On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 07:13:47PM -0600, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
On 01/29/2017 06:08 PM, #$%&#$ %&#$%&#$ wrote:
This is getting ridiculous, Trump must be stopped before he turns America into a White nation - he is shockingly close now to being Literally Hitler!!!
What can we do?
This is why I voted for Hillary.
What can we do, you ask?
If you're in the US, call your Representative and Senators, especially if they happen to be Republicans, and say you want to see Trump impeached. If they actually do their damn jobs, the probable cause for an impeachment is damn near staring them in the face.
If you aren't? Not sure on that one.
I guess a valid question is what is a reasonable ratio of various "races" - the libertarian position is no borders, no citizens, no government. Government, when it exists, "ought" be a strength of collective position. The counter position to this is that government can never be more than the tyranny of the majority. "The majority" in this case invariably accept some form of rulership (government, monarch, etc) in order for ("perceived") safety. At the family level, an argument can be made for example that every household ought accept one African migrant family to live with them, and were this policy in place and imposed upon the people (besides some folk reacting/ protesting in response), others would undoubtedly say this is a good thing, and undoubtedly a good 300 million Africans would immigrate into the USA. Is there anything wrong with this picture? Is there anything right with this picture?
From a purely objective viewpoint you must understand, we can ask the following questions:
- what ration of "whites" / other races is "acceptable"? - should the "White invaders" into USA be deported back to Europe? - should 'no borders' be imposed upon the majority? - should the ratio of races in any country be imposed to be according to global population stats ratio? Open borders at the household level would probably be violently rejected by the vast majority. - Just as we "defend our literal homes", why then isn't it reasonable to likewise "defend the national border"? The only moral argument I can conceive is one of assumed guilt - the "majority" have acquiesced to the tyranny of their respective governments and therefore ought suffer the tyranny of having to copy with personally 'handling' foreigners from some random country that has been invaded by ones host country. I don't support that particular argument. I say families have a right to keep anyone and everyone out of their homes/ properties. Similarly, I extend that argument to the nation, as an entirely reasonable position for humans to take, and indeed easily considered as a moral position - a moral imperative in fact. The ultimate answer to "what can we do about Trump's 'Whitening' of the USA" is to deport White Americans from the USA. The follow on from this is How many to deport? This is the question of ratio asked above - some would (I assume) set that ratio at 'zero Whites to remain in America'. - Is 'zero Whites to remain in USA' unreasonable? - if so, what ratio is reasonable? Far from ironic, these various questions are sincere, and genuine questions which appear to be before people. It's all very well to rail frantically against "Trump, who's literally Hitler" - but such emotive reactions won't cut the mustard. So, choose your ratio today :) Don't be shy, be bold - own your position. If you don't own your position, no one else gonna own it for you, except those who disagree with you. Speak, or forever hold your peace! Zenaan