NationStates Jolt Archive

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to Utah County GOP Chairwoman Marian Monnahan, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Mrs. Monnahan, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635

Isn't she the one responding to the media about this rather than the one endorsing it

Isn't she the one responding to the media about this rather than the one endorsing it

You are correct. Fixed.

I'm glad Jesus is on OUR side.



I cant think of anything funny yet,using both "holy water" and "wet-backs".

Quick! Consecrate the border and the Mexi-devils won't be able to cross!

I love how the article made it clear that the Latino community had to search for diplomatic words to respond to this. Since my initial reaction was something like 'crazy-ass motherfucker', I'd have to do some searching for politeness, too.

Then some people ask why we in Latin America do not like the english called America. I know not everyone there hate us, but it seems there are enough of them, specially leaders, that seem to loathe us. The hatred is spreaded mutually.

I would prefer to go to most countries in the world than to the US. For me, the USA ranks as high as Iran in my "friendly countries to visit".

so do we start calling them Dexicans now, or something?

I love how the article made it clear that the Latino community had to search for diplomatic words to respond to this. Since my initial reaction was something like 'crazy-ass motherfucker', I'd have to do some searching for politeness, too.
I can imagine the Utah Mexican community wondering ¿Cómo se dice pendejo loco en ingles?

I can imagine the Utah Mexican community wondering ¿Cómo se dice pendejo loco en ingles?

I am pretty sure they know how to say it. ¿Cómo se lo decimos sin que se dé cuenta? was for sure a more asked question.

Then some people ask why we in Latin America do not like the english called America. I know not everyone there hate us, but it seems there are enough of them, specially leaders, that seem to loathe us. The hatred is spreaded mutually.

I would prefer to go to most countries in the world than to the US. For me, the USA ranks as high as Iran in my "friendly countries to visit".

You'll find that most folks in the US are right friendly-like, even to furriners. There are a few assholes in every country, but don't let that stop you from visiting. You'd miss the Great Lakes and the Rocky Mountains and New York and... lots of stuff. Besides, my step-aunt (not claiming an actual relation to that bitch) is from Chile and I haven't seen one single person treat her badly because of her origin.

Then some people ask why we in Latin America do not like the english called America. I know not everyone there hate us, but it seems there are enough of them, specially leaders, that seem to loathe us. The hatred is spreaded mutually.

I would prefer to go to most countries in the world than to the US. For me, the USA ranks as high as Iran in my "friendly countries to visit".

Every group of immigrants has faced some discrimination when they started entering the US in large numbers. It happened to the Italians, the Irish, the Poles, and now to the Hispanics. In a few years it will die down.

You'll find that most folks in the US are right friendly-like, even to furriners. There are a few assholes in every country, but don't let that stop you from visiting. You'd miss the Great Lakes and the Rocky Mountains and New York and... lots of stuff. Besides, my step-aunt (not claiming an actual relation to that bitch) is from Chile and I haven't seen one single person treat her badly because of her origin.

What's a furriner?

And yes, I mourn specially for the Great Lakes, and Michigan. And Boston, I don't know why I like Boston. And many other wonders and marvelous things you country have. And people too, I know most of you aren't a bad lot.

The problem is that I know there are also some bad, bad people, and armed with guns, so I tend to avoid that kind of things if possible. (In my country it is unavoidable, but that happens).

Where do these people come from? :confused:

Where do these people come from? :confused:

That big middle part of the US away from the coasts.

so do we start calling them Dexicans now, or something?

Mexevil, surely?

Every group of immigrants has faced some discrimination when they started entering the US in large numbers. It happened to the Italians, the Irish, the Poles, and now to the Hispanics. In a few years it will die down.

At this rate, I will die down first, so my point stands. Mexicans and latin people in general have been going to the US for decades.

At this rate, I will die down first, so my point stands.

I find that unlikely...

That big middle part of the US away from the coasts.

Oh yes, the state with the Mormons ...

Where do these people come from? :confused:

I think they spring fully formed from the festering boil of WTFness that is Utah.

What worries me was that this guy was elected (or is that a non-elect position?).

I think they spring fully formed from the festering boil of WTFness that is Utah.

I dont know what the people out there are thinking, bu thave you ever spent any time in the Utah countryside?

Its got some of the most beautiful,picturesque places on earth. I love it out there.

Quickly, get as many priests, pastors, and bible bashers as we can! We have a border to fortify! WHile we are at it we can wear aluminum foil hats to keep the aliens from reading our thoughts and check each other for barcodes just to prove that none of us are clones created by communist nations like CHina that will all simultaniously realize thier true objectives and be helpless to resist causing mass chaos and destruction hours before the commies invade us! And then, we'll all sing cum-by-ya (spelled it wrong, don't care) by the fire and load our rifles for some coon hunting. Sounds like a grand ol' time to me!

Lock him up in the looney bin and lets get some serious plots in motion. I can't say it discusts me indeed its actually a testament to our experiment in democracy that even a complete nincumpoop such as this guy can actually gain office. But I still say take him, and onyone that votes for that proposal and use them to deter illegal immigrants by placing them at common crossing points along the border. Once they think this country os full of loonies the illegal immigration rate will fall dramtically.

I've got an even better idea than him... lets just get the biggest, toughest, cruelest thugs in the country to take 12 hour shifts standing at the border. When somone comes across, they thump them on the head with a blackjack and toss them in the back of a truck. The truck drives to lets say.. Canada and drops them off just inside the border. Now its Canada's illegal immigration problem.

What worries me was that this guy was elected

Exactly the same thing that worries me. In democracies, leaders use to represent their people. (And yes, I live in a country filled with angered, hungry commies that voted for Chávez, I do not deny it)

Exactly the same thing that worries me. In democracies, leaders use to represent their people. (And yes, I live in a country filled with angered, hungry commies that voted for Chávez, I do not deny it)

You elected him, yes? There were multiple parties and multiple candidates running, yes? He hasn't started killing off vast amounts of dissenters, right?

Then there's nothing wrong with electing a commie.

What's a furriner?

And yes, I mourn specially for the Great Lakes, and Michigan. And Boston, I don't know why I like Boston. And many other wonders and marvelous things you country have. And people too, I know most of you aren't a bad lot.

The problem is that I know there are also some bad, bad people, and armed with guns, so I tend to avoid that kind of things if possible. (In my country it is unavoidable, but that happens).

A furriner is a person from the US - a southern pronunciation of 'foreigner'. I will never forget a couple of rednecks in my dorm in Missouri yelling at me to 'turn that goddamn furrin music down!' Of course, I was listening to songs mostly in Hebrew, but Noa is from New York, dammit!

Michigan isn't much fun at the moment, it's been raining for about four days straight, at least here in the southwest portion of the state.

THose Predominantly Christian Mexicans are out to destroy Christianity! :eek:



...wait, what? ...:confused:

Well, after the "taking our jobs" reason failed, after the "it's illegal" argument ate itself, I guess this finally explains to me why illegal immigration is so evil.

SATAN!

I don't know what the people out there are thinking, but have you ever spent any time in the Utah countryside?

Its got some of the most beautiful, picturesque places on earth. I love it out there.

A countryside where every third spot on the map is called "Hell's Kitchen" or "Devil's Throat" or "Dead Man's Drop".

Where do these people come from? :confused:
Let's put it this way - if such people came from NS, it'd be a land named Retardania.

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635Well, at least Mexicans are real Christians. Not some splitaway sect like protestants...

Are you sure it wasn't a Mormon who made this statement?

THose Predominantly Christian Mexicans are out to destroy Christianity! :eek:



...wait, what? ...:confused:

They're catholics, and everyone knows catholics are in kahoots with satan.

They're catholics, and everyone knows catholics are in kahoots with satan.The Pope is, after all, the anti-christ.

