The Trumperium 2: Caesar by the Pussy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Jon, Jun 15, 2017.

  1. The Iron Rose

    The Iron Rose Death Eater

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    928
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Everyone's lucky day, I think you mean.

    Hope the door doesn't hit the slimy fuck on his way out.
     
  2. Xiph0

    Xiph0 Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,882
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    People's Republic of California
    Baby baby looking forward to a blue Christmas.
     
  3. fire

    fire High Inquisitor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2011
    Messages:
    529
    At this rate, the only California Republican incumbent left will be Rohrabacher, that treasonous snake.
     
  4. Invictus

    Invictus Prisoner

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,856
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    Is he the blatantly bought out by the Russians dude? I mean, that guy and Steve King are the two Representatives that I have no idea how they managed to still be elected. Those men are below trash.
     
  5. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    287
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Empire City
    High Score:
    2810
    Yep, that's the one.
     
  6. KHAAAAAAAN!!

    KHAAAAAAAN!! Troll in the Dungeon Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,189
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The dungeon. Not in the girls' toilet. No sir.
    High Score:
    2,002
    Today, in Trumpland, another optics fiasco is brewing that will probably take up the brunt of the news cycle for the next 48 hours. Yaaaay. -_-

    "Shithole countries."
     
  7. Agayek

    Agayek The Chosen One

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,076
    I don't really get it. Calling "African countries and Haiti" shitholes is not, generally speaking, inaccurate, especially compared to any first world nation. It's not terribly polite to said places, but it's in a closed meeting so that doesn't matter for shit (though I would fully expect him to say that to the Haitian President's face), and Trump asking why people would want to leave them and come to the US is just Trump being as retarded as he always is, so I'm confused why this is raising any eyebrows at all.
     
  8. Silens Cursor

    Silens Cursor The Silencer DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,029
    Location:
    The other side of reality
    Of course nobody is surprised - hell, there are definitely developing nations that aren't at a first world standard, and of course Trump is going to be a bigoted shitheel.

    But allow me to be crass here: in August I drove across significant sections of rural Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee and both Carolinas while on a little road trip. And while I'm not saying there aren't parts of Canada that are just as bad - there are - there's something about glass houses and not throwing stones that should be emphasized and deep fried in corn oil.

    And the fact that there are ALREADY people trying to normalize and excuse this bigotry as just 'Trump being Trump' is the fucking problem. Forget any trace of diplomatic relations and the blatant racism, there are millions of people who use 'well, my President said it so it must be true' as their excuse and US culture and reputation backslides another step. If that's not an issue, I don't know what is.
     
  9. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    287
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Empire City
    High Score:
    2810
    See, I didn't read it that way. I don't think he was asking why people would want to leave those places and come to the US, he was asking why the US should want those people at all, with the implicit undercurrent being that people from 'shithole countries' would make the US a shithole country, as though shithole-ness follows them around like a plague that he could catch.

    And since 'those people' in this instance were Haitians and Africans (read: Black), that implicit undercurrent basically is the assumption that black people make the US a shithole.

    It's pure, unadulterated racism. And made all the more starkly obvious by his followup to the remark, which was that the US should accept more people from places like Norway (i.e., white people), which, when stated in opposition to the first statement, implies that white people make the US better.

    Racism.
     
  10. Solfege

    Solfege High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    East Coast & the South
    Well, he's not wrong. The New Yorker had a good article this week on how we need to keep deporting bad hombres like 23 year old Laura, so they can get what they deserve --- gasoline-doused deaths in their cars by their deported gang ex-boyfriends, because if they'd stayed in the US presumably their shitty gasoline-doused deaths would have followed them here.

    Now look at Norway, do they look like they have an epidemic of gang-related deaths? Shit's contagious.

    P.S. Don't tell anyone I've rented a couple of houses to illegals. Awesome tenants, the lot. Cash comes under the table and they're totally scared of flagging the cops or the courts, so it's no trouble at all! (Unless they're doing all that Mexican raping under the table too...)

    /s
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 1:54 AM
  11. Agayek

    Agayek The Chosen One

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,076
    I mean, that's certainly one way to read it. Knowing Trump, it's very possibly what he meant.

    But when you look at it in a pure value proposition, as in who would contribute most to a new country they immigrate to, it's not exactly wrong. The average person born and raised in any First World country is going to out-do the average person born and raised in, say, Zimbabwe. Education alone is going to massively favor one over the other, let alone all the other factors (language, cultural overlap, exposure, etc.

