250 Years of America

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Well, what are your thoughts?

I was going to write an extended essay or book on the matter, but have some doubts and hangups about it. I have mixed feelings and views about ‘Murica’ anyway. I’m not a “Heritage American” in the sense that my ancestors were not first aboard the Mayflower, or participated in the Revolutionary War (that I know of). I believe Heritage Americans are the ones most deserving and ‘entitled’ to move the ball forward, regarding America in general. I lean toward Conservative / Traditional values. Why should anyone want to immigrate to a foreign society, and demand it adapt to their peasant and peon delusions, rather than the other way around? Shouldn’t the lowly, miserly, and poor classes of the world bend to the Leaders, Inheritors, and ‘Heritage’ Americans, rather than the other way around?

And this is the crux of the current Culture War (Marxism) in the US anyway, between “Left and Right”.

Leftists want to destroy “Heritage America” and Americans. They want to destroy and topple statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Etc. They hate “America”. They are foreign invaders and, essentially, traitors to this country. They come here, not to ‘adapt’ and integrate, but to disintegrate.

This is the fundamental difference between ‘Liberal and Conservative’.

Because what can a people or society possibly “Conserve” except the traditions of the beginning of the country, along with the MEN who fought and died in the wars that created and sustained it??? This means the Revolutionary and Civil War, along with the minor wars which expanded the boundaries of America. I do NOT mean wars of aggression and foreign wars, which have little or no impact on the lives of American Citizens today. In a way, fighting for foreign wars is detrimental and a disservice to your nation, acting like a mercenary force for rich “elites” and foreign interests (like Yisrael).

These thoughts are just to kick off the thread, add your own anytime:

1 Like
2

I will also add at this point, that if it were up to me, you’d need to prove 10 generations straight of Citizenship to be entitled to vote in this country.

If that means a vast majority of people could no longer vote, then I’d be all for it!!! I don’t like this idea that any turd-worlder or moron should be allowed to vote. It’s already, essentially destroyed our Previously Great country. Politics should be restricted to the best of a Nation, not expanded to delude the worst, poorest, and most miserable.

Citizenship should be only possible for the most Elite (and I do NOT mean money).

1 Like
3

Ironic that this is the story of America from the start. It begins with genocide of the indigenous people who welcomed them, then imported slaves to build up an economy, fought a civil war, and since 1945 has competed with the British Empire in invading and fighting wars with as many countries as possible. It built a “global economy” that subjugated many countries by forcing the dollar on them and perverted trade relations into a fight, taking away natural resources and claiming it was in the interest of national security.

I have friends in America, but many Americans can’t imagine a cooperative society that shows solidarity with every one of its citizens. It’s religion is as crazy as the wildest Islamist, and is doomed to go the way every empire has gone.

1 Like
4

Yes, so you hate/hated America from the beginning, correct?

You would destroy it, if given the opportunity, like the rest of your Liberal and Leftist cohorts?

Were the Indigenous Injuns any better? What were they doing with the land? Did they ever invent the Wheel??

1 Like
5

America at the 250th Year Mark, Columbus Circle:

1 Like
6

This is all you have, isn’t it? You have disengaged half of your brain and can only talk about hate. For all the information you have gathered, you can’t put two and two together and come up with an answer because you discount anything you don’t agree with.

1 Like
7

What more do I need though? YOU are the one who brought it up, not me. If “genocide” is the natural state of affairs of human history, then we ought to examine that preposition. I don’t know how much and exactly what kind of “genocide” took place, or what that entitles to… who, Liberals today? Why do you pretend to care so much, when you arguably reap the rewards from it? I don’t see Liberals giving up their houses so that Injuns TODAY, can move in with them and live rent-free… Liberals are simply hypocrites and virtue-signaling. It’s empty rhetoric.

What is your bleeding-heart actually doing to the Amerindians who currently live on Indian Reservations, and drink booze all day everyday? Do you know any? What about those of them that HAVE integrated into ‘American’ society, and at every point since the Colonialists landed on shores?

