Curious about your comments about immigrants supporting big government, taking away your freedoms —…
Rachel72
1

The majority of immigrants from Latin countries vote for programs that expand government oversight. That means they vote for entitlement programs, and left wing policies that tend toward socialism. A lot of people don’t like that. I’m just saying what they’re thinking. Trying to give them a voice against those who would slander them as racists in order to shut them up, when that concern is perfectly legitimate.

The country is a union of people already living together who make a pact to protect their own interests. You’re conflating land with country. You can’t steal what isn’t owned. It looks a bit unfair because the Europeans had better technology, but humans have always fought for space. You’re asking the settlers to make special considerations that no one in history had ever thought of making up to that point. As if they would politely come along and ask the natives, “Hey, do you mind if we farm here? We traveled at sea for six months so that’d be really cool of you guys! No? Okay, bye! Back to Europe.”

They established their little community in whatever space they had available (they were not immigrants in today’s sense of the word, because there was no country to speak of. Just lots of land, and many roving tribes) and with superior farming techniques, medicine, etc., the population expanded to the point of needing to accommodate itself with more space. It’s an unfortunate reality that many species of animal are invasive by nature, and humans are not exempt from that classification.

The natives tribes fought amongst themselves in the same manner, but with technology inferior for the purposes of winning such wars. There was little unity among them. Some attempted to integrate with the expanding European population and some attempted to kill the Europeans. In the end, with human nature playing itself out by manifesting in the most recurrent form — fighting — the superior fighting subspecies won out against its competitors and gained predominance over the resources of that environment. When you impose your own standards onto people who lived centuries ago you’re being not only naive, but grandiose, as if you understand all the complexities that played out in order to make big, definitive moral judgements on these events, and how everyone else should respond to them.

That being said, it’s actually kind of racist of you to say that only an indigenous person can make a claim on some land. You said:

Only that small bit of blood you’ve got left that’s native can claim this land as being truly yours.

Well aside from the stupidity of such a claim (how can 13% of an individual have ownership of something?), it’s racist, because you are saying that the DNA of an individual plays some determinant role in what they are allowed to have.

I don’t really appreciate you whitesplaining to the portion of my genetic code that is non white. That portion feels very offended that you would tell it anything about itself. Because you play the role of oppressor over that portion of my genetic code, you are perpetuating fractional racism against me, and with my white genes already having colonized over my body in the most insidious ways, and so inequitably, my non white genes simply do not need that. It would be prudent for you to learn your place. Now get back to Europe.

Like what you read? Give Solipsis a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.