoming a social welfare state like the Netherlands or Sweden

If we only were so lucky.

It would drastically improve the quality of life for millions of Americans.

Edited by jatiger13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

Also, we are NOT brothers and sisters, either in a technical way or in some abstract philosophical sense.

I have no responsibility towards you and you don't have any responsibility towards me. We share no bond of any kind.

well actually you're wrong.

 

human society didn't reach the year 2016 through isolation or by disregarding our shared responsibilities. civilization evolved to this point because we realized that community and shared responsibility benefited everyone; the exchange of ideas, the open communication between people of different cultures who speak different languages, etc.

 

these things have only ever made us stronger.

our innovation takes us furthest when we cooperate. there's a reason why we're such a social species. survival and prosperity was ensured by sticking together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tchuck

 

what authority you feel you have to claim they're not?

Me personally? None. A nation's stance on that question depends on the authority of the democratic majority.

 

 

Stop tiptoeing around the subject and answer the man's question. Define ethnically/culturally Finnish, and explain why your definition is more compelling than others.

Do it. It's ok, you can say it's "white".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typhus

 

spout some vapid bullsh*t about us all being "one race"?

 

But we are. Cosmopolitanism is an ancient idea too. It's not some postmodern gibberish. Race and ethnicity are not the same thing. A culture moves towards being a caricature of itself to the extent that it defines identity in terms of race. Aside from arbitrary factors like color, race is often defined by states anyway. Cultures need space to develop more obvious differences and distinctions, but not much else. The overall utility of culture suffers when divisions reach a critical mass. This is probably why broadly speaking, the archetypal culturally rich nations - much of the Middle East, parts of Africa, China, Russia, and India just to name a few - are incredibly racist by modern standards despite otherwise impressive contributions to human history. Culturally rich, pure, etc. is really just a euphemism for being intolerant to outside influence.

 

 

The growing sentiment that excessive contact between different cultures waters down both doesn't hold up to much scrutiny. Culture isn't some zero sum game where we either do things our way, or their way. In fact, cultures owe their supposed improvements to integration and exposure to outside influence...hence the term "cultured". It's no coincidence that the most globally exposed cultures have grown to become the most dominant.

 

Even if we managed to identify a culture too diverse and compare it to say...North Korea, there's clearly a lesser of the two evils.

 

I tend to agree. Cosmopolitanism is a good ideal, one I do subscribe to. Funnily enough, it's a big reason I voted to stay in the EU, because I thought there would be greater intergration, leading to the eventual federalization of the union. It's an idea which appeals to me a great deal.

But surely you would agree that for all these cultures to merge peacefully, there has to be mutual respect? And there's where the problem comes in, young white people don't respect the cultures of their respective ethnicity and so don't think twice about accessorizing the cultures of others.

I have spoken to people about this until I'm blue in the face, but it never sinks in. They would rather pretend to be a crude Hollywood stereotype of African Americans than take the time to research their own history and customs.

 

The Left doesn't help, either. Because whilst they rightly bemoan cultural appropriation, they react with hostility when "white" nations attempt to celebrate their culture. In Europe's case, often ignoring the centuries of peaceful racial coexistence which occured before the advent of race as a construct.

 

This is a big problem, and a major stumbling block to more unified socieities. We have allowed fascists to seize upon entire cultures. To the point where, if I see my own flag hung up, I can be reasonably sure that there's some racist motivation behind it. Before we can achieve a more unified world, we have to detoxify these cultures, and stop allowing the right wing to monopolise patriotism and heritage for their own ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shyabang Shyabang

Here's what I think will happen. Obama and his advisors will open Trump's eyes to the reality of the world. The racists in the US will get tired of being racist when they realize that almost nothing will change under Trump.

 

Btw, if Trump gets impeached, remember who the vice-president is.

