"A Nation of Immigrants"

[Metamorph]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...timothy-snyder

Is this author really serious in saying he wants the entire US to go back to the Indians, because, if so, what does he want the rest of the current citizens to do? Does he really even think that's going to happen? But then, no one thought WWI and WWII would happen either. I have so many questions. I guess I could figure out what people would do by asking all the hippies at the New Age store what they would do if America disbanded, which is still a crazy-sounding thing to say, but then, maybe Trump is dumb enough to do it. I don't want to feel unpatriotic at best and treasonous at worst, but I sincerely have no idea what would happen if the US's territory was ceded back and what the impact on the rest of the world would be and I can't fairly say it would be a disaster. America is not a god that demands our blind obedience just because we were born here, especially if it happens it was illegitimately established and causes nothing but pain to everything around it. Someone had to be born here. However, I would really like to see evidence for America considering I have the sunk cost of being born here.

[Alonzo]

FFS, do you do drugs? If so, can you do them and somehow not post?

The author is clearly using a substantial amount of satire and being just as preposterous as Trump and his administration's posturing that the US comprises some distinctly (white) American monolith that is not itself made up of immigrants from some place else. The point is that it's hypocritical as fuck to be a nation that was created by invading, thieving, pillaging "immigrants" and followed by many many more who begged, borrowed and stole to get to the US, similarly to the current immigrants, but now sees itself as some stalwart against "the others." Ummm, America is full of the descendants of "others," many of whom still cling to their "otherness" > Italian Americans, Irish Americans, Jewish Americans, Polish Americans, Norwegian Americans, and so forth.

You sure do love to shitpost.

[Metamorph]

FFS, do you do drugs? If so, can you do them and somehow not post?

The author is clearly using a substantial amount of satire and being just as preposterous as Trump and his administration's posturing that the US comprises some distinctly (white) American monolith that is not itself made up of immigrants from some place else. The point is that it's hypocritical as fuck to be a nation that was created by invading, thieving, pillaging "immigrants" and followed by many many more who begged, borrowed and stole to get to the US, similarly to the current immigrants, but now sees itself as some stalwart against "the others." Ummm, America is full of the descendants of "others," many of whom still cling to their "otherness" > Italian Americans, Irish Americans, Jewish Americans, Polish Americans, Norwegian Americans, and so forth.

You sure do love to shitpost.

If you read the comments section, you'd see it's full of people taking the idea way more seriously than I imagined anyone would.

[Alonzo]

If you read the comments section, you'd see it's full of people taking the idea way more seriously than I imagined anyone would.

AND? As of now, there are 306 comments probably by mofos just like you who enjoy making mountains out of molehills and waxing the unlikely, fantastical and retarded. No one in their right mind would seriously consider actually ceding the US back to the Native Americans, just like nobody in their right mind could deny or ignore that America itself is a nation of immigrants who were by no means the first ones to claim ownership of its lands.

[Raver]

The author is just playing with semantics and hyperbole to show that making America a nation for former European immigrants like Trump wants to do should really be about restoring the land for Native Americans with that logic since they were there way before the original European settlers. I am kind of ambivalent about this entire article to be honest. The US should take less immigrants so it doesn't get overpopulated to keep infrastructure from being overwhelmed and to retain its American culture and continue being a melting pot rather than becoming multicultural. Not to try to keep it more European when it was originally a land that was comprised of a variety of European immigrants initially and then started to take immigrants from other continents outside of Europe in the second half of the 20th century. The same applies to other former European colonies like Canada, Australia and New Zealand IMO.

[ooo]

yes pls build those fkn walls so that americans stay within the borders and dont annoy the rest of the world with their shit <3

[Bento]

yes pls build those fkn walls so that americans stay within the borders and dont annoy the rest of the world with their shit <3

Keeping just the CIA within their borders would be fine

[ooo]

no everyone pls thx

[Adam Strange]

Keeping just the CIA within their borders would be fine

I believe that the CIA technically is not legally allowed to operate within the borders of the US. That is the realm of the FBI. However, missions tend to grow when it is convenient to the powerful to have them do so.

[perpetuus]

Support the Lakotah Independence Movement.