I'm in league with satan
I was raised in hell
I walk the streets of Salem
Amongst the living dead
I need no one to tell me
What's wrong or right
I drink the blood of children
Stalk my prey at night

[Chorus . .]
Look out beware
When the full moon's high n'bright
In every way I'm there
In every shadow in the night
Coz I'm evil in league with satan
Evil in league with satan

I'm in league with satan
Obey his commands
With the goat of Mendes
Sitting at his left hand
I'm in league with satan
I love the dead
No one prayed for Sodom
As the people fled

I'm in league with satan
I am the masters own
I drink the juice of women
As they lie alone
I'm in league with satan
I bear the devils mark
I kill the new born baby
Tear the infants flesh

The Pope is, after all, the anti-christ.

Anti-Christ? I thought our current Pope was a Sith.

Michigan isn't much fun at the moment, it's been raining for about four days straight, at least here in the southwest portion of the state.

Rain's not s'bad. Always seems to be fewer bugs out then. More worms though, but worms are cool.

Every group of immigrants has faced some discrimination when they started entering the US in large numbers. It happened to the Italians, the Irish, the Poles, and now to the Hispanics. In a few years it will die down.Hah! Latin@s have been entering the US in large numbers for ages.

I mean Jesus Christ, the American Marijuana prohibition was introduced with racist anti-Mexican and anti-Black justifications. Zoot Suit Riots anyone? We're talking a century here. And it's still just as bad as ever, if not actually worse. Don't give me that fucking 'meting pot' bullshit. Mexicans have been 'entering the US' in large numbers since the US annexed a huge chunk of Mexico.

The illegalization of marijuana was primarily done because of the timber industry, not because of racism. Simply put, it was cheaper to make paper from hemp than from wood. The timber industry, being more powerful, as the technique that made the hemp paper cheaper had been recently invented, pushed from the illegalization of marijuana.

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635

Gotta love that logic.

The illegalization of marijuana was primarily done because of the timber industry, not because of racism. Simply put, it was cheaper to make paper from hemp than from wood. The timber industry, being more powerful, as the technique that made the hemp paper cheaper had been recently invented, pushed from the illegalization of marijuana.And yet the arguments publicly made for the measure were racist ones. This is what gave the measure public support. People just didn't want to see their daughters drugged by swarthy foreigners so that they could have their way with her:rolleyes:
I am pointing this out to illustrate that anti-Mexican racism does not fit the 'melting pot' pattern.

EDIT: Weren't the timber industry's efforts primarily responsible for the tax on Cannabis that effectively killed the hemp industry rather then the outright ban?:confused:

I am pointing this out to illustrate that anti-Mexican racism does not fit the 'melting pot' pattern.

Actually, that would make it fit. All the other immigrant groups that have been discriminated against were discriminated against for well over one hundred years. The Irish, the Chinese, the Slavs, the list goes on.

poor guy, hasn't been keeping up with mormon 'revelations'. turns out that darker skin is no longer entirely the result of rejecting mormongod

So that's why that janitor had goat horns and a flaming spear. This clears a lot up.

Actually, that would make it fit. All the other immigrant groups that have been discriminated against were discriminated against for well over one hundred years. The Irish, the Chinese, the Slavs, the list goes on.You are missing the point. The Mexicans should be accepted as fellow human beings by now. It seems that the 'melting pot' works best and quickest for white Europeans. Widespread anti-Mexican bias in th US is at least as old as anti-Slav bias for example. Drunk Commie said that the Mexicans' time would come. I am saying that the time scales involved do not fit the 'pattern.' There are more factors involved here then the melting pot theory accounts for.

You are missing the point. The Mexicans should be accepted as fellow human beings by now. It seems that the 'melting pot' works best and quickest for white Europeans. Widespread anti-Mexican bias in th US is at least as old as anti-Slav bias for example. Drunk Commie said that the Mexicans' time would come. I am saying that the time scales involved do not fit the 'pattern.' There are more factors involved here then the melting pot theory accounts for.

Let's see. Slavs and the rest began immigrating in the early 1820s. Mexicans began immigrating in the late 1800s. Racism against Slavs and the rest ended only in the 1950s. By my calculations, you can't say it's gone on longer than expected for another thirty years.

You are missing the point. The Mexicans should be accepted as fellow human beings by now. It seems that the 'melting pot' works best and quickest for white Europeans. Widespread anti-Mexican bias in th US is at least as old as anti-Slav bias for example. Drunk Commie said that the Mexicans' time would come. I am saying that the time scales involved do not fit the 'pattern.' There are more factors involved here then the melting pot theory accounts for.
Just one more factor. See bolded part above.

Let's see. Slavs and the rest began immigrating in the early 1820s. Mexicans began immigrating in the late 1800s. Racism against Slavs and the rest ended only in the 1950s. By my calculations, you can't say it's gone on longer than expected for another thirty years.
Ah, but don't forget the swarthiness factor. After all, how long have blacks been getting the shaft? I am firmly of the opinion that, among American assholes, xenophobia increases in direct relation to swarthiness, so much so that even Native Americans are hated by xenophobes.

Then some people ask why we in Central/South America do not like the english called America. I know not everyone there hate us, but it seems there are enough of them, specially leaders, that seem to loathe us. The hatred is spreaded mutually.

I would prefer to go to most countries in the world than to the US. For me, the USA ranks as high as Iran in my "friendly countries to visit".

Fixed.
"Latins" are Italians. Hispanics aren't "Latin". Last time I checked, "Latium" was in Italy, not Spain/Central/South America.

If you're dumb enough to believe what you wrote then stay put because we don't want you here anyways. Feel better now that I made your sterotype true?

You elected him, yes? There were multiple parties and multiple candidates running, yes? He hasn't started killing off vast amounts of dissenters, right?

Then there's nothing wrong with electing a commie.

Let's see how far that endures. And no, he doesn't kill them, The occassional jail time and a beating are enough to keep them on line.

Fixed.
"Latins" are Italians. Hispanics aren't "Latin". Last time I checked, "Latium" was in Italy, not Spain/Central/South America.

If you're dumb enough to believe what you wrote then stay put because we don't want you here anyways. Feel better now that I made your sterotype true?

"America" is a continent. "America" is not a country. "Americans" describe the people of an entire continent, not just the inhabitants of certain country situated in North America. Last time I checked, of course.

(Yet, in my posts, your people is called americans, just like you like to be called. It is called respect, in any case. We like to be called Latins, not hispanics, by the way, and we would like to be respected, just as you, even if both american and latin notions are wrong, so I please hope you reconsider your words. Spanish people, from Spain, for example, are hispanics, because they speak spanish but they are not latins, or "latinos", but I guess you, and the people that think like you, forget that tiny detail. By the way, I'm getting tired of giving this explanation, I guess you need to hammer it inside some people's skulls).

I'll stay put here, no worries. I'm pretty sure lots and lots of people plenty of times more influential and interesting than you doesn't want me there, although some do, regarding talent, that seems to be scarce lately over there, given the fact you are looking for it overseas. I am a proud citizen of two different countries and continents, so no need to go to a place I don't like, to meet people I don't like.

Of course I feel better. It means I wasn't wrong. I always feel this way when I prove myself right.

The illegalization of marijuana was primarily done because of the timber industry, not because of racism. Simply put, it was cheaper to make paper from hemp than from wood. The timber industry, being more powerful, as the technique that made the hemp paper cheaper had been recently invented, pushed from the illegalization of marijuana.

The timber industry pushed the taxation and banning of hemp, they sold it to the ignorant xenophobic hordes as "OMFG Mexicans use hemp to drug and rape t3h white wominzzz."

Let's see how far that endures. And no, he doesn't kill them, The occassional jail time and a beating are enough to keep them on line.

I honestly hope for your and the rest of your country's sake that he doesn't turn dictator.

I honestly hope for your and the rest of your country's sake that he doesn't turn dictator.

Thanks for your concern. We need to convince the international community that just because he hates Bush he is a good president. His goverment has many flaws, and threatens with violate several rights. No goverment, even with the support of the majority, deserve to opress those who are contrary to their beliefs.

Gather 'round children, it's time for a story, a tale of ancient sins and long-ago curses.

Ten thousand years ago, when the human race was either young or negative four thousand years old, there lived a man. This man, named Mexico, was a hero to his people (The New Yorkers). He went on a journey, to a far off land to the south, and discovered a land-a land of sunrise and forests, a land of myths and legends, an ancient land, rich with the power of a thousand generations. A land of beauty and love.

Mexico caught a horrible intestinal parasite and died. Well, he would've died from the parasite, but the STD he got checking out the Land of Beauty and Love killed him first.

But his legend lived on, and a new expedition of New Yorkers went to this strange land armed with better STD-prevention and parasite-killing medicines, (Both courtesy of, what was a combination in that day, Planned Parenthood and Subsequent Death.) These heroes found Mexico's corpse, preserved by the sheer euphoria and life of the realm. They decided, upon seeing this sight, to return him to life, the hero of the people, as a magical king of this magical land. They performed ancient rituals to revive him, and to grant him sorcerous might, and so he was returned to life as a powerful man, ready to turn this realm to an even greater parasite (By, for one thing, casting the spell "Kill the goddamn parasites")

But this realm had a secret.

Tularxard, Dark God of Zanzibish (As it was known in those days), bound by Fulaf the Mighty, a knight of old, into the land, slept.

The massive discharge of energy bringing Mexico back awakened him, and he ripped out of his prison, sinking the land (Forming what is now the Gulf of Mexico) and he began his rampage across the land. His mighty claws rent villages in twain, his fiery hatred obliterating forests. Mexico tried to defend the villagers, throwing fire and lightning and the sheer life of the land at Tularxard, and his wasted corpse was launched into the sky, forming what we know as the moon. His hateful, rotting face can still be seen in the moon today. The land was scoured and turned to desert, but it seemed Tularxard had been stopped. But Tularxard had one more trick up his sleeve (Or...um...whatever dark gods have instead of sleeves). He mortally wounded Mexico, and twisted and warped the New Yorkers into shades of their former selves, demonic, hateful entities who really needed a job, man, and he cast the beautiful natives of the realm into another dimension, never to be found.

The New Yorkers, still maintaining a vague recollection of their shattered heritage, named the land Mexico, but they didn't know why.

Mexico's body was said to have been absorbed by the land, nourishing the realm he once found so beautiful, his soul nourishing the crops that began to turn the New Yorkers back into humans, physically.

But nothing could change their souls.

And that, my children, is how Mexico became part of a evil plot.

illegal immigrants, who work their asses off for barely anything, are the antithesis of the American dream and the idea of the Protestant work ethic conservatives hold dearly. wait a minute...

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635[/url];12586679]Don Larsen's resolution - asserting that illegal immigration is the devil's plan to destroy the nation by "stealth invasion" - "in no way" is endorsed by the Republican Party.
"It's just free speech," Monnahan said Thursday. "It's Don's right to do that."




I hate how whenever a conservative says anything retarded the defense is always "he's just exercising his right to free speech."

Having the right to say something doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid or just flat out insane. Yes you have the right to say it, and that right is incredibly important because when loonies like this have the right to spout their jibberish then the rest of us can recognize them for what they are.

But free speech is not the issue. Lunacy is. The fact that someone has the right, power, or authority to do or say something stupid, pointless, and dangerous does not itself make it a commendable course of action. And when people criticize it, the action must be defended on its own merits, not the right of the individual to perform it.

I have the right to cough. But if I do, it means I'm probably sick.
I have the right to publicly say that immigration is a plot by Satan to destroy the country, but if I do, I'm probably unfit for public office.

Exactly the same thing that worries me. In democracies, leaders use to represent their people. (And yes, I live in a country filled with angered, hungry commies that voted for Chávez, I do not deny it)

Whats so wrong about angry hungry socialists?

No goverment, even with the support of the majority, deserve to opress those who are contrary to their beliefs.

Tyranny of the majority springs to mind here.

