quote:The United States was expected to be, but clearly is not, a confederation of independed States, much like the E.U.
I believe you are thinking of the United States under the Articles of Confederation. Those didn't work and we adopted a system that shed the idea of independent States. What it was expected to be for 11 years is not as important as what it's become in the 219 years since then.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I am talking about the United States before the Civil War. I have actualy no idea why Dagonee brought this up, however, as it appears totaly irrelevent to the topic at hand, in my humble opinion. The United States was expected to be a collection of states, but is in fact one federal state.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I said that the U.S. was a state, you then said that it was not States. How can we possibly be arguing over something which a. is self-evident and b. we agree on?
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, I said that the U.S. was a state, you then said that it was not States.
You said: "it is the basis of the argument here, as the United States was founded on the priciple, as I have endevored to explain, of being a state of nations."
I then said "It might have been founded on that principle, but that is not the principle upon which it currently rests."
You brought up the subject of the United States. I added additional information to a subject you brought up.
Why the hell did you feel the need to say, "I have actualy no idea why Dagonee brought this up, however, as it appears totaly irrelevent to the topic at hand, in my humble opinion." How the hell is the structure of the United States before the Civil War relevant to the topic at hand if the structure of the United States now isn't?
quote:How can we possibly be arguing over something which a. is self-evident and b. we agree on?
Because you're asserting something that is inaccurate - namely, that I brought this up - and also bitching about the relevancy of the topic which, again, you brought up.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am confused, the United States is A. a state and B. a state of nations, as opose to a nation-state. That is all I said and all I meant to say when I said that "it is the basis of the argument here, as the United States was founded on the priciple, as I have endevored to explain, of being a state of nations."
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said you didn't know why I brought it up. I explained that you brought it up the subject of the U.S. as a collection of states and I expanded on the current state of that principle.
Why is that confusing to you?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I only said it was a state of nations. I am not sure that a nation of states means anything, but I suppose that the Slavs, Celts and Turkic people could claim that. I am actualy prefering this discusion, surreal though it may be, to the one before.
I think all add to the surreality Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm disappointed. No one has brought up how we are a nation of immigrants--indeed, illegal immigrants--and thus ought to welcome further immigrants.
If they had, I'd be pleased to ask them how the Native Americans handled their illegal immigrant problem, you think maybe I could check at the Cherokee embassy?
Oh well...I probably should not get too snarky. I've been awake too long.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:No one has brought up how we are a nation of immigrants--indeed, illegal immigrants--and thus ought to welcome further immigrants.
While I'm sure there are many of us here with illegal immigrant blood, it should be pointed out that some of us are in fact, the children of legal immigrants. Not everyone who came to this country did so illegally.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The situation in America today is radically different from the one in the early 20th to early 19th centuries.
Those differences, I think, make the type of immigration we welcomed (and that some fought) back then a bad choice for today's America.
The land is settled, the nation is built, the infrastructure long since laid and formed. We're among the other nations in the world in our constant growth, but we are no longer a nation in the flower of youth. Like many, we're still trying to find our way, after a fashion.
I'll always be a supporter of some form of immigration, we cannot close off the borders. But we are becoming a nation of turmoil and problems. Internally formed, internally fought. I think the best thing for America right now is to fix our internal problems, make America flourish as a land of hope for all, then welcome the tired and poor as a nation willing and able to better help them. America shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme for the world's poor.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:America shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme for the world's poor.
America is hardly a get rich quick scheme. If that was how immigrants viewed it, I don't understand why they're working hard at menial jobs that will most likely never make them rich. America represents an opportunity to better your situation through hard work. That is exactly what I think it should stay.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I support immigration, because without it my family wouldn't be here. However, that doesn't mean I support throwing away every and all control over our borders.
Allowing an amnesty, then saying the next day "Look, we don't have an illegal immigrant problem anymore." doesn't work.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you mean no has pointed it out? I have spent the last page defending the view of the United States as a state of immigrants, or a state of nations, the term I used in contrast to nation-state.
Kwea, heavan forbid that there be less burreacracy Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"We're all immigrants" just doesn't hold any meaning for me. After all, regardless of how you view the rise of human beings, it's doubtful that anyone has a family line that is tied to the same place since "the beginning."
It's like saying the grass is green - true, but it doesn't really add anything to a discussion.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:America shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme for the world's poor.
America is hardly a get rich quick scheme. If that was how immigrants viewed it, I don't understand why they're working hard at menial jobs that will most likely never make them rich. America represents an opportunity to better your situation through hard work. That is exactly what I think it should stay.
I think my point was that the world's poor looks at America as the solution to their problem, rather than any effort being made to better the nation they live in. Now, I don't blame them for that, as the problems in the majority of their home countries are not of their making, they are the making of the oligarchs, the rebels, the government, the tyrant, or the British. It isn't their fault, but at the same time, immigration to America as some sort of promised land is NOT a god given right.
The world should be doing a better job at making the third world, and for that matter, the first world nations with high poverty levels, more liveable for every man, woman and child. That means investing in the third world, and not just throwing money at them and letting them kill each other with it. Or in general, throwing money at them and then patting ourselves on the back.
But at the end of the day, my main problem with such high levels of immigration is that America isn't at its best. We have so many internal problems that have been brushed under the rug in the last two decades, we need to fix those before we can welcome anyone else into our homes. It's time to clean house, not have a house party.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
'American' jobs do not belong to native-born Americans by some sacred god-given right either, Lyrhawn. I know you haven't suggested that they do, I'm just pointing it out.
I hear a lot of that rhetoric about jobs in America being 'ours' and 'they should go to Americans'. This from the same people who otherwise will buy at the cheapest price they can, shopping at Wal-Mart and saying to hell with doing good for American workers beyond them simply having a job at all.
No, that argument isn't really about protecting American jobs for Americans. It's really about keeping them out, because we're not comfortable with them.
Why don't they stay in their own homes and make those a better place? Well, that's a good point. But please do bear in mind that as white male Americans in the 20th and 21st centuries, we were born on third base. We didn't hit a triple, y'know what I mean? It's awfully easy to sit in our air conditioning, shortly before driving to work in our insured automobiles at our forty-hour a week jobs (largely without corruption) and tell everyone else, "Fix your own homes, don't come here!"
My thoughts on immigration are very much tempered by the certainty that if I were born in a third-world nation, and if by crossing a border illegally I could suddenly multiply my wages, standard of living, safety, and the promise of all of those things for my children many score over...I'd do it in a heartbeat. I'd listen to Americans whine about how awful it is that their nation is being 'invaded' whilst I'm mowing one of their lawns, or picking some of their food...all at wages and standards much, much better than home. And still pretty crappy by American standards-which is what I'd be working for for my children.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, I don't disagree with you overall. But, I do think American jobs should go to those here legally.
We need more legal immigration / work programs, not an open border. And if that means a wall, so be it.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
People here legally should have first dibs on a job, assuming they want it. But there are many (not all) jobs that illegals do in worse conditions for less money, and the supply of willing workers frequently just isn't there.
Furthermore, I am not saying there isn't any rationale behind that reasoning. I just get irritated when people put it under anything but strictly law-abiding terms.
But I have different irritants with the rule-of-law argument, because to most Americans there are laws and then there are laws.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: Here, here, Rakeesh.
-Bok
Adding my applause. Especially to the "we were born on third base" part. A just world is the world we would create if we didn't know who our parents would be.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Part of living in America is the ability to pass your things on to your children, improving their chances in life.
I refuse to feel ashamed because I was born here, even though that seems to be what a lot of people are trying to do...make people ashamed of our standard of living, and our situation in life.
I don't see many people going there, giving up their lives in the US, and living among the poor and deprived in Mexico (or any other poor, corrupt place).
And I don't appreciate people inferring that every person who opposes a completely open, porous border, is somehow racist.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who said anything about shame? And who said I don't oppose a completely open, porous border? I was speaking of the kinds of people who think that American jobs are theirs by some sacred birthright, or something. It's a rhetoric I've heard before. Oftentimes, such people are racist in matters of immigration.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact of the matter is despite our rhetoric about being a 'beacon of freedom', etc. etc., we often live our freedom and our standards of life at the expense of others who were less fortunate in their birthright.
