Do We Have Any Bernie Sanders Supporters Among Us?

[DC Tom]

 

You're an idiot

 

I officially sanction this post.

[Magox]

 

I officially sanction this post.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Increased political power for Latinos, firstly.

 

Identity politics is determining policies.

 

It's like asking "how would a Muslim benefit by having more Muslims in the US?"....I'm sure virtually every Muslim would say "yes, it would benefit me and my people!

 

Or is that crazy talk?

 

 

 

Latinos (all "people of color") pretty much vote Democrat, and that party has turned into "the anti-straight white male party".

 

 

Why would immigration be important to Magox, if he didn't expect to benefit in some way?

I can think of at least two reasons right off of the top of my head:

 

1. It requires that all Latinos immediately become suspects having to prove their innocence, which is the antithesis of how any justice system opperating in a free society should work.

 

2. He believes if to be immoral to break up families, close down businesses, and uproot communities; sending them somewhere they have no lives and no prospects.

Edited October 11, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[GG]

Then why single out Mexicans in a discussion about Hispanics?

[Prickly Pete]

I doubt this discussion will change anyone's opinion.

[DC Tom]

I doubt this discussion will change anyone's opinion.

 

Of course not. Not with Hispanics involved in it who are incapable of being objective.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I doubt this discussion will change anyone's opinion.

Let's start here:

 

What is so fundamentally different between what Hispanics want, and what largely Anglo/Slavic whites want?

Edited October 11, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[Magox]

No one actually wants to dispute my claim that most Mexicans feel this country was taken from them.

 

Surely one of you that disputes my broad claim can come up with a better estimate of Mexicans that feel that way?

 

 

I really want to know what YOUR estimate is, cuz that attitude is inarguably one taken by some percentage of the population.

 

 

That's not how arguments work, dummy.

 

If you are the one making a claim that is so patently absurd the onus is on you to prove it, not to provide your anecdotal views as proof.

 

There is no statistical data points that are available and to be honest there is no way to compile such data to prove or disprove such a statement.

 

However, your argument is:

 

A) Latino's and more specifically Mexicans have a sense of entitlement that this country belongs to them.

 

B) That ALL Latino's/Mexicans believe that they only make decisions that will benefit their race or ethnicity.

 

C) That I am incapable of looking at this objectively and that my opinions are solely based on "How this can benefit Latino's" because I have Hispanic roots.

 

It's just absurd having to address this but here I am. Do you not realize how stupid this sounds?

 

In any case, the argument that you are essentially making is that the entire race looks at their own race's self-benefit and that it is one of entitlement. Entitled that they believe that this is "their country". I don't dispute that there could be a culture of entitlement of this view, but entitlement is not a unique trait to the Latino race.

 

Entitlement is something that all races and all walks of life whether it be from the "ruling class" like Hillary who believes she's entitled to the presidency. Corrupt individuals on Wall Street who believe they are entitled to mismanage their clients money. Some poor white working folks, AA's, Latino's who believe they are entitled to government benefits. The list goes on and on.

 

Your mistake, which are numerous is that you lump in all Latino's/Mexicans who have this belief. And you go on about it as if it were fact, which don't worry, people passing off opinions as facts is apparently a widespread phenomena on this site.

 

Also, you sound very Trump-like when you explicitly make the case that I'm incapable of objective thought. Ala Trump and the supposed Mexican Judge deal.

 

It's you who is not able to view this objectively.

[Prickly Pete]

Let's start here:

 

What is so fundamentally different between what Hispanics want, and what largely Anglo/Slavic whites want?

 

Let's start here....

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/wps/WP201530.pdf

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Let's start here....

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/wps/WP201530.pdf

No, I want to you make your argument please.

 

I'm not interested in you offering reading assignments.

 

Make your case, and then support it with evidence, like I do.

[Prickly Pete]

No, I want to you make your argument please.

 

I'm not interested in you offering reading assignments.

 

Make your case, and then support it with evidence, like I do.

 

Magox just chided me for using anecdotal evidence. I think all groups have the same fundamental wants. But denial that people give preference to others that are most similar to themselves is ridiculous.

 

There is no reason for me to re-write a book across a 100 posts.

 

 

That's not how arguments work, dummy.

