Are people not responsible for their own actions anymore?

BowdonUK said:
The issue I see when it comes to Mexican immigration is nobody is really doing anything about it.

From what I hear of Mexico is it has a very violent underside with a lot of corruption. I've also heard that with the hysteria of immigration becoming a political football, some people who could legally travel to the US think that they have to sneak in. Mexican (and Canadian) immigration rules are less strict than they are for the rest of us.

So if we're saying that Mexico is such a dump that people can't get their identification documents, then isn't it about time the Mexican government was brought in to an international court because thousands of its citizens are literally running/swimming away from their own country? This stuff can't keep going on indefinately. It's not all the US fault for questioning peoples identity. That is only half the problem. The other half is why are people running away from Mexico?
Click to expand...
The Mexican government is aiding the emigration of its citizens to USA because it hopes to be able in the future to retake the southwestern US states which it lost to the USA in the past.
Mexicans flood into California, Arizona, Texas >>>>> those states secede >>>>>> those states vote to join Mexico.
 
vanillaface said:
You're talking about the time of the cold war.
Consider the US had not meddled in the Americas, and instead had allowed them to become communist dictatorships.
Look at Venezuela now: are the Venezuelan people fleeing Venezuela or not fleeing Venezuela?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's relevant to consider it - then is then and now is now; it's impossible to say what would have happened with no intervention and we can only take a view on what did actually happen. The US meddled with the political landscape of Central America in the 1980s. They put stooges in top positions, and those stooges screwed their own populations over for personal wealth. There's a high chance we're seeing the results of that meddling bear fruit now - the people born during those times are fleeing. And the US, a massive if not the main contributor, is trying to build a wall to keep them out.
 
toshj said:
I don't think it's relevant to consider it - then is then and now is now; it's impossible to say what would have happened with no intervention and we can only take a view on what did actually happen. The US meddled with the political landscape of Central America in the 1980s. They put stooges in top positions, and those stooges screwed their own populations over for personal wealth. There's a high chance we're seeing the results of that meddling bear fruit now - the people born during those times are fleeing. And the US, a massive if not the main contributor, is trying to build a wall to keep them out.
Click to expand...
Well, if the commies had been allowed to take those countries, then not only would the leaders have screwed over their own populations for personal wealth, but millions would have died also.

The beauty of not intervening is that a people are then responsible for their own affairs, but non-intervention was not an option at the time, since the Soviets were already intervening.
Was the US supposed to keep out of it and instead allow South and Central America to become communist, with Soviet troops and nukes stationed there?

The reason that people are trying to enter the US is that the US effectively wants these immigrants; otherwise, it would not allow it to happen.
Israel does not allow migrants to flood over its borders. Why? Because it does not want them. Since migrants know that Israel does not want them, they do not try to go there.
The reason that the EU has such high immigration is because it wants them. This is why the migrants come.

The mass emigration from various countries around the world is catastrophic for them, since those are the very people who are needed to develop those countries.
 
cheesyboy said:
So what's the story with the dude, a long-time lurker with a username referencing his skin colour, suddenly becoming active to spray white-supremacist nonsense all over this thread?!

Kind of disturbing how attractive his views are to some of our regulars.
Click to expand...

Their views pale into insignificance when compared to yours.
 
cheesyboy said:
a username referencing his skin colour, suddenly becoming active to spray white-supremacist nonsense all over this thread?!
Click to expand...

My skin colour?
Are you assuming my ethnicity? :D
Does anyone know if assuming someone's ethnicity is worse than assuming their gender, and if I can get him/her/xir arrested for this?

"White-supremacist" is merely one of the NPC-esque phrases used to try and shut down people in the West who don't want their society ruined.
Racist, xenophobe, bigot, little Englander are others.
All of them have zero effect on me, and an increasing number of other people, who will never, ever be discouraged from opposing the globalist plan to destroy our nations.

But, cheesyboy, you can certainly try.
I would recommend calling me a "Nazi" next. If that doesn't work, then you could try "knuckle-dragger"; that's a good one. Or "Daily Mail reader", perhaps. There's loads you can try. Give it a go. Also, "transphobe" might work, maybe. Maybe "misogynist" would defeat me. Oh crap, I'm doing your work for you.
 
All your posts read like they are copy pasted out of the comments section of a Paul Joseph Watson or Stefan Molyneux YouTube video.

I’m being genuinely objective when I say your posts make you sound like a cultist. Lots of other right wingers on this forum make similar points to you but they manage to not come across as slightly unhinged when doing so.
 
vanillaface said:
The beauty of not intervening is that a people are then responsible for their own affairs, but non-intervention was not an option at the time, since the Soviets were already intervening.
Was the US supposed to keep out of it and instead allow South and Central America to become communist, with Soviet troops and nukes stationed there?
Click to expand...

That's kind of the point. They stopped the Russians from installing their own people... and then simply did the exact same thing but installed people at the complete other end of the spectrum. The US didn't intervene for the good of the local populations, they did it for their own socio-economic purposes and to gain a political foothold which they could then leverage for years to come.