    It's not terribly PC to view immigration in that light, that it's about what the immigrants can offer to their new country, rather than what the country can offer to the immigrants, but if we strip out all the pretense, it's very much what immigration policy is actually about.
     
  12. Solfege

    Solfege High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    East Coast & the South
    1) Isn't the modern nationalist take that we don't want your brain drain, it only depresses the wages of our own high performers in our labor markets? Certainly the Bannonist front subscribes to that view: too many foreigners (South Africans, Asians) in tech. Leave them in their own countries to make their contributions there, so they can improve those shitholes into not-shitholes.

    2) The United States is an exceptionalist country. It's the only industrialized country where citizenship is based on jus soli and not jus sanguinus. Right of soil over right of blood. In accord with that liberal tradition, we maintain that life as an American citizen can be a transformative experience --- and that we should select for those best primed to receive that transformation. As @Darth Revan points out, it may be that most deserving are the hardiest of the toughest countries to make a living in, rather than the purely average middle-classers. Your value accounting seems rather not the point along those lines, though we could make the argument that those deserving will leverage their opportunities like no other; and, besides, is subject to debate as in (1).

    3) And we do have non-refoulement baked into our immigration policies, in principle.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 2:45 AM
  13. Lindsey

    Lindsey Order Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    877
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    If you are looking at extreme short term effects, then yes.

    However, immigrants from poorer countries do a lot more than what we give them credit for. Most end up doing work that Americans do not want to do, such as farming, working at corner stores, etc, etc. Their kids tend to perform better than Americans as well, so in the long run it is actually better to bring in poorer immigrants than those from first world countries. We also have to realize that we tend to be the more educated people from these poorer countries as well, its rarely the average joe living in distress. A huge reason these countries are suffering is because most educated people try to leave, if possible, leading to a massive brain drain.

    There is a reason why Africans whom are black tend to do better within a generation or two than Black Americans.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 2:04 AM
  14. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    287
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Empire City
    High Score:
    2810
    I don't think that's a given at all. And even if it were, I don't think that's what he was saying. He wasn't saying 'we should get experts', he was saying 'we should get people from Norway.' Norway has plenty of purely average, societally useless people. Zimbabwe has plenty of highly educated people. But by his own words, he would rather have the useless people from Norway (who are White) over the African doctors (who are Black). Because he's a racist.

    I had to read this sentence three times to be exactly sure of what it said.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 2:59 AM
  15. Invictus

    Invictus Prisoner

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,856
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    That article is shit. As is most things the New Yorker writes that isn't barely concealed gossip.

    You're talking about general policy. You don't take a anedoctal case and tries to make a point out of it. Meanwhile 20% of the Inmates in the US are foreign born. Guess which ones voters will care more when doing policy? This article bets on the average middle class American citizen ignorance on how a third world country actually is, as much as Trump bets on the ignorance of his working class voters.

    I could do a long, long post on why almost all assumptions I see in the US media about illegals, including the fucking ridiculous assumption that gangs go invading middle class neighbourhoods to recruit teens for God knows why and it apparently happens to 10% of a country's male population and that coincidentally that's the same 10% that also has the money to spend from two to five years worth of the average salary at once, up front and in one trip.

    But I won't because frankly no one here cares.
     
  16. Solfege

    Solfege High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    East Coast & the South
    Quite right. May I confess to being facetiously sarcastic. O father, I have sinned. It's a good thing my post wasn't a play to general America.

    I'm very aware that third world countries aren't the backwards shitholes Americans think they are. Guerrero, Mexico, is not Monterrey, Mexico. Nevertheless there is a cost to the kinds of executive actions that ICE agents are, sometimes indiscriminately, taking; the stats on community policing reports being one indicator. I actually live near some sizable illegal Korean neighborhoods, from what I have heard everyone there has buckled down to fortress mode (business at my favorite coffee locale is down... which means I have to spend more money!)

    And you're right, no one generally cares.* See this on immigration law:

    Quite frankly, our system doesn't care either.



    *Thou I, for one, would find it an entertaining read. Can't speak for the rest of DLP.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 3:20 AM
  17. Agayek

    Agayek The Chosen One

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,076
    1) It wouldn't surprise me if Bannon subscribes to that, he's stupid enough for it. You always want more negative brain drain, that's how progress is made.