 

If you are the one making a claim that is so patently absurd the onus is on you to prove it, not to provide your anecdotal views as proof.

 

There is no statistical data points that are available and to be honest there is no way to compile such data to prove or disprove such a statement.

 

However, your argument is:

 

A) Latino's and more specifically Mexicans have a sense of entitlement that this country belongs to them.

 

B) That ALL Latino's/Mexicans believe that they only make decisions that will benefit their race or ethnicity.

 

C) That I am incapable of looking at this objectively and that my opinions are solely based on "How this can benefit Latino's" because I have Hispanic roots.

 

It's just absurd having to address this but here I am. Do you not realize how stupid this sounds?

 

In any case, the argument that you are essentially making is that the entire race looks at their own race's self-benefit and that it is one of entitlement. Entitled that they believe that this is "their country". I don't dispute that there could be a culture of entitlement of this view, but entitlement is not a unique trait to the Latino race.

 

Entitlement is something that all races and all walks of life whether it be from the "ruling class" like Hillary who believes she's entitled to the presidency. Corrupt individuals on Wall Street who believe they are entitled to mismanage their clients money. Some poor white working folks, AA's, Latino's who believe they are entitled to government benefits. The list goes on and on.

 

Your mistake, which are numerous is that you lump in all Latino's/Mexicans who have this belief. And you go on about it as if it were fact, which don't worry, people passing off opinions as facts is apparently a widespread phenomena on this site.

 

Also, you sound very Trump-like when you explicitly make the case that I'm incapable of objective thought. Ala Trump and the supposed Mexican Judge deal.

 

It's you who is not able to view this objectively.

 

 

http://www.latinorebels.com/2014/08/29/latinos-and-the-resentment-toward-whites/ (it's a quick read, TakeYouToTasker)

 

This is pretty much the attitude I encounter. No, I'm not asking Latino's walking in the mall for their opinions on race relations, or interviewing a broad range of people. The opinions I get are mostly from young Mexicans who consider themselves socially conscious.

 

But I also overhear conversations among older Mexicans, and having worked at a company of over 400 people (mostly Mexican and Philippino) as one of the few white employees, I had plenty of opportunity to gain some understanding of their attitudes. I wasn't mistreated, but they were conscious of my presence, and often openly discussed race relations. I had a great time working there, it should be noted.

Edited October 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[Magox]

 

Magox just chided me for using anecdotal evidence. I think all groups have the same fundamental wants. But denial that people give preference to others that are most similar to themselves is ridiculous.

 

There is no reason for me to re-write a book across a 100 posts.

 

 

http://www.latinorebels.com/2014/08/29/latinos-and-the-resentment-toward-whites/

 

This is pretty much the attitude I encounter. No, I'm not asking Latino's walking in the mall for their opinions on race relations, or interviewing a broad range of people. The opinions I get are mostly from young Mexicans who consider themselves socially conscious.

 

 

So to make your point, you link an article from Hector Luis Alamo who is an author for LatinoRebels website who essentially has the same views towards whites as Al Sharpton? If you are going to be consistent, then you may as well lump in AA's into your argument.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Magox

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Magox just chided me for using anecdotal evidence.

 

There is no reason for me to re-write a book across a 100 posts.

I'm not asking you to re-write a book. I'm asking you to explain to me the fundamental differences between what Hispanics and largely Anglo/Slavic whites want. Then I'll ask you to source it...

 

What you offered is a theoretical paper, which offers the (unproven) idea that heterogeneous populations can be either cooperative or divisive depending on how large the minority groups are; with the major negative implication of "critical mass" minority groups being isolated from the majority's economic advantage predicated on an unwillingness to assimilate.

 

The paper, while interesting, isn't particularly relevant to the topic at hand, given that the overwhelming amount of harm is done to these immigrant communities themselves, by themselves; and that neither Magox nor anyone else here, is advocating making undocumented immigrants into citizens, but rather in offering them a path towards citizenship which would force them towards assimilation as opposed to what we have now, and enacting meaningful immigration reform to actually begin protecting our sovereign borders.

Edited October 11, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[Prickly Pete]

 

 

 

So to make your point, you link an article from Hector Luis Alamo who is an author for LatinoRebels website who essentially has the same views towards whites as Al Sharpton? If you are going to be consistent, then you may as well lump in AA's into your argument.

