It's more worthy of consideration than some rah-rah US nativist nonsense. Either the US is a melting pot or it's a country for and by Anglo-Germanic people exclusively.
It's for the people who live here and who constitute the core ethnicity to determine who comes here. That's a universal principle of self-determination.
Core ethnicity, eh ? Which one is that ? Where is the list of "universal principles" ? Now you are beginning to sound like Woodrow Wilson.
This is just another dumb comment. Either it's this or that? Who said?
Logical consistency said.
It's the legitimate right of the people who have lived here, whose ancestors built the country to decide what they want and to act within their rights and power to that end.
Then I guess the Mexicans get to decide what language is spoken and the parasitic Anglophone United Statesians don't, since the Mexicans are the only thing close to the core ethnicity in Southern California and they built it, whereas the Yankees have contributed very little to the land and have actually, more or less, destroyed it. Unless you think that a people need not have any bond whatsoever with the land they are living on, and that they can treat it as hostile and ruin it as much as they want and still claim it as their own, even if they are interlopers on it themselves, I don't see how you can really say that the English-speakers "built Southern California." It looks more like rude exploitation to me. Besides, the English-speakers are not a single ethnicity and therefore lose on that front. And for the record, I dissent from your use of "rights" language and your implication that there are universal human rights of any kind.
We all know what your response is going to that is going to be: everyone but Americans have rights.
Outside of their narrow strip of land, United-Statesians are part of an imperial venture. In a struggle for solidification of a conquest, nobody gets to complain when their victims don't surrender. That's how the game works. Sorry if you were expecting the rules to apply to one side but not the other. The US gained most of its current claimed land through aggression and invasive settlement; they therefore have no moral power to complain when others do the same back to them. As for the Mexicans in California -- they're not even pursuing invasive settlement aggressively, they're simply re-settling in the lands of their ancestors, which currently are occupied by an imperial régime and its migrant industrial and agricultural workers and/or colonists. They are committing no crime by not wishing to join the régime that invaded and partaking in the mentality and camaraderie and culture of the colonists.
Very well, you ally yourself with the naked aggression of foreigners who have absolutely no respect for this country or its national sovereignty.
I ally myself with order and law being brought to North America; you are right, I do have no respect for the mythos of the United States and its propaganda narratives. I respect it as being given legitimate authority in the places where it has been given authority, but I also think that God gave it this as a harsh punishment of the human race. The Anglo-American Establishment of the past two hundred years has been the scourge of Christendom, the purifying fire of servitude and destruction. Being from one of the pre-imperial autochthonous peoples myself, I have nothing but sympathy for the Mexicans and encourage them to not let their children learn English if they can tough it out.
In that sense you're right in lock-step with the Jews.
I am on the side of Christendom and against the destruction of morals, the spread of dissorder and falsehood, and the ruination of God's creation. The United States and its associated English-speaking bureaucrats and colonists are a force for the destruction of morality, the destruction of order, the spread of falsehood, the spread of the love of riches, and the devastation of God's creation. So, you tell me who advances the Jews' agenda better. As far as what the Jews themselves think, it seems like very few of them would not count the US as their greatest ally and weapon.
Of course, the bottom line is that you don't recognize anything American as having legitimacy...
What does that term mean if you really analyze it -- "American" ? It seems to have about as much accuracy and meaning as "civilisation," that is to say, it is a corruption of language. I don't share the ideology of those who use either word in the way you and Man of the West do, so you will have to be more precise. If you think that I am going to cowtow to English nationalist myths, or English ideology, or the Enlightenment, or the public school propaganda of the US government, then you should think again.
...that is simply hatred of America and a disregard for its rights, which is the default mode of PC leftists and those on the right who think it gives them some sort of credibility to bash America
Well, I can assure you that I am not intellectually indebted in any way to political correctness. Likewise, I don't need to use and do not use political correctness to help my case.
Topic: USA Hispanics from the SSPX (Read 39854 times)