They were just as bad for the people as any communist or Russian intervention. The problem for the US is that it's not exactly located too far from Central America... and they're now reaping what they sowed by having an awful time of it by the border.

I don't think any of us can sit here and criticise individuals/families looking to secure safety from countries littered with violence, crime, drugs and other terrible issues. We don't know what those families have faced and to sit here in the comfort of a developed world and throw accusations at them seems (more than) a little callous...
 
neckbeardthethird said:
All your posts read like they are copy pasted out of the comments section of a Paul Joseph Watson or Stefan Molyneux YouTube video.

I’m being genuinely objective when I say your posts make you sound like a cultist. Lots of other right wingers on this forum make similar points to you but they manage to not come across as slightly unhinged when doing so.
Click to expand...
Anti-globalism is a cult.
I've never heard that one before, haha.

"Slightly unhinged" - the commies used to do the same thing. Anyone who didn't follow the party line was denounced as mentally ill. They would be taken away for "re-education", which would mean being separated from their family, all of whom would be taken to camps.

None of this is going to have the slightest effect on me.

Btw, PJW is funny. You should watch his videos.
SM is a highly intelligent man. He'll do more for you even than adopting a diet of oily fish.
 
vanillaface said:
My skin colour?
Are you assuming my ethnicity? :D
Does anyone know if assuming someone's ethnicity is worse than assuming their gender, and if I can get him/her/xir arrested for this?

"White-supremacist" is merely one of the NPC-esque phrases used to try and shut down people in the West who don't want their society ruined.
Racist, xenophobe, bigot, little Englander are others.
All of them have zero effect on me, and an increasing number of other people, who will never, ever be discouraged from opposing the globalist plan to destroy our nations.

But, cheesyboy, you can certainly try.
I would recommend calling me a "Nazi" next. If that doesn't work, then you could try "knuckle-dragger"; that's a good one. Or "Daily Mail reader", perhaps. There's loads you can try. Give it a go. Also, "transphobe" might work, maybe. Maybe "misogynist" would defeat me. Oh crap, I'm doing your work for you.
Click to expand...
You mad bro? You sound mad.
 
toshj said:
That's kind of the point. They stopped the Russians from installing their own people... and then simply did the exact same thing but installed people at the complete other end of the spectrum. The US didn't intervene for the good of the local populations, they did it for their own socio-economic purposes and to gain a political foothold which they could then leverage for years to come.

They were just as bad for the people as any communist or Russian intervention. The problem for the US is that it's not exactly located too far from Central America... and they're now reaping what they sowed by having an awful time of it by the border.

I don't think any of us can sit here and criticise individuals/families looking to secure safety from countries littered with violence, crime, drugs and other terrible issues. We don't know what those families have faced and to sit here in the comfort of a developed world and throw accusations at them seems (more than) a little callous...
Click to expand...

You're making the mistake of believing that the opposite ends of a spectrum are equal. They are not.

The migrants are economic migrants. They are seeking to better their lot in life. They are seeking to do it at the expense of the people living in the country to which they wish to emigrate.
They are welcome to apply to immigrate legally.
They are like other criminals who wish to better their lot at the expense of others.
 
vanillaface said:
Anti-globalism is a cult.
Click to expand...

You denounce communism, and yet you also denounce capitalism by being anti-globalism, so what is it, what do you actually want?

Or maybe you can explain how globalism isn't capitalism-max?

And no i will NOT accept a ****** youtube video.
 
Last edited:
vanillaface said:
The Mexican government is aiding the emigration of its citizens to USA because it hopes to be able in the future to retake the southwestern US states which it lost to the USA in the past.
Mexicans flood into California, Arizona, Texas >>>>> those states secede >>>>>> those states vote to join Mexico.
Click to expand...

Though I understand the idealogy of some Mexicans for that, I don't think the average person crossing the border is thinking in those terms, especially when they are taking their children. I'm sure they are just wanting a better life for their kids.

So the question needs to be asked of how we can solve this problem of south americans feeling the need to head north. I'm sure with the right investment in to Mexico, and reduced corruption, it would be a very good place in its own right.
 
BowdonUK said:
Though I understand the idealogy of some Mexicans for that, I don't think the average person crossing the border is thinking in those terms, especially when they are taking their children. I'm sure they are just wanting a better life for their kids.

So the question needs to be asked of how we can solve this problem of south americans feeling the need to head north. I'm sure with the right investment in to Mexico, and reduced corruption, it would be a very good place in its own right.
Click to expand...

Literally the point of globalism, it's an explicit side effect.
 
vanillaface said:
Anti-globalism is a cult.
I've never heard that one before, haha.

"Slightly unhinged" - the commies used to do the same thing. Anyone who didn't follow the party line was denounced as mentally ill. They would be taken away for "re-education", which would mean being separated from their family, all of whom would be taken to camps.

None of this is going to have the slightest effect on me.

Btw, PJW is funny. You should watch his videos.
SM is a highly intelligent man. He'll do more for you even than adopting a diet of oily fish.
Click to expand...

Far from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom