US Politics the 2025 trump presidency thread

[alasdairm]

it's your opinion. and, just like my opinion, it's not a fact.

again, please stop.

alasdair

 

[Shambles]

As somewhat of an aside… good god do I hate it when right-wing types reel out the “adult conversation” or “adults in the room” bollocks. So fukkin condescending and so indicative of their patriarchal belief system

 

[someguyontheinternet]

As somewhat of an aside… good god do I hate it when right-wing types reel out the “adult conversation” or “adults in the room” bollocks. So fukkin condescending and so indicative of their patriarchal belief system

they need a hierarchical system where they are above others so they infantilize those they don't agree with

 

[Fire&Water]

Brought to you by the Letter O

 

[Foreigner]

Not playing your binary bullshit games my friend. I'll give you the full explanation of how I feel;

As I've said numerous times already in this thread, there is such a thing is a healthy immigration policy that discriminates properly on who should be allowed in to a country and who shouldn't. White African farmers on the whole are going to be far more acceptable and easier to integrate (to USA, UK, EU) than pulling from the general black population of South Africa. If that makes you uncomfortable that's your problem but anyone with a brain knows that is true. It is what it is.

Yes you still have to screen all candidates, regardless of their skin colour. Was that even in doubt? In your mind in relation to me, yes, because you guys just won't give up trying to frame and paint people into a corner so you can go "Ah HA! A racist/homophobe/etc etc". Those of us in the real world who are bolted to reality keep saying we need a proper immigration system, with the proper checks.. that is the whole bloody argument.

A white Albanian would be easier to integrate than a black South African, but that still doesn't mean we'd just let them in without checking.. especially with Albanian's, because, like the black South African's, they currently have a real issue in their culture with violence and crime. As evidenced by the issues the UK faces with Albanian gangs operating here, for example.

Would I want loads of black South Africans in my country? Absolutely not. Not until there culture is more aligned with our own, not until their psychology has levelled out - a nation that has been through tremendous upheaval is not going to produce stable psychology in people, and combined with the black predilection for violent outbursts that is not a great mix. Call me racist, I don't care. I've already pointed out that they are holding massive political rallies chanting "Kill the boer!" and doing little tribal dancing jigs to it.. sorry, but that is demonstrable evidence that they are not on par with where we are in the West. We do not need that shit here thank you very much, we are past political parties outright calling for murder.

The fact that the numbers are disputed and vary wildly should suggest to you that perhaps South Africa is not a great country, eh? If they can't even produce their own reliable data then that speaks volumes in itself doesn't it. If we can't trust them to accurately produce statistics on violent crime and murder.. then that just lends weight to my argument that they suck as a people and we don't need that shit in our countries.

The situation can be re-evaluated once they sort themselves out, but until then.. no thanks.

I think it's fine to talk about culture clashes, but it is indeed racist to make it about skin colour. Have you ever been to SA? I have. I met some of the most bushwhacking, ignorant, Dutch racist assholes there in my time AND I also met really enlightened thinkers (a lot of them doctors). Same in the black SA community for racist assholes vs. enlightened thinkers. I wanted to go to med school in SA because their training was better than some of the top US schools.

You have a perfectly valid argument about cultural integration and vetting, but then you undermine it by making it about black or white. Culture is programming. Like... here in Canada we have an influx of low level Indian wage workers right now, causing cultural problems. Second and third generation Indians who have integrated are complaining about their image being ruined because they had to go through a vetting process to get into Canada. So that right there shows us that it's not a race issue.

I also don't understand your comments like... the black predilection for violent outbursts. I look at countries like Ghana, Botswana, Zambia and Tanzania... they all have lower violence statistics than the best US states. Then you look at somewhere like the Congo and it's a bloodbath in some areas.

I think you need to very carefully delineate race from socioeconomics in some of your thinking. I honestly get your localized UK experience, the UK is really going through it right now. Extracting your points from your anger, I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just don't think that is evidence about race so much as it is about culture and SES. So you really need to cool it with the racist rhetoric (which you admit you are using).

 

[Shambles]

As an even more random aside, a variation of your avatar is the only tattoo design I have ever considered actually putting on my body, O Great Punpkin King. True story.

 

[Fire&Water]

Your skin is sacred ground
Just let your toes grow regenerating roots

 

[-=SS=-]

As somewhat of an aside… good god do I hate it when right-wing types reel out the “adult conversation” or “adults in the room” bollocks. So fukkin condescending and so indicative of their patriarchal belief system

Patriarchy

I think it's fine to talk about culture clashes, but it is indeed racist to make it about skin colour.