Whats so wrong about angry hungry socialists?



Tyranny of the majority springs to mind here.

Angry, hungry people tend to choice somewhat poorly when it comes to voting. One of the reasons why democracy seems to work better in wealthy countries than in poor ones. Once they stop being angry and hungry, they will turn into true socialists, and start a real democracy.

Yeah, tyranny of the majority. We have been reading Tocqueville, no?

Let's see. Slavs and the rest began immigrating in the early 1820s. Mexicans began immigrating in the late 1800s. Racism against Slavs and the rest ended only in the 1950s. By my calculations, you can't say it's gone on longer than expected for another thirty years.

Mexicans have been crossing that border since before it was a border. In fact, Spanish was spoken in the southwest US before English was. So I would argue that anti-Hispanic sentiment is actually far more prevalent and longer lasting than anti-white european sentiment.

After few successful attempts to produce prosperous colonies on the Atlantic coast, the Spanish turned their attention to the vast, unexplored territory in the West and Southwest of the present-day United States, where they left an indelible cultural and linguistic mark. Today, much of the long-term U.S. Spanish-speaking population is located in these areas, which include portions of Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Texas. The earliest Spanish explorations of this region date to 1540, first by Francisco Coronado. Juan de Oñate followed in 1598. Spanish settlements were established throughout the Southwest. In 1605, Santa Fe, New Mexico, was established, making it one of the oldest cities in the United States. Spanish exploration and colonization of the Southwest was more successful than earlier attempts in the Southeast. According to Hernandez-Chavez et al. (1975), as many as 100,000 Spanish speakers were living in this region by the mid-19th century.

http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/spanglish/usa/

Angry, hungry people tend to choice somewhat poorly when it comes to voting.

I'd sort of agree with you there, usually being angry would unify the populace and hungry would allow for more revolutionary or extreme governments to be elected.

One of the reasons why democracy seems to work better in wealthy countries than in poor ones. Once they stop being angry and hungry, they will turn into true socialists, and start a real democracy.

But what is a true socialist? That is the crux of the problem.

I myself am a federal democratic state socialist, however there would be many, many socialist libertarians and anarchists who would hate the idea of the large state and (on the other side of the state prescence) you would have stalinists who want the central, highest power to be centred around a single person with a single party with only a few different groups in that small clique and have absolute power over every single person.

Chavez started out well but he has been centralising a bit too much as well as reducing his accountability. It would still not be fine if he was a paragon of virtue and knew what to do because it would mean his successors would have far more control than they should

Yeah, tyranny of the majority. We have been reading Tocqueville, no?

Nope, just massive wikipedia reading. I support direct democratic voting in a federal way but using preferential voting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting) for local elections and proportional election for statoid and federal levels (or just preferential elected council). The ideal addition for that (in my opinion) is that each candidate could combine to form a small council where they have voting power proportional to the amount of votes they got.

Local and federal could have recall (though only a certain amount of times throughout a year) voting but the statoid probably wouldn't.

In fact, Spanish was spoken in the southwest US before English was.
And that couldn't have had anything to do with the fact that Mexico owned the entire southwest, could it?

I'd sort of agree with you there, usually being angry would unify the populace and hungry would allow for more revolutionary or extreme governments to be elected.

Being angry and hungry makes people more easy to be manipulated by demagogues and opportunists



But what is a true socialist? That is the crux of the problem.

One that is not personalistic. The messianic tendency should stop being part of socialism, as in Cuba, or Venezuela, where the idea of socialism is a vague concept gathered around the image of a charismatic leader.

Chavez started out well but he has been centralising a bit too much as well as reducing his accountability. It would still not be fine if he was a paragon of virtue and knew what to do because it would mean his successors would have far more control than they should

His attempts at centralizing are already attempting against the democratic system itself.

And I then recommend you to read Tocqueville. Great view about the matter at hand here.

Being angry and hungry makes people more easy to be manipulated by demagogues and opportunists

I agree, though sadly that has been the norm for most political institutions for the past fifty to sixty years. Openness in government should be one of the central tenets of democracy.

One that is not personalistic. The messianic tendency should stop being part of socialism, as in Cuba, or Venezuela, where the idea of socialism is a vague concept gathered around the image of a charismatic leader.

The messianic factor unfortunately can be found in almost all ideologies. Cuba, whilst it does have that is much better off than Venezuala is. There political institutions can at least survive (even though they would be weakened) the death of their founder and could quite possibly continue on for a long time after (barring interventions by nearby countries).

His attempts at centralizing are already attempting against the democratic system itself.

I know that, it why I have stopped supporting his political changes. He seemed to have his heart in the right place but the precedents he has put in place (especially over the last year) make it too easy for it to turn out like Russia.

I still do support a socialist method in Venezuala.

And I then recommend you to read Tocqueville. Great view about the matter at hand here.

There was only a small amount on algeria and his thoughts of democracy in america on the wikipedia article (as well as a link to a creepy right wing U.S lobby group). Anything else to add?

As it stands I view a greater involvment of the state then what he thought (people are partners with the state, not associations with themselves).

I agree, though sadly that has been the norm for most political institutions for the past fifty to sixty years. Openness in government should be one of the central tenets of democracy.

I'm all for openness. But I am also all for education, and making the people to realize that they should vote for who they truly like, and not for someone that is "feeding" them, and that truly is just giving back their taxes, and not even in the perfect way. I just happen to hate demagogues.

The messianic factor unfortunately can be found in almost all ideologies. Cuba, whilst it does have that is much better off than Venezuala is. There political institutions can at least survive (even though they would be weakened) the death of their founder and could quite possibly continue on for a long time after (barring interventions by nearby countries).

I know, but it is sad, I prefer the institution over the person, and the state over the goverment. Most cubans I've met feel lost now, although, and think socialism will die with Fidel.

I know that, it why I have stopped supporting his political changes. He seemed to have his heart in the right place but the precedents he has put in place (especially over the last year) make it too easy for it to turn out like Russia.

I still do support a socialist method in Venezuela.

I know as we stand, we need a left wing goverment, more specifically a socialist one, but we need one less inept with their policies, and with a lot less of personality cult, and sociological issues. I'm a centrist, moderate, myself, but I believe in democracy alternativism.

There was only a small amount on algeria and his thoughts of democracy in america on the wikipedia article (as well as a link to a creepy right wing U.S lobby group). Anything else to add?

As it stands I view a greater involvment of the state then what he thought (people are partners with the state, not associations with themselves).

Right wing wackos use his ideology, that is not designed for a right wing regime, in any case. Tocqueville was just afraid of what could happen if a majority would start to persecute the minorities, based in the democratic principles.

And that couldn't have had anything to do with the fact that Mexico owned the entire southwest, could it?

That's kinda my point. You claimed that Mexicans have only been immigrating in large numbers since the late 1800s, when history shows us that Mexicans have been living and moving around that area before the USA even existed.

Mexican immigration is not a new thing, and it has been going on for a lot longer than immigration by any other group. This is why I don't believe it when people assume that anti-Mexican sentiment will disappear. If it has been around for the last 250 years (as opposed to ±100 years for white Europeans), why do you think it will fade away in the next thirty years?

I'm all for openness. But I am also all for education, and making the people to realize that they should vote for who they truly like, and not for someone that is "feeding" them, and that truly is just giving back their taxes, and not even in the perfect way. I just happen to hate demagogues.

I completely agree with that. Preferably political science would be taught in schools and a culture of inquiry and rationality would be fostered, as well as extreme openness in government and other state apparatus.

Voter apathy would have to be limited but if they were taught in school (or indoctrined, your choice) and there was a society of truth and openness, along with an interest in the working of the state this could be greatly reduced.

I know, but it is sad, I prefer the institution over the person, and the state over the goverment. Most cubans I've met feel lost now, although, and think socialism will die with Fidel.

The problem is that there is always going to be one person viewed as the pre-eminent one. By making governments allowed to vote on concience more often and there being a group of people who assume leadership of government instead of an individual this would help. Executive power (as an individual branch) would be better spent as a problem solving system than a leadership one.

Yep, government should be seen a the driving factor of the state (and has greater authority than some parts of the state, such as the millitary and funding), but not the be all and end all of the state.

As long as they are not old cubans (the initial lot that fled).

I know as we stand, we need a left wing goverment, more specifically a socialist one, but we need one less inept with their policies, and with a lot less of personality cult, and sociological issues. I'm a centrist, moderate, myself, but I believe in democracy alternativism.

Democratic alternativism? What sociological issues?

Part of the problem with most governent parties is that they do not have planes beyond their next election (which leads to increadiably inefficient cycles of starving the public works then flushing them with money at the election year). I think that there is a country in europe which requires the parties to have five, ten and thirty year plans/goals which are updated every year (not sure about the updating) in order to combat that.

Right wing wackos use his ideology, that is not designed for a right wing regime, in any case. Tocqueville was just afraid of what could happen if a majority would start to persecute the minorities, based in the democratic principles.

Ahh, good to hear that they are not the true inheritents to his position.

I would prefer some kind of multi layered constitution that would provide the equality of oppurtunity (partially merit based positions would help) whilst also having public works to elminate all poverty.

That's kinda my point. You claimed that Mexicans have only been immigrating in large numbers since the late 1800s, when history shows us that Mexicans have been living and moving around that area before the USA even existed.


It's not immigration if they're moving around in their own country.

It's not immigration if they're moving around in their own country.

Fine. Mexican immigration in large numbers has been part of US history since Texas became a state in 1845. That was over 150 years ago. Anti-Mexican immigration sentiment is still alive and strong, while other ethnic groups who have been immigrating for less time have already been accepted.

My point still stands.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.

Quoted for Mighty Truth.

I couldn't care less. Anybody can come here. I'd even accept an athiest as president. I'm crazy.

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635

Well it is kinda a stealth invasion however whether or not it was caused by demonic forces is questionable. Lats face it Mexico wants territory back, they can't regain it conventionally so they're trying the next best thing.

I couldn't care less. Anybody can come here. I'd even accept an athiest as president. I'm crazy.

Then you would be part of only half of your country that would then consider voting based on policy and/or part affiliation.

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635



WHo cares? They are just using this to aid the democrats anyway! This isn't newsworthy!

Well it is kinda a stealth invasion however whether or not it was caused by demonic forces is questionable. Lats face it Mexico wants territory back, they can't regain it conventionally so they're trying the next best thing.



QFT 120%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Be ready for attacks, they are on their way I am sure!

Move over fudge, Tacos are the new devil's food!

everyone these days is claiming everything they don't like is in league with 'satan'!

bzzzt. ding ding. THERE IS NO SATAN!

there is only screwing everything up for each other which it is up to ourselves to avoid doing.

sure there may be and probably are all sorts of nontangable awairnessess, most if not all, wishing us well, or at least no particular harm.

but we still live in a world that is precisely neither more nor less screwed up then our collective thoughtlessness makes it.

as for utah republicans, if this is even true, well, all i can say to that, is consider the source.

which, granted i usualy say read the fine print first, and that i still do.

but this whole closing the borders nonsense, consider who or what if anything it actualy bennifits, and who, meaning everyone, it hurts.

we need to be removing barriers everywhere, not building more berlin walls everywhere like these pseudo-conservative nut cases propose.

=^^=
.../\...

Want to know why all these Mexicans are flooding across the border? Because they're Satan's army sent to destroy the USA. Everyone knows that Jesus loves the USA more than any other nation, and Satan wants to bring us down to hurt Jesus, so according to District 65 Chairman Don Larsen, Satan has sent Mexicans.

Personally I would think the quickest way to destroy the USA would be to send more folks like Larson, but whatever.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5756635

what a fucking nutcase. is that real? :eek:

though the US isn't the only bastion of freedom in the world - i think satan would have to take on the EU as well before he can do whatever bollocks that guy was talking about