    2) This comes down to one's perspective on the word "deserve". I, personally, hold that no one deserves anything. You aren't owed shit for having the incredible cosmic luck of existing. You earn what you get, through skill, effort, and no small amount of luck, and if that's not good enough, then too fucking bad. As a direct extension of that, I view immigration and citizenship of a new country being something you have to earn, that you have to prove to that country you are worthy of the investment.*

    Obviously, you disagree and that fundamental disagreement will ensure we never agree on this.

    *Honestly, I'd prefer it if people born in a country had to earn their citizenship as well, but I'm cognizant of the fact that very few would agree with me and I don't care enough about to bother kicking up a fuss about it.

    You mean the work that isn't going to exist in 30 years? :p

    The second generation bit is very true, and one of several reasons I would like immigration numbers to be higher. It applies just as much for the college graduates as it does for the migrant workers though, perhaps even more so, and that distinction is my point.

    It's a simple fact that an educated, English speaking immigrant will generally be able to attain a higher paying job than someone who can't, or can only barely, speak the language and doesn't have even a basic education.

    There's plenty of people in either country who buck the trend, and a black Zimbabwean college graduate would generally be more productive than a white Norwegian high school dropout, but the generality is very much true, and lying to ourselves and others about it isn't going to change that.

    And yes, Trump is probably racist and his efforts toward such immigration restrictions likely don't have even that rudimentary level of thought and reasoning behind it, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's objectively wrong. It just means Trump's an idiot with bad motives.
     
  18. Solfege

    Solfege High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    East Coast & the South
    The meaning of deserve, in this case, is "those best primed to take advantage of those transformations." In other words, potential earnings. You seem pretty clear that to deserve is not a part of your vocabulary --- guess what? It's not a part of mine either, as you think it ought be used (for handouts*). And yes, this renders the latter part of my earlier statement addressing value-accounting redundant.

    My point then was really that your accounting seemed to base contributions on ease of assimilation. Whereas the function to optimize for seems rather to be those who might, based off personal characteristics such as risk-taking ability, in no small part shaped by prior experience, make the most of their gains. And yes, there are plenty of (self-)educated tech talents in the third world, more so than from the comparatively smaller European countries.

    *It is merely to note that our country "hands outs" citizenship to persons born on this soil, whereas other First Worlds "hand out" citizenships to persons of the right parentage. On this I truly have no opinion, except to say that by this system to be qualified is synonymous with to be deserving. e.g. semantics!**

    **Also, to be truly cynical, it would seem by you that no one deserves any rights. One can merely earn privileges. If we want to get anal about this. But the very act of existing seems to, in fact, qualify you for those rights that Americans seem to hold so dear. Part and parcel of citizenship, I suppose (though maybe we could convert this to a video-game like hierarchy, where to be a citizen merely qualifies you to start earning certain Amendment-like privileges...?)
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 4:01 AM
  19. Agayek

    Agayek The Chosen One

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,076
    Nah. My stance is that there are intrinsic rights inherent to being sapient, foremost among them being the right to make your own choices and reap the rewards, both positive and negative, of such. It's not a matter of someone deserving or earning it, it's simply part of, if not the very definition, of living.

    Notably, and where I diverge from most of the more liberal-minded that I talk to, these rights do not include a minimum standard of living, protection from your own bad decisions, and, really, a guarantee of continued survival.

    As a rational, thinking being, you have the right and the responsibility to forge your own path through life, for better or worse. No more, and no less.

    Everything else, especially honestly rather irrelevant things like citizenship (read: being recognized as belonging to a group by said group), is either earned, or given. And the latter can, in all honesty, be taken away at will, the very instant anyone with enough gun decides they want to.

    Edit: To further clarify my stance, upon reflection, I should have altered my word choice. "Deserved" and its implications muddles the waters a bit. The main thrust of what I was attempting to get at originally, on this topic at least, is that you are not owed anything because you happen to exist. You have no claim on anything except that which you manage to earn for yourself.

    You can be given things, obviously, but that is a matter of charity, not obligation, and no one has a right to demand them, for themselves or others. This extends to social structures exactly the same as material objects or even the time and attention of other people, and if the charity you receive is insufficient, that's no one's problem but your own.

    Asking for help is not a problem, something I'd encourage in fact, but demanding it as if it's expected or as if you're entitled to it crosses the line.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 8:10 AM
  20. gorlosh

    gorlosh DA Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    168
    I wish I was as confident speaking out of my ass as you are.