There is something to be ashamed of in that, perhaps. But it's nothing more than pretty much every other nation on Earth is guilty of, too.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious how the people supporting the illegal aliens (especially the Mexican ones) feel about Mexico's treatment of their illegal aliens?
EDIT: I forgot to add this article where Mexico is criticizing Georgia for their new anti-illegal immigration law calling it "discriminating against Mexicans".
posted
Interesting article Eisenoxyde. To answer your question, I feel that Mexico's treatment of its illegal aliens is pretty horrible and I'm glad that we strive for a higher standard.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amanecer - but what about their government demanding that *we* let their people come here with a free pass? (And encouraging their people to come here any way they can.)
quote:But please do bear in mind that as white male Americans in the 20th and 21st centuries, we were born on third base. We didn't hit a triple, y'know what I mean?
You know, this attitude gets under my skin. My husband and I are white, and we're probably considered upper middle class, maybe even rich depending on what scale you use.
And not a single bit of the wealth we've earned was given to us. I'd love to meet all these born on third base white males who sit around and get a check from somewhere because they're white and male and don't need to work for a living.
I have a lot of friends who are well off as well, and not a single one of us were trust fund babies. I only know of one or two whose parents actually paid for their college education, the rest of us had to make do with either scholarships, loans, or working through college to pay our own way. None of us went to ritzy private schools or to schools in all-white suburban neighborhoods, for that matter. My husband went to a high school in which whites were the minority.
In my circle of friends are many people who started out poor or middle class, and now earn much more than their parents. My parents declared bankruptcy, lost their home to foreclosure and had their car repossessed when I was in high school. I did not come from a privileged background. Same with my husband - his father was a math teacher and his mom a stay-at-home mom. Wes and I are where we are today because we worked our butts off to get here, and we're still working to improve our lives and to set up a good future for our children, which is why I'm finishing my degree and going back to work and he's starting a new business.
I'm sick of hearing how we have it easy because we're white. It hasn't been easy. It's taken determination and work ethic and no one ever gave us a darn thing. My parents never paid one cent toward higher education for me, I've done it all on my own. There are plenty of opportunities for people to get ahead in this country, that's why so many people want to come here. Yes you may start off poor and in a bad neighborhood with perhaps not-so-good public schools but if you apply yourself and try and are determined and have a good work ethic you can succeed, regardless of your color or gender. There is no magic pill that turns all white males born in America rich.
I live in a county that is 98% white and yet has a high poverty percentage. Not all poor people are minorities and not all white people live on easy street.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I don't think most people here would qualify as "rich", even the poorest of us have it pretty good (and have always had it pretty good) compared to most of those who risk their lives to get here.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I acknowledge that, and love that I was born in America. I just resent being told I have it better than everyone else in America because I'm white.
It's much more fair to say that my kids have an advantage, being born into a two-parent home, upper middle class, and living in a low-crime area with good schools. That's fair. They do have advantages over inner-city kids who have to walk through metal detectors to get to class. (and we've worked darn hard to give our kid that advantage)
But to say they have an advantage just because they're white? No, that's where I disagree. I could drive five minutes away from my house and show you dozens of white families living in abject poverty, their race certainly didn't give them some magic potion that makes life easier.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my opinion, it isn't so much a matter of race as it is being born in this society that gives us a head start.
edit to add: No one is suggesting that our "head start" means we don't have to do some running ourselves.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My accomplishments aren't worth any less because I'm a WASP.
It's not even being recognized for my accomplishments, actually I spend a lot more time focused on what I deem as failures I've had - such as not finishing school the first time around and having to go back now at 34.
It's more about recognizing that yes, some people do have advantages over others, but they aren't necessarily linked to race. I think the economic status you're born into says a lot more about how "easy" you're going to find success in life. But even being born into the most privileged of situations is not a guarantee of personal success, you still have to work for a living to make it in this world. (unless you're one of the afore mentioned trust fund babies) And in the real world, being white is no guarantor of success.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Amanecer - but what about their government demanding that *we* let their people come here with a free pass? (And encouraging their people to come here any way they can.)
posted
kmbboots, I don't really like the idea of a 'head start.' That implies that it's all a race, and that those with a 'head start' are cheating those who are running the race according to the rules.
Belle, I understand now.
<rant>
I remember in college this one non-white kid complaining about how many disadvantages he's had to overcome. He then went on to gripe that they could only afford a 'small' house in Atlanta, and other stuff. Finally someone asked him the question that we were all thinking... how much, exactly, did his parents bring home a year? It was close to a million dollars.
I wanted to beat the snot out of him. Pulling the race card when his parents made close to 50 times what mine did? I'd really like to know what disadvantages he's overcome that I had to.
I don't really care about race and disadvantage - it's all about economic status, for me. I was on a committee at Emory with faculty and admissions staff, and they kept going on and on about "racial diversity" in the upcoming student body, and how it was such a step in the right direction with regard to righting past wrongs. I raised my hand and asked about economic diversity. It kinda got quiet, then the dean of admissions admitted that about 40% of the kids admitted came from families with 250k+ income a year. Yeah Emory, way to go. You sure picked those who had overcome huge disadvantages to admit! My family's income was in the bottom 5. Don't break your arms patting yourself on the back. In fact, let me do it for you.
posted
I didn't meant to imply that there is anything wrong with a "head start", just that our good fortune needs to be recognized as good fortune rather than something that we earned - or something that others have failed to deserve.
I also want to be clear that I am not talking about race.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm sick of hearing how we have it easy because we're white. It hasn't been easy. It's taken determination and work ethic and no one ever gave us a darn thing.
Hard work and a strong work ethic are only "parts" of what is needed to achieve a good standard of living--it also takes a system where economic growth is possible.
My problem with illegal immigrants is not race. I love immigration. My wife immigrated (legally). I am even grateful for the illegal immigrants who contribute to society. As a parent I certainly emphasize with anyone who tries to come here to get a better life for themselves or their kids. Rakeesh hit the nail on the head when s/he said:
quote:My thoughts on immigration are very much tempered by the certainty that if I were born in a third-world nation, and if by crossing a border illegally I could suddenly multiply my wages, standard of living, safety, and the promise of all of those things for my children many score over...I'd do it in a heartbeat.
But I ultimately agree with TheHumanTarget when s/he wrote
quote: However, I think it's important to remember that uncontrolled immigration (illegal) is a threat. Not at the individual level where illegal immigrants are our friends, or coworkers, or neighbors, but as a whole, where they threaten to overwhelm our social systems.
America has a system that works for a lot of people. Belle can work hard, have a strong work ethic, and achieve a nice lifestyle. She should not feel guilty. Her behavior should be emulated by people who want the same success.
It is possible because of our economy, government, laws, et cetera. If illegal immigration is not put in check, I don't see how our system can survive. If it is overwhelmed and crashes everyone suffers. If it is nurtured, there is success for many and a beacon of hope for many more.
Immigrants add a lot to our economy. I don't dispute that illegal immigrants add to our economy--but porous borders next to a country with millions of desperate people needing to flee surely poses a grave threat to our system. Illegal immigrants in Phoenix are a strain on public resources funded by taxes. Crimes and gangs also seem to increase in areas with high levels of illegal immigrants.
Surely we can find a method of making it possible to allow more legal workers and turning back more illegal immigrants. At least Congress’s actions are spurring the debate forward.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't dispute that illegal immigrants add to our economy--but porous borders next to a country with millions of desperate people needing to flee surely poses a grave threat to our system.
Agreed. I have no trouble with guest worker status, if the person can stay in the US, hold down steady employment for a certain period (save 5 years or so), then they should be allowed to apply for citizenship. That type of system would allow employers looking for labor and laborers looking for work to get together, legally, and allows a way for those who truly do want to come here and work to improve their lot a way to do so.
I agree with you, lem, that just opening up our borders to any and all who will come is not in our nation's best interest. It will put a strain on social services. I don't know about the crime issue, but I know from hearing anecdotal evidence from cops and firefighters that crime is very high in areas with lots of immigrant families, especially domestic violence.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: 'American' jobs do not belong to native-born Americans by some sacred god-given right either, Lyrhawn. I know you haven't suggested that they do, I'm just pointing it out.
