Sh!thole Nations

Again you make a caricature and have the ability to somehow know what all people are thinking.

 

In a sense this is entrapment. If my girlfriend sneaks into my phone and sees some shit she didn't want to see, then thats not my problem.

 

America was founded on the genocidal slaughter of indigenous people and the holocaust of slavery. It was also founded on an imagined moral superiority and purity of the white race. The fact that dominance of others came, and still comes, from unrestrained acts of violence is washed out of the national narrative - James Baldwin

enough said

 

was actually founded by european settlers but yeah ok.
the time gap from settling to slavery to indian holocaust is quite large. it's rediclous to me, that in that case, you can say a whole nation was founded on genocide and holocaust. because it wasn't it, not from day one.
a lot of the indian massacre and migration happened well after the civil war, from war heroes, decorated men who still wanted to fight. Yankees. America was founded in 1492, the civil war ended in 1865. that 370 odd years alone. founded on slavery and holocaust, my white ass.

but hey, if an author says it, may as well run with it ay.

 

No, youre a pussy because you are equating genocide and slavery with nit picky words and attitudes.

Enough said.

 

Actually one of the first official acts at the first colony in Roanoke, VA in 1585 was to destroy a Native American village, burn it to the ground and destroy their crops over a dispute involving a missing silver cup. History now refers to that first English settlement in the America’s as the Lost Colony of Roanoke

 

so near 100 hundred years after settlement? that's a whole other generation, probably even two in many cases. C'mon man. we're talking about colonial sailors, at youngest maybe what? 15-17 years old go across the world, they would be dead before the battle you speak of. That's not their generation, not the founders generation that did that. That's almost 100 years later, probably by the kids of the grand kids.

I'm not saying it's right or anything, I'm just saying I can't see those timelines making any sense to claim that a whole nation was "founded" on those principals and instances. Doesn't make it any more right, I just can't believe that.

I don't believe the intentions of many "invading" voyages were to be completely peaceful, and it's in our natures instinct to take up arms with cultures they don't know, especially ones they didn't know existed yet, but I don't think from that first day to hell, decades.. the clear intention was to colonise America for slavery and genocide.

 

When I saw this Trump saying shithole countries thing in th news, I think to myself "why is this in the news?" And then almost a week later it is still in the news. It is at the top of the list of things in the news. To me the story is like a curiosity, but no, the story is Trump is awful and that is THE news.

 

That isnt really even close to the truth

First off, like everywhere else, it was disease, especially smallpox that wiped out most of the native americans well before the French/British/Dutch/Spanish settlements even began. Theres over a hundred years of this between Columbus's first landing through to the settlement in Jamestown. Most of those early collonies were founded by trading companies not governments

Secondly, half the immigrants to the British colonies were indentured servants, a fancy term for white slavery along with around 100,000 convicts. There was around 170 years of this in between the founding of Jamestown and the American Revolution

It seems there were only around 1/2 million slaves from Africa sent to North America over a 250 year period, and most of that was between the american revolution and the civil war i.e. It was your founding fathers more so than the europeans that caused the holocaust of slavery

Just before the american revolution, population of the US was 2.5 million, just under 20% of that were blacks, more than double that were white indentured servants and convicts

Slavery in the United States - Wikipedia


Up to 90% of the indigenous population wiped out by disease brought by explorers before settlements began, this was common not only in latin and North America but Australia too. What happened in Tasmania probably the worst of the worst, 90% of the population was killed by disease, tribes that were left just tore each other apart, well before the british started settlements

Population history of indigenous peoples of the Americas - Wikipedia

 

Wow! Completely missed my point. As I said, even if all those things were true (they're not), it has no relevance the the thread at hand. In Africa 200 years ago they were selling each other as slaves. In native America, some tribes were cannibals. What is going on today?

 

I checked my local listing .. I could only find The Jefferson's.

 

The UK is going down the drain pretty fast. I'm not kidding. We're getting into serious shtuck here.

 

This is what happens when people attempt to squeeze 600 years of history into a quick cause and effect analysis. Those pulling the Native Americans card usually neglect to mention there are more of them today than when the Spanish first arrived, or that they fought shoulder to shoulder with the Spanish to rid themselves of the cannibals and blood cults.

While I'm somewhat of a tree hugger, I'm also aware there are more trees in the nation now than there were 200 years ago and that number is increasing. Why? Because only a tiny number of people use trees for fuel the way they did back then.

This is why I try to avoid conversations with people who do this. They are more fixated on pushing a narrative than an actual analysis of history. I keep hearing the claim that slaves built the nation, but that's simply not possible, there weren't enough of them. Also, most white folks in the Americans couldn't possibly afford to keep slaves, it was the domain of the "1%" or so, the wealthy class.

If the US really was the horrible, racist and oppressive nation I keep hearing, it would surely be a very different place today. And the people making these very claims would likely be rounded up and fed to gators in south Florida.

 

When you take the politics out of it, trees are like any other part of our environment. When used as fuel they are carbon neutral. But our infrastructure today is far too demanding to rely on wood for fuel, though it would be a way to retrofit the older coal-burning power plants into something "cleaner" as opposed to just shutting them down. Like immigration, I don't agree with letting every tree grow in a free for all manner. It's not a good way to manage a forest.

The trees that have become unstable, are dead due to lightning strikes or have grown too numerous for the resources of the area, must be culled back. So why not use them as fuel, an option that should already be on the table.

Our population is a similar dilemma. Why bring in people who can't possibly contribute to the betterment of the environment where they are expected to live? If you remove the politics from this question, the answer becomes academic. Unlike the trees though, we can't use excess people for fuel. When we tend a garden do we yank the weeds? Of course we do, they use too much water and spread out in a manner that chokes off the other vegetation. It's not a matter of the "rights" of the weeds, so when the politics is removed, the issue is easy to sort.

It's interesting you choose 1965 as your population solution since that's the very year the US shifted immigration policy. Prior to that we only allowed top tier contributors to immigrate. After that, it became a free for all though not overnight. And I have never understood how we got saddled with "birthright citizenship". Do any other nations allow this? At this point the politics becomes unavoidable. But it's also sharply polarized between the "let's just throw the gates wide open and hope for the best" advocates and the "let's build a wall and filter out all but the doctors, physicists and rich people" cabal.

Caught in the middle are the American people, of all colors, faiths and status. It seems to me that Americans have nearly no friends at all in Washington.

 

I'm glad others found the settlement of America post to be a bit of rubbish and I wasn't the only one lol.

 

I’m well aware of all the facts you generated and yes there were 100 million indigenous people on both continents both North and South before European contact.
10 years later their numbers were reduced by 90%.


Still you haven’t disputed the quote by Black author James Baldwin who offers a unique perspective on race relations through the eyes of director Raoul Peck
in the new documentary “I’m Not Your Negro” I highly recommend you see it.


You suffer from what Baldwin referred to as a “steadfast failure to face the truth which perpetuates a kind of collective psychosis, unable to face the truth, whites stunt and destroy their capacity for self-reflection and self-criticism”

 

Rofl

Yeah VG then maybe you can also read some German texts on WW2 and might change your mind and learn some things

 

Ok, wont argue with you on the African American thing,

But the Native Americans, if it had been the other way around, them trying to colonize Britain or France, you dont think they would have been as brutal or more brutal? Where does this idea that they were all peace loving hippies come from?

 

There's no need to portray them as peaceloving hippies, but the highly hypothetical scenario what the injuns would do if they were the ones discovering and colonizing Europe is just as useless

That there are more native americans now then just after their land and culture was deliberately and forcefully taken from them is also not an excuse for what happened to them because of the european consensus back then about their land and how they were using it. Its rather despicable how with all available knowledge people in this thread are down playing the deliberate rape of native american culture.

 

You are Dutch, your lot started it though. New York started off as a Dutch Colony

You should feel more guilty than anyone