[FreelancePoliceman]

The author is just playing with semantics and hyperbole to show that making America a nation for former European immigrants like Trump wants to do should really be about restoring the land for Native Americans with that logic since they were there way before the original European settlers. I am kind of ambivalent about this entire article to be honest. The US should take less immigrants so it doesn't get overpopulated to keep infrastructure from being overwhelmed and to retain its American culture and continue being a melting pot rather than becoming multicultural. Not to try to keep it more European when it was originally a land that was comprised of a variety of European immigrants initially and then started to take immigrants from other continents outside of Europe in the second half of the 20th century. The same applies to other former European colonies like Canada, Australia and New Zealand IMO.

Man, what 'American culture' exactly do you think is worth preserving? Hollywood with their twenty superhero movies a year? Our pop music? I'm sure Billie Eilish will be an immortal testament to our cultural legacy. McDonald's? Walmart?

Almost any decent culture came from our black population and white Southeasterners, both of whom are being assimilated into the fondue of mediocrity and mental laziness endemic to this country.

[Raver]

Man, what 'American culture' exactly do you think is worth preserving? Hollywood with their twenty superhero movies a year? Our pop music? I'm sure Billie Eilish will be an immortal testament to our cultural legacy. McDonald's? Walmart?

Almost any decent culture came from our black population and white Southeasterners, both of whom are being assimilated into the fondue of mediocrity and laziness endemic to this country.

American culture is basically a melting pot so it is a mixture of Western European culture plus black and white South Eastern white influence and other influences from later immigrants. Naturally, it will evolve over time and change anyways as new groups arrive and they will be absorbed into the melting pot/monoculture as well.

So it less about preserving the bad aspects of American culture and more about preserving a monoculture/melting pot. I agree that American/Canadian cultures are not as interesting as European cultures, Japanese culture, Egyptian culture, etc... If anything, American culture/mass consumerism is being absorbed into other cultures worldwide via globalization:

[FreelancePoliceman]

American culture is basically a melting pot so it is a mixture of Western European culture plus black and white South Eastern white influence and other influences from later immigrants. Naturally, it will evolve over time and change anyways. I agree that American/Canadian cultures are not as interesting as European cultures, Japanese culture, Egyptian culture, etc... If anything, American culture is being absorbed into other cultures worldwide via globalization:

1. If it will change anyway, better to change it now and rescue us from our misery.

2. It's the reverse; Americans export our horrible excuse for a culture around the world and other countries have to suffer for it.

3. There's an irony in that music video you linked emphasizes the only really tangible achievement this country has made in the past 70 years -- which to make matters worse was one of the only victories in a space race this country lost to a country with a fraction of its GDP.

[Raver]

1. If it will change anyway, better to change it now and rescue us from our misery.

I don't mind if American culture evolves as we both agree that despite the good aspects, there are several bad aspects that do not need to be preserved.

2. It's the reverse; Americans export our horrible culture around the world and other countries have to suffer for it.

Yes, I admitted that in my post.

3. There's an irony in that music video you linked emphasizes the only really tangible achievement this country has made in the past 70 years -- which to make matters worse was one of the only victories in a space race this country lost to a country with a fraction of its GDP.

Perhaps, but no country has topped that achievement yet to this point. Perhaps from outside pressure like China, the US can set up a moon base on the moon and a man on Mars via NASA and/or a private space company like Space X.

The US hasn't sent anyone to the moon since 1972 since there was no more incentive to do so. Once competition comes from private companies and/or emerging economies in future space endeavors, the US will be forced to react.

[Alonzo]

@Raver why do you REFUSE to understand that "culture" is not static and that it has never been? Doesn't matter how many times that's been explained to you, in different ways, nope, you just don't get it. If I'm being polite and diplomatic, I wonder if it has something to do with unrefined, nuance lacking low D Si. Culture is a dynamic, living, breathing organism that expands, shifts, splinters, and atrophies. American, Canadian, French and Chinese culture today look different than they did 40 years ago, and 100 years before that, and 200 before that. And that can be said for just about any culture (especially when it has had access to the larger world and isn't utterly isolated, remote and cut off--and even they "fall" eventually). I don't know what world you live in where culture stays "preserved" in some perpetual state of stagnation. Over time, there are always changes, whether big or small, significant or insignificant. That is something implicit within the human experience. This is why arguments like yours are not rooted in reality.

[FreelancePoliceman]

I don't mind if American culture evolves as we both agree that despite the good aspects, there are several bad aspects that do not need to be preserved.

But you were just arguing the U.S. should take fewer immigrants so as to 'retain American culture'!

Yes, I admitted that in my post.

Apologies; I thought you meant that American 'culture' was changing because of the influences of other countries.

Perhaps, but no country has topped that achievement yet to this point. Perhaps from outside pressure like China, the US can set up a moon base on the moon and a man on Mars via NASA and/or a private space company like Space X.

The U.S. isn't even going to top that achievement for a long time. Putting a human on the moon is horrifyingly expensive; all the more so because there's no profit that could possibly made from it with current technology -- at all. There's no way in hell a company could find investors for such a project. The only way it could possibly be done would be if one or a few of the wealthiest people on the planet funded the project entirely out of personal interest (presumably because they wish to be the person on the moon), which is unlikely.

[ooo]

and british people too btw, you not alone, you'll never walk alone

[Raver]

@Raver why do you REFUSE to understand that "culture" is not static and that it has never been? Doesn't matter how many times that's been explained to you, in different ways, nope, you just don't get it. If I'm being polite and diplomatic, I wonder if it has something to do with unrefined, nuance lacking low D Si. Culture is a dynamic, living, breathing organism that expands, shifts, splinters, and atrophies. American, Canadian, French and Chinese culture today look different than they did 40 years ago, and 100 years before that, and 200 before that. And that can be said for just about any culture (especially when it has had access to the larger world and isn't utterly isolated, remote and cut off--and even they "fall" eventually). I don't know what world you live in where culture stays "preserved" in some perpetual state of stagnation. Over time, there are always changes, whether big or small, significant or insignificant. That is something implicit within the human experience. This is why arguments like yours are not rooted in reality.

Yes, I am well aware that culture changes and evolves over time. Obviously, 21st century Chinese culture is very different than 11th century Chinese culture and the same goes for French culture, etc. However, there is a big difference between a culture evolving naturally over time and a culture being rapidly and artificially changed in a short period of time via mass immigration. It is also important to note that culture just like technology still retains aspects that are hundreds to thousands of years old. We still use forks that are a relic of the 4th century, but we use them alongside cell phones. The fork was not replaced with another utensil like chopsticks, it was retained while new technologies were added for other uses.

Language is a good example of that, a part of culture that is preserved for lengthy periods of time despite clothing, music and other aspects of culture constantly changing. I guess my point is, I don't mind if current cultures add aspects to its existing culture, but I do mind if cultures are artificially replaced with new ones. Ideally, I would prefer if existing cultures keep adding and evolving within their existing framework or foundation rather than mixing in several cultures to form a new one or worst case scenario where foreign cultures replace old ones. I suspect that mixing in cultures to form a new one is likely the highest possibility out of the three scenarios. Anyways, I want the change of culture to slow down, not be stopped completely.

But you were just arguing the U.S. should take fewer immigrants so as to 'retain American culture'!

Yes, because even with fewer immigrants especially the ones that immigrated already, American culture will still change and improve, just not as dramatically.

Apologies; I thought you meant that American 'culture' was changing because of the influences of other countries.

No worries.

The U.S. isn't even going to top that achievement for a long time. Putting a human on the moon is horrifyingly expensive; all the more so because there's no profit that could possibly made from it with current technology -- at all. There's no way in hell a company could find investors for such a project. The only way it could possibly be done would be if one or a few of the wealthiest people on the planet funded the project entirely out of personal interest (presumably because they wish to be the person on the moon), which is unlikely.

Yes, that is true, but I believe you are underestimating the pressure from outside influence. You said it yourself, the main reason the US put a man in the moon was because they lost to the Soviet Union in the space race in many instances.

Replace Soviet Union with China and Space X and you can get a similar situation happening in this century. It won't happen until the 2030s at the earliest or even much later, but I believe it will happen some time in this century and in our lifetimes IMO.

https://www.space.com/china-moon-base-10-years.html

https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/30/2...n-starship-aco

Yeah, I am well aware these are likely exaggerations and the real date will be much later, but I suspect the intention is there regardless.

[ooo]

languages do in fact change very much through the centuries, when not more rapidly.

[FreelancePoliceman]

@Raver, since you seem to have conceded that American culture ought to change, why should the pace be slow?

China might land on the moon (relatively) soon, but almost nothing SpaceX or Tesla says should be trusted. I'd love to see a schematic of how they plan to get fucking mining equipment into space.

[ooo]

btw, one thing I agree with is that it's a pity to see the world becoming the same everywhere you go, European countries pretty much all look alike, and they look like America, and they look like Australia, and pretty much the entire world sells the same products and watches the very same translated tv shows, which now is culture. internet too.

and it would be great to retain everyone's uniqueness, so that when you go to Spain you don't think you're in Norway if not that there are no igloos around and people say hola to you

[Raver]

languages do in fact change very much through the centuries, when not more rapidly.

They do change, but the change of language is considerably slower compared to the change of fashion and music for instance.

@Raver, since you seem to have conceded that American culture ought to change, why should the pace be slow?

The main motivation for a slower pace has less to do with culture and more to do with immigration in allowing assimilation and integration into a melting pot. Rapid pace of mass immigration results in multiculturalism and ethnic enclaves. So encouraging a monocultural society over a multicultural one as both are multi-ethnic regardless.

China might land on the moon (relatively) soon, but almost nothing SpaceX or Tesla says should be trusted. I'd love to see a schematic of how they plan to get fucking mining equipment into space.

I agree that the dates they are giving like landing a man on Mars in 2024 is laughable, but if you ignore the dates and look at their goals then I think they are achievable within this century and in our lifetimes. I also agree that it won't be as easy as a task as they claim so I am prepared to wait a good while for this to happen.

btw, one thing I agree with is that it's a pity to see the world becoming the same everywhere you go, European countries pretty much all look alike, and they look like America, and they look like Australia, and pretty much the entire world sells the same products and watches the very same translated tv shows, which now is culture. internet too.

and it would be great to retain everyone's uniqueness, so that when you go to Spain you don't think you're in Norway if not that there are no igloos around and people say hola to you

Yes, I am glad that we are in agreement on this. Ftr, I don't believe Europe is going to turn into a Muslim and/or African continent because of mass immigration. What is far more likely to happen is that Europe turns into the United States of Europe sometime in the 22nd century. Each country in the EU will be more like an American state than a nation.

IMO, Europe will likely turn into a multi-ethnic mass consumerism melting pot/monoculture in the 22nd century. The fact that Europe is receiving way more immigrants is not an accident, US/Canada are already multi-ethnic melting pots (Canada is more multicultural) and don't need as many immigrants as Europe. The reason why I am so resistant to mass immigration in Western Europe is because I don't want it to turn into the US/Canada.

Also, the reason why I don't mind if the US/Canada remain multi-ethnic melting pots is because they were both European colonial nations built on immigration. Unlike Europe that has had its own unique cultures within each nation for a while. If someone thinks it is a good thing that Western Europe is turning into the US/Canada then that is their prerogative to believe that, but it is hard to deny that it is where it is heading.

[Alonzo]

However, there is a big difference between a culture evolving naturally over time and a culture being rapidly and artificially changed in a short period of time via mass immigration.

...

but I do mind if cultures are artificially replaced with new ones. Ideally, I would prefer if existing cultures keep adding and evolving within their existing framework or foundation rather than mixing in several cultures to form a new one or worst case scenario where foreign cultures replace old ones. I suspect that mixing in cultures to form a new one is likely the highest possibility out of the three scenarios. Anyways, I want the change of culture to slow down, not be stopped completely.

I'd just like to go on record and show that I've been over this with you before >

So you’d call the Danish Vikings raiding (read: murdering, plundering and pillaging) the coast of England for decades before deciding to put down roots (setting up farms, homesteads) that they also murdered and fought for vociferously in 865 a non-“forced,” “natural evolution” that happened “organically?” Lol


Where are the ships, swords, axes and accompanying violence, metaphorical or otherwise, possessed by the latest breed of Muslim invaders? Even still, the seemingly bloodthirsty (but in actuality, resource-starved) Danish Vikings would go on to eventually meld with the local Anglo-Saxon populations, infusing their own customs and traditions into the larger Anglo-Saxon culture (its Christian religion, especially), that would again soon take shape with the violent, and I do mean, VIOLENT incoming of the Normans. Is that what you all "organic?" lol


I mean, I know that IEEs are Ni-ignoring, but gotta say, you’re fast approaching caricature and satire. I can concede that the rate of the aforementioned clash of cultures, though always having existed, is indeed speeding up (thanks in part to technological advancements and subsequent globalization), but at the very least, it is undeniably less bloody and violent than it used to be. That has to count for something. In some ways, we are actually making progress as a species. What I would love to hear from many of those who think like you is an argument for why the things we've accepted as "culture" should endure, particularly in light of MY premise, the one most often reflected throughout human history, that our cultures and their artifacts are always in a state of flux.

Many of the very cultures you claim to want to preserve have been the result of violent, "rapid" bouts of "mass immigration" > the Anglo-Saxons in Roman Britain, the Moors in Spain, I could go on. I just don't what you are talking about when you say "artificial" change, as if cultural shifts don't take on many different faces and forms, some being more forced and "intentional" than others, and I don't understand why you think a "monocultural" society is inherently better a multicultural one.

[Metamorph]

As of now, there are 306 comments probably by mofos just like you who enjoy making mountains out of molehills and waxing the unlikely, fantastical and retarded.

Most of the Internet is for people to be retarded on. If you don't enjoy retardation, autism, and mental illness, there's a nice place called "real life" you can go to.

[Raver]

I'd just like to go on record and show that I've been over this with you before >



Many of the very cultures you claim to want to preserve have been the result of violent, "rapid" bouts of "mass immigration" > the Anglo-Saxons in Roman Britain, the Moors in Spain, I could go on. I just don't what you are talking about when you say "artificial" change, as if cultural shifts don't take on many different faces and forms, some being more forced and "intentional" than others, and I don't understand why you think a "monocultural" society is inherently better a multicultural one.

I'll admit that cultural change has happened before with mass immigration, but never to the extent and scale that is happening today. IMO, a monocultural society regardless of the ethnicities that are in it will work better than a multicultural one because there is far less division and more unity. If everyone shares a common language(s) and culture then nation states will be preserved rather than nations ceding to lose their value in preference for a globalized world. Multicultural societies result in ethnic enclaves where people mostly ignore each other and most of the focus is built on consumerism. I know this because I live in one of the most multicultural cities in the world and I'll admit that I enjoy some aspects of multiculturalism like being able to try different types of cuisine from around the world from authentic restaurants as it appeals to my .

However, what I don't like about it is the alienation because despite living in the same city and country, noone really feels connected with one another. You feel like a stranger in your own city and country despite being born and raised in it. When you're in a mall, you just feel like you're in a global shopping outlet, the only thing you share in common with each other is consumerism, everything else is alienating. That is why I'd prefer a multi-ethnic monocultural society in my country, which I know most second generation immigrants and some first generation immigrants along with succeeding generation immigrants will assimilate into. It is only through controlled immigration that this can occur as mass immigration ensures that there will always be substantial first generation immigrants that won't integrate and assimilate into the host country.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

American culture as it is now is anti-culture. It comes from large populations of immigrants coming here and casting off their homeland's culture to blend in. Just look at when we talk about "culture" restaurants inevitably come up. All we know as a country is a pseudo-culture akin to Disney World's Epcot, its a commodification of culture. So naturally, we can exchange our natural citizens for "new" citizens when they do what they're supposed to like when they don't work or do the jobs you need or don't accept the wages you'd like to pay them. Just exchange them just as you would a pair of jeans.

America had close cultural ties with Western Europe, but the "old america" the American people want to go back to is dead, has been paved over, and a theme park was built on top of it.

[Raver]

American culture as it is now is anti-culture. It comes from large populations of immigrants coming here and casting off their homeland's culture to blend in. Just look at when we talk about "culture" restaurants inevitably come up. All we know as a country is a pseudo-culture akin to Disney World's Epcot, its a commodification of culture. So naturally, we can exchange our natural citizens for "new" citizens when they do what they're supposed to like when they don't work or do the jobs you need or don't accept the wages you'd like to pay them. Just exchange them just as you would a pair of jeans.

America had close cultural ties with Western Europe, but the "old america" the American people want to go back to is dead, has been paved over, and a theme park was built on top of it.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. I consider multiculturalism to be a middle transient phase when an ethnostate begins to turn into a multi-ethnic monocultural/melting pot. Multicultural societies as a result of mass immigration are unsustainable in the long run. Worst case scenario, they devolve into crime and poverty ridden nations like some current Western European cities and best case scenario they are alienating and filled with ethnic enclaves with citizens having little in common with each other like some current North American cities.

IMO, I suspect Western Europe as a result of EU mass immigration policies will resemble the United States at some time in the 22nd century, a multi-ethnic monocultural/melting pot. So a United States of Europe with each nation as a state with the only major difference being language and it will likely be filled with consumerism as a major driving force of it's new culture. This is merely speculation though, but it seems to be the most likely scenario to me. Whether, this is a good or a bad thing depends on one's point of view and it is up for debate.

[Grendel]

unironically, we're going to get conquered by some foreign power, diaspora'd, and genocided harder than anything anyone's seen in a century in every country we try to flee to

[Metamorph]

Man, what 'American culture' exactly do you think is worth preserving? Hollywood with their twenty superhero movies a year? Our pop music? I'm sure Billie Eilish will be an immortal testament to our cultural legacy. McDonald's? Walmart?

Almost any decent culture came from our black population and white Southeasterners, both of whom are being assimilated into the fondue of mediocrity and mental laziness endemic to this country.

Lots of American culture is amazing. We have symphonies, novels, and 7 of the 10 top research universities in the world. We landed on the moon before the Soviets, and our public education still seems to be better than countries like Germany and Japan despite certain issues. Jazz is awesome too like you said of course. I'm sorry that you're awful and live in the awful part of America.

[xerx]

The United States is a shithole because its business elite crashed the economy while raking in millions. There are illegal immigrants who can do the same job or better for 3 bucks an hour.

[xerx]

Worst case scenario, they devolve into crime and poverty ridden nations like some current Western European cities and best case scenario they are alienating and filled with ethnic enclaves with citizens having little in common with each other like some current North American cities.

didn't you say you were South Italian? you aren't allowed to complain about immigrant crime.

[Raver]

didn't you say you were South Italian? you aren't allowed to complain about immigrant crime.

I am worse! Half mafia, half cartel, be very afraid!

[Metamorph]

How on Earth are so many people upvoting contradictory posts...

[Deprecator]

How do people think the pre-European Americans reacted when Europeans started colonizing the land they were living on? Were they all like....

[Adam Strange]

How do people think the pre-European Americans reacted when Europeans started colonizing the land they were living on? Were they all like....

Every time superimposes it's view of it's own time on history.

"Are your taxes too high? High taxes destroyed the Roman Empire, too. Or wait, maybe it was Lead Plumbing, like in Flint, Michigan. Or was it climate change? Or low-quality immigrants from Germany to Rome?"

For a more nuanced view of how the Native Americans and Europeans interacted, I recommend reading "The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815".

I thought the story of the interactions between the Miami and Seneca tribes on pages 4 and 5 of the book were very interesting. You can read this story on Amazon's "Look Inside" preview page.

[xerx]

Lots of American culture is amazing. We have symphonies, novels, and 7 of the 10 top research universities in the world. We landed on the moon before the Soviets, and our public education still seems to be better than countries like Germany and Japan despite certain issues. Jazz is awesome too like you said of course. I'm sorry that you're awful and live in the awful part of America.

Really? I thought Japan has one of the world's best education systems. Japanese are top tier in international competitions, whereas American students are near the bottom of the OECD.

Also, those research universities have tons of immigrant students (a disproportionate number) from better-educated countries. No offense, but educated foreigners are a big part of the reason that America is a technological leader, and stopping immigration isn't going to make the American elite suddenly give a shit about helping their own people.