I hear a lot of that rhetoric about jobs in America being 'ours' and 'they should go to Americans'. This from the same people who otherwise will buy at the cheapest price they can, shopping at Wal-Mart and saying to hell with doing good for American workers beyond them simply having a job at all.
No, that argument isn't really about protecting American jobs for Americans. It's really about keeping them out, because we're not comfortable with them.
Why don't they stay in their own homes and make those a better place? Well, that's a good point. But please do bear in mind that as white male Americans in the 20th and 21st centuries, we were born on third base. We didn't hit a triple, y'know what I mean? It's awfully easy to sit in our air conditioning, shortly before driving to work in our insured automobiles at our forty-hour a week jobs (largely without corruption) and tell everyone else, "Fix your own homes, don't come here!"
My thoughts on immigration are very much tempered by the certainty that if I were born in a third-world nation, and if by crossing a border illegally I could suddenly multiply my wages, standard of living, safety, and the promise of all of those things for my children many score over...I'd do it in a heartbeat. I'd listen to Americans whine about how awful it is that their nation is being 'invaded' whilst I'm mowing one of their lawns, or picking some of their food...all at wages and standards much, much better than home. And still pretty crappy by American standards-which is what I'd be working for for my children.
Oh I quite agree with you Rakeesh, though I do think that Americans born here should get first dibs, and mostly they do. Still, how fair is it to the American construction worker or the American landscaper when an illegal can come in and work for next to nothing and thus undercut him? I guess my argument there is actually for more legalized immigration. I'd rather have more immigrants here legally than illegally so they are protected by wage laws. It levels the playing field.
And I do understand what you are saying about being a few steps ahead in America. I hear a lot of my own thoughts echoing in Belle's words about the anger with people who assume that white people in America just automatically get everything when that is not the reality. But the fact of the matter is there is a system set up here to help give us the chance to work hard and actually get somewhere. Hard work isn't an automatic path to success in third world countries.
However, and I've said this before on here, the first world should do more to make sure that hard work in the third world DOES give them a chance at success. It's been done all over Africa on the small scale, with entrepreneurs lending small business loans to individuals who paid it back with minimal interest and made their lives better. It's an investment in humanity, in the target nation, in the first world nations that want more equality and less exodus, and in our own selfish future interests in selling them useless crap. Everyone wins. But they shouldn't give up right off the bat and head for the border.
Also, I'm not sure if somewhere in there you called me a racist, but my argument for or against illegal immigration has zero to do with the fact that it is hispanics coming here. If the country south of us was populated by Germans, British, Chinese, or whatever I'd still have precisely the same position. I don't think god gifted America to me alone, or the rest of the American people (American race? Part of why I'm curious about the racist argument, but that's for another post).
I just think America has too many problems that are effected by large numbers of immigrants, and trying to fix them while not plugging the holes, is like trying to fix leaks in a boat without first taking it out of the water. It's easier to fix a leak in drydock, then we can put to water again safely and more easily and fairly allow increased immigration.
The whole argument comes down to control. America needs to be in control of itself, it needs a measure of control over it's safety, it's future, it's security. It needs to be able to control how many people get in, and of what number of them are skilled and unskilled. Often times the arguments FOR an explosion in immigration come off as arguments AGAINST control.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I live in a county that is 98% white and yet has a high poverty percentage. Not all poor people are minorities and not all white people live on easy street.
Had I been speaking strictly of Americans in America, I think your complaints about my statement would be more on point. However I was speaking about white Americans in America when compared to all of humanity.
Do you disagree with my assessment under those circumstances? Being born on third isn't necessarily easy, but it is easier. For, say, an African farmer to attain the same standard of living and security of physical welfare in Africa, he'd have to work much, much harder than you would doing so in Alabama. It doesn't mean you were sitting there born with a silver spoon, it means that when compared to him...you had it pretty damn easy.
And so did I, please bear that in mind.
quote:But they shouldn't give up right off the bat and head for the border.
Why not? Just because it's their country? Because they were born within an arbitrary set of geographical lines? I am loyal to my nation because it is loyal to me, to an extent. And to my family, my fellow citizens, my neighbors, and so on and so forth. But if I lived in a place where quite a few of my infant children died, if there were warlords rampaging up and down my street every year or so, if there was constant flooding and epedimics...I'd leave. I'd bug out. I'm not going to blame anyone who does.
quote:I live in a county that is 98% white and yet has a high poverty percentage. Not all poor people are minorities and not all white people live on easy street.
This is a country, God bless it, where the poor often have a better standard of living than the rich in some third world nations. It is that standard by which I made my baseball analogy.
quote:But to say they have an advantage just because they're white? No, that's where I disagree. I could drive five minutes away from my house and show you dozens of white families living in abject poverty, their race certainly didn't give them some magic potion that makes life easier.
Which family do you think is better off in America? Your family, or a hypothetical family which makes precisely the same amount of money, has the same job security, the same healthiness, etc. etc., but who is African-American, or Hispanic, or Asian?
The problem is obviously nowhere near as bad as it once was, but to suggest as you are doing that whites and minorities in America are equal in opportunity as you are...well, that's just not the world I see. I'm talking real-world opportunity, not the kinds of opportunities that exist for exceptions, but for the rules.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Why not? Just because it's their country? Because they were born within an arbitrary set of geographical lines? I am loyal to my nation because it is loyal to me, to an extent. And to my family, my fellow citizens, my neighbors, and so on and so forth. But if I lived in a place where quite a few of my infant children died, if there were warlords rampaging up and down my street every year or so, if there was constant flooding and epedimics...I'd leave. I'd bug out. I'm not going to blame anyone who does.
I suppose I wouldn't blame them for trying either. Doesn't mean they all automatically get to actually come here though. I think it's a two way street, if we're willing to help them, and really help, not just the useless money throwing schemes of the past, but not full on nation building, then I think they should stay and work to make their nation something to be proud of. The reason I think many of them leave is despair and hope. Right now they have every reason to despair, and every reason to hope for a better life somewhere else.
Take away their despair and give them a reason to hope for a better life where they were born and it'd be a good step towards raising the standard of living for all of humanity, not just the lucky few who happened to be born in south and central America and can walk or hitch a ride to America.
It's true that national lines are arbitraty and unfair, and you can use that argument to justify migration in the north and south American continents. Anyone can also use some higher moral argument about humanity deserving a better life in general, and that we'd understand why they'd leave, hell, we'd do it too if we were them. But if we're going to go down that road, one of empathy and understanding, why not take it a step further and not ignore those unlucky enough to live an ocean away, and talk about helping them to help themselves too, and in the process, also help ourselves.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some of the biggest racists I have ever met were minorities themselves, so I don't but the "race=hardship" line myself. I am not saying that racism isn't an issue, because it is at times, but economic issues are a FAR greater issue in this country than race is, at least in my experience.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, the not-listening-to-qualifiers is getting frustrating. I did not say, "Race=hardship." I said, "Race=morehardship, if you're in the minority."
So please, guys, remember that's what I'm actually saying. It's incredibly ironic for me to listen to myself labeled as playing the race card.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Which family do you think is better off in America? Your family, or a hypothetical family which makes precisely the same amount of money, has the same job security, the same healthiness, etc. etc., but who is African-American, or Hispanic, or Asian?
Why would they not be considered as well off as me if they have all the same things - the same economic status, job security, etc.? Are you insinuating there is something inherently bad about being African-American, Asian, or Hispanic that makes them inferior to me even if they have all the same things I do?
We have African-American neighbors who are at least as well-off financially as we are, perhaps more (I happen to know what their house was listed at, and if they paid the listing amount they spent a lot more on their home than we did on ours) and I would never take the stand that "Oh, it must be terrible for this highly successful family to be African-American, they would be so much better off if they were white." I wonder if I asked them if they wished they were born white what they'd say. I have a feeling they are proud of their heritage and cultural roots as African-Americans and would not want to give that up for whatever benefit you think there would be for them to be white.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is a country, God bless it, where the poor often have a better standard of living than the rich in some third world nations. It is that standard by which I made my baseball analogy.
But your analogy didn't say that. You didn't say "Guys, those of us born in America already start on third base because even our poor are rich compared to people in third world countries."
Had you said that, I would have had no problem with it. But no, you specifically singled out white males and made the analogy about THEM.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