I never made it about skin colour, you guys did. I stated quite clearly that the fact that South Africa, with its notoriously high murder rates, happens to be 80% black is incidental to that fact. If they had purple or orange skin it wouldn't make any difference what so ever, the point remains is that no rational, sane country would choose to have lax immigration policy in regards to that specific country. Clearly they have issues, whatever the root causes may be, but that's not our problem and it's fine to simply say "No. We're going to be extra stringent about vetting people from this country until conditions improve".

Why is that so hard for people here to grasp? I don't want a bunch of Albanian's coming here just as much as I don't want a bunch of South African's coming here. Not unless they meet strict immigration criteria so we are certain we are getting decent hardworking people and not criminals or questionable characters.

So you really need to cool it with the racist rhetoric (which you admit you are using).

I never admitted to such a thing. There's no point in being in denial about the predilections of certain groups of people though, you can make generalizations that inform decision making, but they are generalizations.. there's no need to fly off that handle about that fact. This nonsense about everyone being the same is one of the contributing factors to why immigration policy has become so pathetically weak to the point of suicidal empathy. The colour of skin is incidental, so please can we just drop that bullshit, please. I have underlined already that regardless if it were black or white South African, you still need to vet these people properly.

If you were given the choice to admitting to your country 100,000 South African's or 100,000 Japanese, who are you going to choose? You're god damn right you're choosing the Japanese.

 

[Foreigner]

Patriarchy

I never made it about skin colour, you guys did. I stated quite clearly that the fact that South Africa, with its notoriously high murder rates, happens to be 80% black is incidental to that fact. If they had purple or orange skin it wouldn't make any difference what so ever, the point remains is that no rational, sane country would choose to have lax immigration policy in regards to that specific country. Clearly they have issues, whatever the root causes may be, but that's not our problem and it's fine to simply say "No. We're going to be extra stringent about vetting people from this country until conditions improve".

80% of South Africans are black... less than 10% are white. So what do you expect in terms of violent crime, in terms of population demographics aligning with violence demographics? SA is almost entirely dark skinned, so going on about how more black South Africans commit violent crime doesn't say much.

Why not say "South Africans" instead of "blacks" and talking about predilections as though being black predisposes you to violence. 80% of violent offenders being black does not mean 80% of black South Africans are violent. If you compare numbers instead of percentages, you'll find that way more blacks have not committed violent crimes in their lifetimes than those that have, by the numbers.

I agree with you about unvetted immigration and the resulting culture clashes. We generally do not grant immigration status to people with known criminal histories in the Commonwealth nations.

Why is that so hard for people here to grasp? I don't want a bunch of Albanian's coming here just as much as I don't want a bunch of South African's coming here. Not unless they meet strict immigration criteria so we are certain we are getting decent hardworking people and not criminals or questionable characters.

I do grasp that part.

I never admitted to such a thing. There's no point in being in denial about the predilections of certain groups of people though, you can make generalizations that inform decision making, but they are generalizations.. there's no need to fly off that handle about that fact. This nonsense about everyone being the same is one of the contributing factors to why immigration policy has become so pathetically weak to the point of suicidal empathy. The colour of skin is incidental, so please can we just drop that bullshit, please. I have underlined already that regardless if it were black or white South African, you still need to vet these people properly.

If you were given the choice to admitting to your country 100,000 South African's or 100,000 Japanese, who are you going to choose? You're god damn right you're choosing the Japanese.

I can deny it because your argument is not statistically logical.

The real immigration issue is that too many are being allowed in at once, which is having a dilution effect on culture, which makes it difficult to assimilate newcomers. In the past, new immigrants were titrated at a much lower rate and this facilitated assimilation. Now because the western nations fear a demographic crisis (low birth rate), they are granting people entry in droves, many of whom are low socioeconomic status in order to fill low-wage labour. At least, that's what's happening in Canada. Contemporary government doesn't seem to care about culture dilution, it's just about the number of human bodies in the globalist enterprise.

So they are basically letting in the most disenfranchised groups to whom higher crime rates are attached due to their SES.

It's got nothing to do with them being black or having predilections, and everything to do with them having low SES, which means low education. Our governments are letting them in specifically because they are low class, because they know they will not climb the socioeconomic ladder easily and will instead fill menial labour roles.

If your conclusion is truly that we need to vet everybody, then we are in agreement and there is really no need for further argument. I just take issue with them being black South Africans playing a factor in your analysis. Furthermore the blame should go to our governments for opening the immigration floodgates, rather than denigrating the people who are just taking advantage of our looser immigration policies for a better life.

Your argument would make a lot more sense if you just said, "We should more strongly vet immigrants from countries with high rates of violence because there will be higher chances of a criminal element trying to immigrate." I believe countries can contain more violence than others, but not races. If every "race" is raised with good conditions, equal community treatment and equal opportunity, they all turn out as well-adjusted human beings.