 

That is the prevailing attitude of Mexicans I encounter. If you can't understand why I wouldn't want millions more people with this attitude becoming US citizens, then I don't know what else to say.

Edited October 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

 

That is the prevailing attitude of Mexicans I encounter. If you can't understand why I wouldn't want millions more people with this attitude becoming US citizens, then I don't know what else to say.

You blank post quoted me, and haven't responded to anything I wrote.

 

Further, you're taking small sample size anecdotal evidence, and extrapolating it across the population of an entire nation of people; and then you're compounding that logical error by equating all Hispanics with Mexicans.

 

Do better.

[Prickly Pete]

You blank post quoted me, and haven't responded to anything I wrote.

 

Further, you're taking small sample size anecdotal evidence, and extrapolating it across the population of an entire nation of people; and then you're compounding that logical error by equating all Hispanics with Mexicans.

 

Do better.

 

I'm doing fine. I give everyone I meet respect.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

I'm doing fine. I give everyone I meet respect.

You aren't doing fine at all in terms of conveying information, or making an intelligible argument.

 

In fact, you're making such a very poor case that even if you were 100% correct, no one would know it because you've presented it so damn poorly.

 

I'm sitting here, willing to listen.

 

Make your case, and do it better.

[Prickly Pete]

You aren't doing fine at all in terms of conveying information, or making an intelligible argument.

 

In fact, you're making such a very poor case that even if you were 100% correct, no one would know it because you've presented it so damn poorly.

 

I'm sitting here, willing to listen.

 

Make your case, and do it better.

 

Ugh. There is no shortage of information concerning race relations. No shortage of news footage of racial conflicts. No shortage of racial dissension documented in any culture's historical writings.

 

What there is a shortage of, is nations where a diversity of races and religions, without a clear majority, is operating without serious conflict among it's people.

 

Why that is, I don't know.

Edited October 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Ugh. There is no shortage of information concerning race relations. No shortage of news footage of racial conflicts. No shortage of racial dissension documented in any culture's historical writings.

 

What there is a shortage of, is nations where a diversity of races and religions without a clear majority, is working successfully.

 

Why that is, I don't know.

The European conflicts, which are the subject matter of the paper you presented earlier, are due (largely) to the influx of a hostile non-Judeo-Christian population whose culture is driven by a 1500 year old Theocratic rule which is incompatible with Western culture and values.

 

Black/white racial conflicts begin with America's "original sin", and would likely be nearly healed had Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to re-subjugate black Americans in the guise of political patronage.

 

Hispanic/Nativist conflict is caused (largely) by the irrational fears of people whom are seeking to protect something they never had from another group of people who wouldn't have had the ability to take it away from them anyway; forcing the immigrant Hispanic community to live in isolation by denying them the ability to assimilate, all while complaining about their unwillingness to assimilate.

Edited October 11, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[Prickly Pete]

The European conflicts, which are the subject matter of the paper you presented earlier, are due (largely) to the influx of a hostile non-Judeo-Christian population whose culture driven by 1500 year old Theocratic rule; which is incompatible with Western culture and values.

 

Black/white racial conflicts begin with America's "original sin", and would likely be nearly healed had Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to re-subjugate them in the guise of political patronage.

 

Hispanic/Nativist conflict is caused (largely) by the irrational fears of people whom are seeking to protect something they never had from another group of people who wouldn't have had the ability to take it away from them anyway; forcing the immigrant Hispanic community to live in isolation by denying them the ability to assimilate, all while complaining about their unwillingness to assimilate.

 

Gee, talk about "unproven". ("it's all whitey's fault [largely]")

 

The whole country is playing "Identity Politics", and frankly I can't think of much, if any way I will benefit from more Latino (or Muslim) immigration, at this time. I can however, see some disadvantages (including wading through a deeper, and near continuous chorus of "White Privilege!").

 

 

There is nowhere to go with this.

 

But anyway, back to my original point (that compelled Magox to jump in. For some reason he claimed Sanders was pro open borders. When I cited sources that completely dispelled that, he didn't acknowledge them at all, but instead attacked me on some other point. Typical Magox)....I would gladly vote for Sanders over Trump or Clinton. It's a shame he dropped out.

Edited October 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins