PereJoseph, Catholics colonized other areas through military might and imposed their rule, do you have a problem with that as well?
It depends on the circuмstances, but in principle, I do not have a problem with it.
Is the problem as you see it that a powerful will has been imposed on native peoples, or is it all about whether this will is Catholic or not?
The latter, as well as all of the attendant dishonesty and murder the US used in pursuit of its anti-Christ goals.
If the latter, then you shouldn't complain about colonialism, because it just sounds liberal.
I am not opposed to colonialism as such, and I hope that I did not give that impression. I am opposed to Protestants coming into a country of Catholics and Catholic allies and then effacing the legitimate customs, languages, and memory of the people there, especially since those things constituted the reign of Christ in this land and were gleefully destroyed in order to erect the reign of Satan.
I usually agree with you but you are going too far here, saying Mexicans shouldn't even learn to speak English.
Well, I don't think the US will be around much longer, so I think devout Mexican parents will unnecessarily be putting their children at risk of being absorbed into an immoral urban youth culture by having them learn English. Plus, I don't see why there is any obligation for Mexicans in Southern California to learn English. That being said, I am speaking of this particular case with this particularly strange type of governmental régime and culture. In general, I think immigrants to countries should always learn the local language and respect the local customs and traditions of the people there.
I am not any more fond of this Masonic nation than you are, as you well know, but it's absurd to pretend that having this type of government hasn't changed the game.
How do you mean ?
America seems to be a punishment from God, like Babylon, but God did not tell the Jews in Babylon to live totally separately from Babylon and reject everything about it.
I never quite said that. Obviously people need to respect the laws insofar as they are made by a power God allows and insofar as they are ordained to order and justice. I think people need to make a livelihood, too, and I don't recommend total rejection; I personally don't have the great honour of living like a hermit -- as my vocation requires -- and I likewise don't insist that others live like Elias on Mount Carmel, either, if they are not so called. That being said, I think that local heritages that predate the US's presence should be preserved and, in patient watching and prayer, people such as myself should redeem the time as we wait until a more opportune situation arises and, nature following its course, the US government dissolves. Then we can rebuild.
You are acting like the false prophet from Ezekiel who didn't accept God's punishment.
I am aware that we are being punished; that being said, I also don't think we should join in on the punishing by sharing in the falsehoods and sins of the wicked generations that have succeeded, one after the another, in the US as it has poured over North America, nor should we offer incense to the Americanist idols. In my case, I believe I have a patriotic duty to preserve my heritage and the memory of the country of Louisiana until the US goes away, meanwhile fulfilling my duty of state as best as I can in the concrete circuмstances in which I find myself. That doesn't mean I can't still be loyal to the cause of my forefathers, preferring it to eventually prevail and the US to recede from my homeland, while also finding my way in the world through having a passport, driver's license, etc. I don't think that counts as not accepting God's punishment. But I am well aware that I merely propose, while God disposes.
Keep in mind that the Hebrews in Babylon did eventually return to Israel and remembered that they were Hebrews, descendants of Abraham to whom God made His covenant; they did not all become full Babylonians, even if they did bring Babylonian errors and wicked customs back with them before being returned to the straight and narrow path (for a while).
But there are many out there who have this idea of America as "our country" meaning whites, and I'm not sure where they would get such an impression. It is a melting-pot nation, this was permitted and encouraged.
The truth is that, while it was called a melting-pot nation, there was always and still is a very strong contingent of people who want(ed) everything to melt into the pre-existing English and Puritan soup. It might be accepted as seasoning, but that's it. It seems that there was a kind of disingenuousness in the way the US was represented as a melting pot. Maybe it is because, while the US was purposely designed to be an exception to every other country by being based on novel ideas represented as universal, self-evident truths, the original United-Statesians were still very much Englishmen who believed in English ideas (as the US ideas are), and their society could not help but operate according to the dynamics natural to any other country. In order to get ahead and be accepted in US society, one had to, for all intents and purposes, become another Anglo-Protestant.
Any claims to non-ethnic detachedness fell before the insistence on the English language, the English ideas, the piety shown for the Puritan settlers of Massachusetts, the anti-Catholicism contained in the US Declaration of Independence, and the overwhelmingly Protestant culture and state and local laws. It really never could be simultaneously both so incredibly English and a universal melting-pot. And the US would not be the US if not for the ideas, language, laws, culture, and religion of its founders. A practical example will suffice : Every public school history textbook includes the phrase "our Pilgrim forefathers" when speaking of the Mayflower and so forth; for the natives of Santa Fe, Lafayette, and the various Indian reservations, that sounds a little strange. Ah, but it's a melting pot... well, kinda, but... not really.