1 Like
8

You ask a person living in Europe what I am doing for your indigenous population? You’ll be asking me next what I am doing about the widespread poverty in your country or the lack of medical coverage. All I know is that what your president is doing is affecting the rest of the world negatively, as though he wants to take it all down before he dies.

My question would be, why can’t you make your president address the issues you have at home and leave the rest of the world alone? As long as we had the feeling that America was trying to help in the world, we let ourselves be convinced that America was a force for good. Now your president is like a miafia boss trying to strongarm other countries.

1 Like
9

You brought up the American Indian “genocide” Bob, so you have to address your own Liberal arguments underneath it. I, personally, have a lot of questions and doubts about it. Presuming the claim is true, then why should the Conquering Europeans be ashamed of their military conquest and victories? Should we just be Losers then? That’s what you’re implying by your protestations.

Aren’t Liberal and Democratic Americans far worse in terms of Moral Goodness though?

1 Like
10

We are talking about genocide. Some estimates say that among the pre-contact population (when Europeans arrived), between 7 and 15 million were killed. 90–95% of the population died in the first 100 years after contact. They were already weakened by epidemic diseases (smallpox, influenza, measles) when the U.S. government authorised 1,500+ attacks on tribes.

4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears alone; 46,000 were removed from 1830 to 1837, and starvation, displacement, and societal disruption were the major indirect causes of death. In California alone, the Indigenous population dropped from 150,000 to 30,000 between 1846 and 1873. Some tribes (Pequot, Mohegan, Massachusetts) were completely exterminated, and European settlers were sometimes paid bounties for Indigenous scalps (e.g., Penobscot people).

One UCL study estimated 56 million Indigenous people killed across the entire Americas (North, Central, South) over ~100 years from European colonisation. Though disease was the primary cause of the population collapse, violence, forced removal, and policies designed to seize land were deliberate contributors to what many scholars call genocide.

1 Like
11

So your argument is that Europeans should have stayed home.

No world exploration. No discovery of electricity, automobiles, airplanes, computers, internet.

You’d trade it all in then?

1 Like
12

To be fair, though, it was European settlers who wreaked havoc in Africa too. The key difference is that North America experienced a catastrophic demographic collapse, with a population loss of 90–95%, while Africa did not experience a comparable decline in population.

The main cause of death in Africa was forced labour, massacres and slavery, rather than disease. Fortunately, the African population had been exposed to Old World diseases for a long time and had therefore acquired immunity.

The indigenous population in America suffered from settler colonialism (like Israel), whereas in Africa it was extractive colonialism, whereby the Europeans ruled but did not settle (except in South Africa, Rhodesia and Algeria).

However, although Africa did not experience a 90% population collapse, Europeans still killed millions in specific atrocities. In the Congo Free State under Leopold II (1885–1908), 10–15 million people were killed through forced labour, mutilation and execution.

During the Herero and Namaqua genocide in Namibia (1904–1908), 80% of the Herero people and 50% of the Namaqua people were killed (approximately 65,000 in total), and 22,000 forced labourers were murdered during the construction of the railroad in French Congo. There is, of course, a connection with the Transatlantic slave trade, which saw over 20 million people enslaved over the centuries.

So, as you can see, the difference in numbers is staggering. This isn’t exploration.

1 Like
13

Congratulations, you missed the point entirely.

There is no “progress” without wars, conquest, and exploration. Yet, as per the typical Leftist-Liberal response, you are unwilling to give it all up to rescind on your fake moral protestations.

You’re basically virtue-signaling without substance: White Guilt complex.

You still haven’t explained why those who are Conquerors ought to be ashamed of their Conquering. YOU are ashamed, yes, with a Loser mentality. But why should the Winners be ashamed?

1 Like
14

Well then, go ahead. You will soon have WWIII, and then no troubles. After all, it can only get better afterwards, according to your mentality. Just one question: Who will survive?

1 Like
15

America, I hope.

1 Like
16

Exactly, which makes you a danger to everyone else on the planet. Anyone proposing what you have proposed is a psychopath and a thief, who considers themselves above everyone else. Such opinions are like cancer for an organism, the only thing is, once the host organism dies, the cancer dies too.

2 Likes
17

RealUn:
Congratulations, you missed the point entirely.

There is no “progress” without wars, conquest, and exploration. Yet, as per the typical Leftist-Liberal response, you are unwilling to give it all up to rescind on your fake moral protestations.

You’re basically virtue-signaling without substance: White Guilt complex.

You still haven’t explained why those who are Conquerors ought to be ashamed of their Conquering. YOU are ashamed, yes, with a Loser mentality. But why should the Winners be ashamed?

K: as usual, RealUn is misguided, at best… a couple of things,
for the record, RealUn is not an American, Aussie I believe…
and just so you know, Bob is not an American either…

Now RealUn is factually wrong when he says that there is
no ‘‘progress’’ without wars, conquests… and exploration
requires cooperation to succeed… it is separate and different
than the other two aspects… war and conquest… read a history
of science, physics specifically, and one can see ‘‘progress’’
over the centuries without any need for war or conquest…
let us explore this a touch… we can trace the history of
several physicists, and not see a war or conquest that drove
their science… for example, what war or conquest drove
Kepler or Galileo or Tycho Brahe or even Newton to create
what we now call physics? If you actually knew any history,
you wouldn’t make such an ignorant statement about ‘‘war
being the driver of progress’’ it isn’t…

RU: You’re basically virtue-signaling without substance: White Guilt complex.

K: making up shit is what the right does… there is no such thing as
‘‘Virtue signaling’’ and no such thing as ‘‘White guilt complex’’
and no such thing as ‘‘Trump derangement syndrome’’
hatred of a village idiot who is the single most corrupt politician
in American history is not being ‘‘deranged’’ it is a logical response
to the trump criminal enterprise… IQ45 is the single worst president
in American history… and one should acknowledge that fact,
that isn’t being deranged, that is being truthful…

RU: You still haven’t explained why those who are Conquerors ought to be ashamed of their Conquering. YOU are ashamed, yes, with a Loser mentality. But why should the Winners be ashamed?

K: another example of a failed idea… that RealUn still believes in the
clearly outdated and frankly dangerous principle of ‘‘Rugged
Individualism’’ Winning and losing are failed ideas because
there can be no progress when the goal is simply to win or lose…
because one can count winning as virtually anything and losing
also defined as anything… it depends on how this winning and losing
are defined…what standards are being used to define winning
and losing… I can easily create standards that make Musk
the biggest loser in this planet’s history… that holding great
wealth is the most dangerous proposition ever proposed…
it divides people, not unites them, it causes social conditions
that threaten to become ugly, as it is becoming in the U.S…
the next war won’t be the right vs the left, but the haves and the
haves-not…

Kropotkin

1 Like
18

I have lived in the United States my entire life and I am more ashamed of it now than I have ever been in the past.

The economic exploitation of this nation domestically it is at an all time high where the American working class in majority have to work two to three different jobs just to survive.

Government corruption is at an all time high and transparency is nowhere to be found.

Our government is also very close to bringing our nation close to the brink of a new world war.

The only thing I can say that’s good about this nation is the beautiful natural landscape we possess and yet even now our government wants to encroach on all of that destroying it as well by abolishing national parks or reserves.

This nation was created by wealthy land owners and it is still monopolized by them along with capitalists to this day. Freedom if you have the money to buy or financially afford it otherwise you’re just another indebted working class slave peon living within penury.

:clown_face:

19

There’s no real political left or right in this nation, political third position is the only way forward rejecting both.

What is needed in this nation is authentic real political rebellion and not any of this fake astro turf bullshit engineered by global think tanks controlled by corporations themselves.

:clown_face:

20

@RealUn

Voting is irrelevant inside of democracy, the wealthy will merely rig things in their favor either through bribery, blackmail, or threats of violence. The majority of people control absolutely nothing beholden to politicians that are crooks or act as bribed trading insiders.

Democracy isn’t real.

:clown_face: