Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Reblogged: Set the Bar Low for Immigration but High for Citizenship

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Non-white politics is not just slightly socialist, it is significantly, overwhelmingly, socialist.

 

... the glaring contradictions in your convoluted rationalizations ...

 

— more of the name-calling Nicky is known for.  
 
Amnesty for illegals right now, amnesty for American taxpayers sometime in the future (as in never) — is that a rationalization?
 
About being a racist, in post #13 back on page 1 of this thread I wrote:
 
If you’re a racist for not wanting your country swamped by
the Third World you’ll just have to live with the designation.  
You’re a racist.  Get used to it ringing in your ears.
 
Personally I don’t mind it anymore.  I am a racist. (Link to a talk by Paul Weston.)  If you think that video is extreme, look up the Woolrich killing, which occurred not long after.  Paul Weston mentions it in a later talk
 
I don’t know much about Paul Weston except that he is British and entered politics (now the Liberty GB party) because of concern about Britain’s immigration disaster.  The British elite hate Britain as much as Obama and his backers hate America.
 
On the subject of immigration it’s past time students of Objectivism started looking at the real world.  Yaron Brook and the others at ARI are leading you down the garden path.  Seeing Obama walking next to them arm in arm should give you pause.  
Edited by HandyHandle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That’s the half of it.  The other half is that the government isn’t using it’s legitimate power to protect us.  What we have now is approaching immigration anarchy.
 
In Spiral Architect’s world there are no governments restricted to the populous of an individual country.  Instead, each country’s government ministers to anyone on earth as long as they show up at its – rather fictitious – border.  In a word, a kind of one world globalism.  
 
In that brave new world America gets swamped by Third World immigrants.
 

 

 

I have no idea what you said and how it somehow applies to what I said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non-white politics is not just slightly socialist, it is significantly, overwhelmingly, socialist.

That's odd, I'm looking at the Heritage Economic Freedom Index, and the two most free countries in the world have over 95% non-white populations.

It must be a lie, non-white countries couldn't possible be less socialist than the US. I bet the Jews are somehow involved in this fabrication.

Oh, and, looking at some more statistics, turns out most Latin American immigrants are white. So there's that. I suppose they're not white in your book though. Racists usually have a hard time wrapping their heads around basic facts like that.

Non-white politics is not just slightly socialist, it is significantly, overwhelmingly, socialist.

 

 

— more of the name-calling Nicky is known for.  

 

Amnesty for illegals right now, amnesty for American taxpayers sometime in the future (as in never) — is that a rationalization?

 

About being a racist, in post #13 back on page 1 of this thread I wrote:

 

If you’re a racist for not wanting your country swamped by

the Third World you’ll just have to live with the designation.  

You’re a racist.  Get used to it ringing in your ears.

 

Personally I don’t mind it anymore.  I am a racist. (Link to a talk by Paul Weston.)  If you think that video is extreme, look up the Woolrich killing, which occurred not long after.  Paul Weston mentions it in a later talk.

There's no reason to be proud of any of that. A racist is one of the dumbest things you can be. Edited by Nicky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No major shift has come, especially among Blacks.   We don’t have time for a couple more generations.  As “the better Peikoff” said at the end of his podcast (see post #67 here) we need to buy time.

Buy time for what? You really think opening with "I'm proud to be a racist" is gonna eventually lead to turning blacks (or most whites, for that matter) around to your cause?

Are you really expecting this ideology you're peddling to go over well with ANY audience outside whatever far right message board you're getting it off of? What world do you live in? Look around, dude. You're acting like an applause break is just around the corner to reward your vision and leadership, while in reality saying half of the stuff you posted in this forum with your actual name attached to it would get you fired from your job and shunned by most people you know.

How could you possibly look at the stuff in this thread, and think it's a good plan to save America? Who do you think is gonna join in with this nonsense? Trust me, the dirty Mexicans aren't what's preventing America from joining your cause. This whites only ship sailed back around when Hitler lost the war. Things have been going downhill for you ever since, and they ain't about to turn around.

Edited by Nicky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicky failed to name the top two free countries – free, that is, according to the Heritage Foundation – so here they are:  
     1. Hong Kong
     2. Singapore
Apparently the Heritage Foundation not only thinks that Singapore and Hong Kong (in fact a part of China) are free, they are the two freest countries on earth. 
 
This says more about the Heritage Foundation than it does about Hong Kong and Singapore.
 
Nicky might reply that the Heritage Foundation only claims that these two countries are “economically” free.  But in Objectivism there is no valid distinction between freedom and economic freedom.  To be truly economically free you must be free.  Neither Hong Kong nor Singapore is anywhere near as free as the U.S.
 
About Hispanics, even if most were white:  the immigration of Hispanics (and also Asians and Blacks) affects the U.S. adversely.  White Hispanics may be better than the rest but most are Catholic and will tend to vote socialist for that reason.  (Catholics – as a group, not just Hispanic – slightly favored Obama in the last two elections, and substantially favored Clinton in his two elections.)
 
The point of my posts is this: An immigration moratorium – like we had before 1968 – will not just be good for us, it is necessary for our survival.
Edited by HandyHandle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whites only ship sailed back around when Hitler lost the war. Things have been going downhill for [whites only] ever since, and they ain't about to turn around. 

 

In hoping / gloating that it won’t Nicky sounds like Tim Wise in  
 
This is the second time Nicky has mentioned Hitler in an attempt to make me look bad.  In reply consider this:
 
There is a sense in which current immigration policy is Adolf Hitler’s posthumous revenge on America.  The U.S. political elite emerged from the war passionately concerned to cleanse itself from all taints of racism and xenophobia.  Eventually it enacted the epochal Immigration Reform Act of 1965.  This triggered a mass immigration so huge and so different from anything that had gone before as to transform — and ultimately to destroy — the one unquestioned victor of World War II. 
 
— paraphrased from Alien Nation (Random House, 1995) by Peter Brimelow.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicky failed to name the top two free countries – free, that is, according to the Heritage Foundation – so here they are:  

     1. Hong Kong

     2. Singapore

Apparently the Heritage Foundation not only thinks that Singapore and Hong Kong (in fact a part of China) are free, they are the two freest countries on earth. 

 

This says more about the Heritage Foundation than it does about Hong Kong and Singapore.

 

Nicky might reply that the Heritage Foundation only claims that these two countries are “economically” free.  But in Objectivism there is no valid distinction between freedom and economic freedom.

No, I would reply that this is the EXACT PHRASE I was replying to, with that fact about the two top countries on the Heritage Economic Freedom Index:

Non-white politics is not just slightly socialist, it is significantly, overwhelmingly, socialist.

Those are your exact words. I quoted them directly, back when I replied with the fact about the Economic Freedom Index. There was no mistaking any of that.

At that point, you were faced with three options, in responding to my very basic factual rebuttal of your claim about non-whites stance on the socialism vs. economic freedom issue:

1. You could've taken it back, admitted that your racism caused you to say something stupid, and rethought your premises.

2. You could've continued to stick with your racist premise, try and explain how that fact doesn't falsify it.

3  You could've acted like a goldfish, forgot what you said two posts ago, and went on a tangent about economic freedom vs. overall freedom as if you weren't talking about economic freedom to begin with. 

 

Your choice, of course, gives me an insight into how your mind works. Or rather, it further validates what I already knew: that racism is the product of an unfocused, irrational mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicky seems to think this thread is about me instead of the immigration disaster.
 
No amount of sophistry will convince me that you would be freer living in  Singapore  or  Hong Kong, China  than in America.
 
Yes, there is the race aspect too.  Singapore might be OK to visit, but do you want to spend the rest of your life surrounded by Orientals?  What’s wrong with wanting to avoid that?  Whom does it harm?
 
Assuming Nicky isn’t Black, does he live in a Black neighborhood?  Is he happy living there?  I wouldn’t be  (brother, I’ve tried it).  Again, whom does your preference harm?  What right of Blacks does it violate?
 
If that kind of racism is evil, why?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicky seems to think this thread is about me instead of the immigration disaster.

 

No amount of sophistry will convince me that you would be freer living in  Singapore  or  Hong Kong, China  than in America.

 

Yes, there is the race aspect too.  Singapore might be OK to visit, but do you want to spend the rest of your life surrounded by Orientals?  What’s wrong with wanting to avoid that?  Whom does it harm?

 

Assuming Nicky isn’t Black, does he live in a Black neighborhood?  Is he happy living there?  I wouldn’t be  (brother, I’ve tried it).  Again, whom does your preference harm?  What right of Blacks does it violate?

 

If that kind of racism is evil, why?

It's not evil, it's stupid. It becomes evil once it starts informing public policy though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...