Social Thoughts on "Heritage" Americans/Canadians?

[USA!USA!]

You KNOW the system has inequities, you're just re-affirming them.

It was NEVER about the legality of immigrants. It's about who they don't want here.

My point is that citizenship, by definition, is not supposed to be equality for all. Those who are citizens are afforded more rights than those who are not, that is baked into the system as is.. if you want to give everything that citizens have to non-citizens, you no longer have any citizens. It is an unsustainable free for all.

I am not looking down on them. I am certainly not hating them. I have no ill will towards them. It is just the sane, grounded expectation to have when you are a citizen in a country.

Once an immigrant who is here either legally or illegally gains citizenship, I gladly would afford them the same privileges.

I do agree with you that we do have enough wealth to pull it off - I, unfortunately, disagree that the people who facilitate that wealth will ever allow it to help everyone the way that it could.. hence my more realistic, grounded stance. Yours is idealistic (and one I would welcome.. but its never going to happen).

 

[Sinister]

My point is that citizenship, by definition, is not supposed to be equality for all. Those who are citizens are afforded more rights than those who are not, that is baked into the system as is.. if you want to give everything that citizens have to non-citizens, you no longer have any citizens. It is an unsustainable free for all.

I am not looking down on them. I am certainly not hating them. I have no ill will towards them. It is just the sane, grounded expectation to have when you are a citizen in a country.

Once an immigrant who is here either legally or illegally gains citizenship, I gladly would afford them the same privileges.

I do agree with you that we do have enough wealth to pull it off - I, unfortunately, disagree that the people who facilitate that wealth will ever allow it to help everyone the way that it could.. hence my more realistic, grounded stance. Yours is idealistic (and one I would welcome.. but its never going to happen).

Let me pose this theory:

What right would you grant a citizen that you wouldn't grant a non-citizen?

Before you answer I'd like you to consider that the most obvious choice would be the right to vote. The idea that a non-citizen should never have say in the shaping of our laws. If that's what you might be thinking, does that make sense? The laws of a Nation Govern everyone within its borders. To suggest that non-citizens should have no say in this is to suggest that other citizens have an inherent authority over them. What are we a giant HOA?

Allow me a practical example. I've mentioned a friend of mine, Sharif Bogere. He defected from Uganda and signed to a Professional Boxing contract. He had a hand injury early in his career and I suggested he go to the Doctor (we had the same Coach at the time). He said he couldn't because he was indebted to his manager. What I later found out was they had him in processing for Asylum, and they wouldnt give him any of his paperwork. Now imagine that in this political climate. He was fighting injured out of fear they would have him deported. That's a result of tiers of occupants of a Nation.

I appreciate your closing sentiment. Though I dont think what I'm talking about is as farfetched as you think. But I do agree the Capital class would rather invoke a second Civil War than see it become reality. They already hate the multi-racial democracy that exists and want to tier voting rights even further.

 

[USA!USA!]

To suggest that non-citizens should have no say in this is to suggest that other citizens have an inherent authority over them. What are we a giant HOA?

I appreciate your closing sentiment. Though I dont think what I'm talking about is as farfetched as you think. But I do agree the Capital class would rather invoke a second Civil War than see it become reality. They already hate the multi-racial democracy that exists and want to tier voting rights even further.

I personally would have no authority over a non-citizen. The government exercises that authority. I just vote for the people who govern, and we give those who are elected our consent to do so. The government carries the authority, which the citizens shape with their vote. If non-citizens become citizens, they can take place in this democratic process.

I think you are probably correct about the capital class though. I certainly am not among them, and I also don't think they have the best interests of myself, my family or people like me at heart. I certainly do not trust them or their intentions, and I don't like having a plutocracy running my country at all.

 

[kflo]

We spend way too much time trying to put people in boxes. Even ourselves. We are all humans. If you’re a citizen you are American.

Ultimately you are what you say and do. Your actions define who you are.

And try not to fuck it up.

 

[deviake]

They can heritage deez nuts

 

[Nizam al-Mulk]

I'm glad you have diverse taste in movies, but I'd really have to take a look at your collection to understand why you're concluding there's no real diversity.

Hollywood is dying because anyone can do it now, and there's no real need to rely on getting the approval of a small group of old farts to make a film anymore. Similarly across the arts, you don't have to appeal to a minimal number of dinosaurs to get your break.

I find it ironic that talent shows even exist at this point, but I'm glad they're there as they filter out all the young "aspiring" lazy bastards looking to hitch a ride on a catapult rather than, you know, actually doing some work and grinding away. Now more than ever, there is no reason to try and take the tired old routes to stardom.

I agree on your first two lines in so far as old stuff will still always feel a bigger part of the zeitgeist than the new stuff, and that's fine, old people were spoonfed a rather minimal choice of what to like, and they made their choices already. The younger generations, way less so. They might still revert to type by following whatever's promoted on a computer game or TikTok or some bullshit, but there's really no need for anyone to be limited anymore.

'Budget' means naff all. Who cares how much something cost? That's what I'm talking about when I say 'being told what to like' because often budget is just cheap (CGI) tricks and marketing and little else.

There is certainly less ideological diversity.

Hollywood is getting eaten by tech because they weakened themselves via politics and many other things, it is not because anyone can do it now with decent budgets.

Older people had more diverse tastes, in the 50s foreign movies were way bigger compared to the 90s and the 200s and probably even today.

The Gazillion people who watched Avengers Endgame and the Avatar movie care about budget. the consumers.

The Trump regime is not 1 year old. It's about to turn 10. But vilifying artists isnt party-specific, its ideology specific. I can post hearings from the 80's when Tipper Gore was in a tizzy about everything and Satanic Panic was in full swing. Hell there were gigantic movies made ABOUT how dancing was evil when I was a kid.

Monopolies ALWAYS kill culture. That's part of their job. Wal-Mart kills the Mom and Pop shops. The mall killed general stores, and the big box book stores killed small book stores with their bulk buying and coffee shops, then Amazon came along and killed them. The death of American culture is not out gay or trans characters in TV shows, or a mixed couple casually appearing in a movie so that its not a movie ABOUT their "taboo" relationship, the death of American culture is all the culture being wiped from your town. Every restaurant being a Denny's or iHOP. Every gas station being an Exxon, Dollar Generals.

I'm a leftist and I'm Southern. What are you talking about? As a racially mixed kid the only place I ever got sh*t for being multi-ethnic and Southern at the same time WAS the South. No one wants to erase "Southern Culture" unless you're specifically referring to the continuation of Confederate sentiment, and that sh*t SHOULD have been erased the second those traitors lost.

Arts censorship is not only done by the self identified right. Most artists going away for no reason was done by the self identified left recently. The HBO Confederacy won tv series was not nuked by the right wring nor was the Scarlet Johanson playing a trans person project.

In Iran the government has like 70% or 80% of the economy and i do not consider it a dead culture.

Please name some prominent self identified leftists who would be sad if Southern Culture would be erased. Plenty of people want to erase southern coded civilian gun ownership.

 

[White Whale]

This guy is running for govonor of Ohio because Vivek Ramaswamy wrote the article for NYT. Vivek crashes out around Christmas because he has no care for a holiday where the majority of people in the United States of America celebrate.



Hertiage Americans have a long history in the country.

 

[Sinister]

There is certainly less ideological diversity.

Hollywood is getting eaten by tech because they weakened themselves via politics and many other things, it is not because anyone can do it now with decent budgets.

Older people had more diverse tastes, in the 50s foreign movies were way bigger compared to the 90s and the 200s and probably even today.

The Gazillion people who watched Avengers Endgame and the Avatar movie care about budget. the consumers.


Arts censorship is not only done by the self identified right. Most artists going away for no reason was done by the self identified left recently. The HBO Confederacy won tv series was not nuked by the right wring nor was the Scarlet Johanson playing a trans person project.

In Iran the government has like 70% or 80% of the economy and i do not consider it a dead culture.

Please name some prominent self identified leftists who would be sad if Southern Culture would be erased. Plenty of people want to erase southern coded civilian gun ownership.

What are you defining as "Southern Culture." Please clarify

 

[Brampton_Boy]

This guy is running for govonor of Ohio because Vivek Ramaswamy wrote the article for NYT. Vivek crashes out around Christmas because he has no care for a holiday where the majority of people in the United States of America celebrate.



Hertiage Americans have a long history in the country.

I watched the first guys video, and I have to say, it is very disheartening to hear that someone is "barely an American" if their parents weren't born there. That's basically a giant fuck you to the second generation immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to a country where they apparently "don't really belong".

I also find it hilarious that this guy was trying to argue that Vivek didn't represent the American dream. The man built has built multiple companies from the ground up and employs hundreds of people.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I watched the first guys video, and I have to say, it is very disheartening to hear that someone is "barely an American" if their parents weren't born there. That's basically a giant fuck you to the second generation immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to a country where they apparently "don't really belong".

I also find it hilarious that this guy was trying to argue that Vivek didn't represent the American dream. The man built has built multiple companies from the ground up and employs hundreds of people.

That is the explicit intension of the Heritage American discourse, to marginalized immigrants including those born here.

 

[Andy Capp]

This guy is running for govonor of Ohio because Vivek Ramaswamy wrote the article for NYT. Vivek crashes out around Christmas because he has no care for a holiday where the majority of people in the United States of America celebrate.



Hertiage Americans have a long history in the country.

LMAO @ giving a shit whether some other individual likes to celebrate Christmas or not.

 

[Nizam al-Mulk]

What are you defining as "Southern Culture." Please clarify

First paragraph on wikipedia does it for me for now.

The culture of the Southern United States, Southern culture, or Southern heritage, is a subculture of the United States. From its many cultural influences, the South developed its own unique customs, dialects, arts, literature, cuisine, dance, and music.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_Southern_United_States#cite_note-3"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a> The combination of its unique history and the fact that many Southerners maintain—and even nurture—an identity separate from the rest of the country has led to it being one of the most studied and written-about regions of the United States.

 

[Quadtavius Tuck]

If you want to have Heritage Americans, I'd put Foundational Black Americans as part of that list. Maybe even Chinese who helped build the railroads.

All those groups have been here long enough.

#ogun

 

[jk7707]

It's an arbitrary term made up by racists to attempt to make themselves feel special, when in reality most of them are pathetic losers.

 

[Sinister]

First paragraph on wikipedia does it for me for now.

The culture of the Southern United States, Southern culture, or Southern heritage, is a subculture of the United States. From its many cultural influences, the South developed its own unique customs, dialects, arts, literature, cuisine, dance, and music.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_Southern_United_States#cite_note-3"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a> The combination of its unique history and the fact that many Southerners maintain—and even nurture—an identity separate from the rest of the country has led to it being one of the most studied and written-about regions of the United States.

Yeah that's still pretty general. Are you suggesting that people would erase Country music? Cornbread, collard greens, sweet potato pie and fried chicken? Because as a Southerner who now no longer lives in the South, I've never once felt my Southernness threatened.

 

[Nizam al-Mulk]

Yeah that's still pretty general. Are you suggesting that people would erase Country music? Cornbread, collard greens, sweet potato pie and fried chicken? Because as a Southerner who now no longer lives in the South, I've never once felt my Southernness threatened.

Are you suggesting people with the most influence over culture would not erase it if they could?

 

[Sinister]

Are you suggesting people with the most influence over culture would not erase it if they could?

Answering a question with a question. You can substantiate your own claim. What efforts are you seeing to erase Southern food, music, speech, or any other indication of culture?

 

[jk7707]

This guy is running for govonor of Ohio because Vivek Ramaswamy wrote the article for NYT. Vivek crashes out around Christmas because he has no care for a holiday where the majority of people in the United States of America celebrate.



Hertiage Americans have a long history in the country.

Yep. This guy is a great example of the racist morons who love that term.

 

[Andy Capp]

What are you defining as "Southern Culture." Please clarify

Answering a question with a question. You can substantiate your own claim. What efforts are you seeing to erase Southern food, music, speech, or any other indication of culture?

[Edit: correction: Whether he's willing to admit it or not,] It's stuff like this.

Historical prevalence of slavery predicts contemporary American gun ownership - PMC

American gun-owners, uniquely, view firearms as a means of keeping themselves safe from dangers both physical and psychological. We root this belief in the experience of White Southerners during Reconstruction—a moment when a massive upsurge in the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Edit:

Significance Statement.​

"We suggest that the distinctly American belief that guns keep a person safe was partially formed in the backlash to Reconstruction after the American Civil War—a moment when a massive increase in the availability of firearms coincided with a destabilization of White politics in response to the emancipation and empowerment of Black Americans. We show that the historical prevalence of enslavement in a county predicts present-day frequency of firearms, and we show that the relationship between feeling unsafe and county-level firearms ownership is stronger in counties with a history of enslavement. Looking outside the South, we further show that social connection to historically slaveholding counties predicts firearm ownership."

Over 45% of all the civilian-owned weapons in the world are owned by the 5% of the world population that is American (1). Firearm-owners in America are distinct in how they think about their weapons: Over two-thirds report that they own a gun, at least in part, to keep themselves safe (2). Despite these beliefs, studies show that gun ownership doubles the likelihood that someone in the household will die in a violent homicide and triples the likelihood of a death by violent suicide (3), while offering little-to-no protection against assailants (4). These risks are understood by citizens of comparable nations, where people are more likely to think of firearms as dangerous than as safe (5, 6).

Why do so many Americans look to their firearms for safety? According to the Coping Model of Protective Gun Ownership, gun-owners use guns symbolically as an aid to manage psychological threats stemming from their belief that the world is a dangerous place from which society will not protect them (7, 8). American gun-owners are more likely than non-gun-owners to believe that the world is dangerous (9) and that institutions of order, such as government or police, are unable or unwilling to keep them safe (10). These beliefs trigger worries in gun owners concerning their fundamental needs, including their safety (11), their control and self-efficacy (12), and their place in society (13). Guns, in turn, become more salient to owners when core identities are threatened (14). Gun owners use their weapons to defend against all these meaning-threats (15), with owners more likely to believe that a gun keeps them safe (2), keeps them in control (16), and keeps them belonging to important social groups (17)."

 

[Sinister]

Whether he's willing to admit it or not, I'm pretty sure it's stuff like this.

Historical prevalence of slavery predicts contemporary American gun ownership - PMC

American gun-owners, uniquely, view firearms as a means of keeping themselves safe from dangers both physical and psychological. We root this belief in the experience of White Southerners during Reconstruction—a moment when a massive upsurge in the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Edit:

Significance Statement.​

"We suggest that the distinctly American belief that guns keep a person safe was partially formed in the backlash to Reconstruction after the American Civil War—a moment when a massive increase in the availability of firearms coincided with a destabilization of White politics in response to the emancipation and empowerment of Black Americans. We show that the historical prevalence of enslavement in a county predicts present-day frequency of firearms, and we show that the relationship between feeling unsafe and county-level firearms ownership is stronger in counties with a history of enslavement. Looking outside the South, we further show that social connection to historically slaveholding counties predicts firearm ownership."

Over 45% of all the civilian-owned weapons in the world are owned by the 5% of the world population that is American (1). Firearm-owners in America are distinct in how they think about their weapons: Over two-thirds report that they own a gun, at least in part, to keep themselves safe (2). Despite these beliefs, studies show that gun ownership doubles the likelihood that someone in the household will die in a violent homicide and triples the likelihood of a death by violent suicide (3), while offering little-to-no protection against assailants (4). These risks are understood by citizens of comparable nations, where people are more likely to think of firearms as dangerous than as safe (5, 6).

Why do so many Americans look to their firearms for safety? According to the Coping Model of Protective Gun Ownership, gun-owners use guns symbolically as an aid to manage psychological threats stemming from their belief that the world is a dangerous place from which society will not protect them (7, 8). American gun-owners are more likely than non-gun-owners to believe that the world is dangerous (9) and that institutions of order, such as government or police, are unable or unwilling to keep them safe (10). These beliefs trigger worries in gun owners concerning their fundamental needs, including their safety (11), their control and self-efficacy (12), and their place in society (13). Guns, in turn, become more salient to owners when core identities are threatened (14). Gun owners use their weapons to defend against all these meaning-threats (15), with owners more likely to believe that a gun keeps them safe (2), keeps them in control (16), and keeps them belonging to important social groups (17)."

Of course it is, but as soon as he owns up to it I'll go ahead and debunk the Lost Cause myth as not at all culturally significant and merely a rhetorical means to preserve white supremacy in the US.