Edited by Shyabang Shyabang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

You're taking my comment literally; I'm saying that Trump can fill up the supreme court with 30-something-year-old right wing radicals (and he probably will) keeping the supreme court right leaning for most of the rest of your life. Look at who is on the bench, look at their ages, look at Trump's senate majority. You understand that your party is in real trouble here right? Also, there are more democrats in congress up for reelection in 18 than republicans and some of them are in red states. Trump will likely have a free pass to do whatever he wants.

you don't seem to be very familiar with how Congress operates.

Trump is a Republican in name only. he doesn't share their values and lied his way through the election cycle saying literally anything he thought would garner support from his base. these people rejected the GOP establishment as much as anything. the Republican party doesn't owe Trump for their Congressional seats. they won't give him "anything" he wants unless it's in line with what the party wants.

 

it won't affect my life much anyhow.

the Court isn't going to turn back the tide of social progress as the states keep updating their own constitutions thanks to the will of the people on ballot initiatives and referendums. a minority of the country elected Trump, just like a minority of the country would've elected Hillary. neither of them represent what most Americans are about. Americans are legalizing pot and accepting their gay friends/family. Americans overwhelmingly support a woman's right to choose and universal access to health care. but I digress.

 

it's not "my party" either. the Democrats are not the Liberals that I want.

Bernie was my candidate, not Hillary. you don't get it. you're so short-sighted. just interested in the horse race and WINNING. like I said, this election won't affect my life too much, but I feel bad for immigrants and Muslims and the working poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Just to set the record straight he was sued for entering a federal building under false pretenses/recording without consent in a state that requires consent from all parties. It had nothing to do with editing.

The specific lawsuit initiated by ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera was to do with breach of privacy (recording an individual without consent), but it became abundantly clear during the process that O'Keefe had extensively edited, manipulated and recut footage he'd shot to entirely misrepresent the people being filmed. And a tu quoque fallacy doesn't somehow turn O'Keefe from a deeply unreliable source of information into someone noteworthy or merit-worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Nice Person

Btw, if Trump gets impeached, remember who the vice-president is.

We've reached the point where Donald Trump is the lesser of both evils.

 

I don't advocate doing dumb sh*t, but if I were to blow up Trump's car, Pence better be in the car also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

 

I thought the whole idea of anti racism was that we try to consider each other as 'people' and that I don't consider the black people I know 'black people', but just people... That we judge each other by the contents of each others character, and not by the color of each others skin. That we don't have different norms according to your skin color.

 

Oh no, that's 'colour blind' knee jerk white guy liberalism. A competent anti-racist would accept that white people benefit from a power dynamic with PoC and this renders us inherently dense and unreflective, like all privileged groups. What we don't do is cry reverse racism at anything that tries to restrict our behaviour, rather we acknowledge our privileged position and conditional status as allies.

 

It's also sort of exactly what Martin Luther King says in his famous speech. I'm the opposite of the color blind anti racist. I've argued time and time again that I believe almost every single person has racial bias. But it should at least be a goal to not judge people on the color of their skin, right? By attacking kids with dreadlocks and people with ironic headdresses as if they were responsible for slavery and the genocide against native Americans, you are really being a regressive asshole that's busy harvesting racial hatred and division.

 

Saying white kids are more responsible for slavery and the genocide against native Americans, is as racists as holding each and every black individual responsible for the increased rates of murder and rape.

 

But this is also a cultural difference between me and Americans. The extent to which race is politicized in the US is to a so much higher degree than where I live, and it actually disgusts me, because many college kids are trying to import it here.

Edited by Eutyphro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DareYokel

If this is true then LOOOOOOL

 

 

Edited by The Yokel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Saying white kids are more responsible for slavery and the genocide against native Americans

Eh? Bit of an obvious straw man here, no? Doesn't even appear close to what Melc was arguing. Accepting white people are by and large socioeconomically advantaged and suggesting they should avoid offending other cultures for the sake of social cohesion != inferring responsibility for slavery and genocide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Nice Person

I was hoping he trolled the electorate after Bernie lost, that would be something I never knew was possible, and I suspect how this country will go is >nowhere is that turned out to be true.

 

 

But it should at least be a goal to not judge people on the color of their skin, right? By attacking kids with dreadlocks and people with ironic headdresses as if they were responsible for slavery and the genocide against native Americans, you are really being a regressive asshole that's busy harvesting racial hatred and division.

I agree with you to an extent, but if the individual is making fun of the 'cultural symbol' it shouldn't be taken lightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twang.

 

Alternatively, you can ask; perhaps the United States is too big for its own good?

This is an interesting question. Possibly, and maybe one of the primary reasons we've been so hesitant to add on more states, regardless of the various territories and commonwealths and their status within US sovereignty, ie. Puerto Rico.

 

Actually, Federalist no. 10 provides the rationale and background for stifling the factions and differences between individuals, and the size of the republic, but it's also largely antithetical to leftist class struggle because it suppresses direct democracy.

I support dissolving the union. Secession is being talked about in California and Oregon, many of my Minnesota friends seem to genuinely want to join Canada, Texas and other southerners are always talking about it, and it seems like so many people at large are disillusioned with the US and this election did nothing to help. Sure, a few Trumpets genuinely believe (are deluded) that he'll put it on the 'right track' but now seems like the best time yet for a bipartisan velvet divorce. After all, the only thing we seem to agree on is that we want nothing to do with each other.

 

We can all work on it and get it done by 2026 just in time for the 250th anniversary.

 

Edit: speaking of native Americans, they should be given their own state (both of the Dakotas, I say) with complete autonomy. This could also come with the dissolution.

Edited by Twang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

 

Eh? Bit of an obvious straw man here, no? Doesn't even appear close to what Melc was arguing. Accepting white people are by and large socioeconomically advantaged and suggesting they should avoid offending other cultures for the sake of social cohesion != inferring responsibility for slavery and genocide.

 

If you think it is purely about socioeconomic advantage, then you don't keep up with what the ultra progressive regressive gangs of self declared morally enlightened people think. I feel like I'm being too edgy when posting about this, as I normally generally post leftist opinions, but these people really want a continuing extreme amount of white guilt, where every evil in the world is caused by white people and only white people can have agency and responsibility, and minorities are weaklings that are victims by definition that need to be pandered to infinitely. They are really a bunch of patronizing elitist scumbags who in everything they do oppose inclusion and integration, because they feed on the feeling of moral superiority by pandering to victims.

 

I could write a whole lot about these people, but one of the things they do is write about headscarfs as if they are 'empowering to women', which is a disgusting and offensive amount of pandering. It's really dishonest and disgusting. These people want Sharia councils in the West, and oppose integration. These people hate rationality, honesty, truth and science as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sunrise Driver

Maybe this question was asked already, but what are the chances that on 19 December Hillary will be elected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PhillBellic

Maybe this question was asked already, but what are the chances that on 19 December Hillary will be elected?

What makes you feel that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sunrise Driver

 

Maybe this question was asked already, but what are the chances that on 19 December Hillary will be elected?

What makes you feel that?

 

Well Electors don't necessarily have to vote the way their county voted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PhillBellic

 

 

Maybe this question was asked already, but what are the chances that on 19 December Hillary will be elected?

What makes you feel that?

 

Well Electors don't necessarily have to vote the way their county voted.

 

I certainly feel that the Electoral Colleges need to go in any reformation of your Federal System.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatstupidbug

Since I'm not American, and informations and media are REALLY unprofessional here (well, not only here, but still...) , can someone explain what's going on with those protests?

 

I'm not trying to pass as a trump apologyst, but - as an external viewer - isn't the founding element of "democracy" to respect the electoral results, unless there has been forms of cheating and/or violence? Trump, as far as i know, has won fair and square.

 

I fear that protests will only increase resentment and separation inside the country, another "we are right" against "you are wrong"... but since i'm an external observer, someone may explain to me this whole thing better...

Edited by thatstupidbug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

    • Svip
×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.