View Poll Results: If Immigrants Received No Welfare, I Would...

Voters
12. You may not vote on this poll
  • Support Free Immigration

    5 41.67%
  • Support Immigration Restrictions

    7 58.33%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 158

Thread: Immigration & Welfare

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Not my experience.
    Exceptions exist in any trend, Statistics show they vote Demoncrat by a far larger margin than Americans.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Exceptions exist in any trend, Statistics show they vote Demoncrat by a far larger margin than Americans.
    My experience is also that we have a 1 party system- no big diff between Repubs and Dems.The answer in to end the FED, bring back free markets and end the welfare/warfare system, then - we will all be freer.
    Last edited by Ender; 06-10-2017 at 07:27 PM.
    There is no spoon.

  4. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I want free markets & liberty for all. I do NOT want gov interfering in my life or anyone else's.
    Not all immigrants are the same. A Russian immigrant is far different from a Hispanic immigrant. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ssians/477045/

    Hispanics as a whole are antagonistic to capitalism and 1st generation Mexicans are especially bad. Voting for Democrats does interfere with my life and is an act of aggression. "Ninety percent of Hispanics who primarily speak Spanish identify as Democrats." http://fortune.com/2016/10/29/hispan...ration-divide/

    The default should be for open immigration provided the immigrant is here either 1.illegally or 2. on a work visa or Green Card and not a citizen who can vote. No 1st generation immigrant should be able to become a citizen unless they purchase citizenship. Immigration should be curtailed from cultures they have proven not to mix with Western values. There is no reason to have open immigration from the Middle East. Islam and liberalism are irreconcilable.

  5. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Why don't we just go back to the war of northern aggression? (The civil war for stupid yankees)
    Immigrants of any race are more socialist than Americans they were back in FDR's time as well.
    Americans=bad does not disprove immigrants=worse.
    In the 19th century, immigrants were voting for Jefferson's laissez faire Democrats, natives for Hamilton/Lincoln's proto-progressive GOP.

    Religion % Dem % Rep
    Immigrants
    Irish Catholics 80 20
    All Catholics 70 30
    Confessional German Lutherans 65 35
    German Reformed 60 40
    French Canadian Catholics 50 50
    Less Confessional German Lutherans 45 55
    English Canadians 40 60
    British Stock 35 65
    German Sectarians 30 70
    Norwegian Lutherans 20 80
    Swedish Lutherans 15 85
    Haugean Norwegians 5 95
    Natives
    Northern Stock
    Quakers 5 95
    Free Will Baptists 20 80
    Congregational 25 75
    Methodists 25 75
    Regular Baptists 35 65
    Blacks 40 60
    Presbyterians 40 60
    Episcopalians 45 55
    Southern Stock
    Disciples 50 50
    Presbyterians 70 30
    Baptists 75 25
    Methodists 90 10

    Source: Paul Kleppner,
    The Third Electoral System 1853-1892 (1979) p. 182

    It changed in the 20th century, of course, with the Jeffersonians being pushed out and the Dems adopting the progressivism of the GOP. From that time forward, they were quite similar, fighting over power rather than ideology. The 16th Amendment was proposed by a Republican President and passed by a Republican Senate and a Republican House. The Federal Reserve Act was passed with broad bipartisan support in the House and Senate (and was really just a rehashed version of GOP Senator Nelson Aldrich's plan from a few years earlier - what Republican opposition there was to the bill was based on wanting the bank to be less accountable to Congress). Both income tax and a central bank had been part of the GOP platform from the beginning of the party, in any event. Hoover was as bad as FDR (just not as good at winning elections), FDR's psychotic relative Teddy was as bad as Wilson. No one has anything to brag about in the 20th century.

    The theory that the US was originally inhabited by liberty lovers, who were corrupted by immigrants simply doesn't correspond to reality. A better, short account of US history might go as follows: In the beginning, there were nutjobs in New England, and rational Whiggish people in the South. Then immigrants arrived and sided with the South. But by about 1900 the nutjobs outmaneuvered and converted the others, the original Southerners and the immigrants, and now everyone's a nutjob. Of course, behind the ideology of the nutjobs is a great deal of self-interest, from boodle-seekers, which would have ultimately expressed itself in a growing state regardless. So, in that sense, the nutjobs don't really matter, things would have played out about the same anyway, but if you want to blame anyone for corrupting the American liberal tradition, you should blame that faction of natives known as Yankees, not immigrants.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 06-10-2017 at 08:01 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  6. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Not all immigrants are the same. A Russian immigrant is far different from a Hispanic immigrant. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ssians/477045/

    Hispanics as a whole are antagonistic to capitalism and 1st generation Mexicans are especially bad. Voting for Democrats does interfere with my life and is an act of aggression. "Ninety percent of Hispanics who primarily speak Spanish identify as Democrats." http://fortune.com/2016/10/29/hispan...ration-divide/

    The default should be for open immigration provided the immigrant is here either 1.illegally or 2. on a work visa or Green Card and not a citizen who can vote. No 1st generation immigrant should be able to become a citizen unless they purchase citizenship. Immigration should be curtailed from cultures they have proven not to mix with Western values. There is no reason to have open immigration from the Middle East. Islam and liberalism are irreconcilable.
    History does repeat itself:

    [T]hey steal, they are cruel and bloody, full of revenge, and delighting in deadly execution, licentious, swearers and blasphemers, common ravishers of women, and murderers of children.” —Edmund Spencer

    The emigrants who land at New York, whether they remain in that city or come on in the interior, are not merely ignorant and poor—which might be their misfortune rather than their fault—but they are drunken, dirty, indolent, and riotous, so as to be the objects of dislike and fear to all in whose neighbourhood they congregate in large numbers.” —James Silk Buckingham

    These are not quotes from a Trump rally or an “alt-right” message board. These are historical statements from yesteryear describing a despised race of people in America. They are indicative of the sentiment of white people throughout this country who thought a subhuman species good for nothing but work and servitude might ruin America with their crime, poverty and interbreeding with white women. They were not referring to Africans, Mexicans or Muslims.

    They were talking about the Irish.

    First, we should get this out of the way: One of the favorite recurring themes of racists in America is the idea that the Irish came to America as slaves and had it as bad as, or worse than, Africans. According to these “racialists,” the European blood in the Irish made them pull themselves up by their bootstraps and integrate themselves into the opening arms of American liberty. They never bitched and moaned about their situation, so ...

    All of this is wrong. In fact, it is too stupid to give space, credence or words, so read where it is debunked here and here.

    But as we celebrate the first St. Patrick’s Day of the Trumpian era, we should remember when America passed laws against another group of immigrants. We should recall when this country tried to ban another group of people based on their religion. We should never forget that both “American” and whiteness are sociopolitical constructs that have evolved over a long period of time, always seeking exclusion and supremacy, and it was not so long ago that Irish Americans were on the outside looking in.

    In his book The Renegade History of the United States, Thaddeus Russell explains that the first large wave of Irish immigrants worked low-paying jobs—mostly building the canals along the Canadian border—that other Americans wouldn’t do. Like finding out a song you thought was new is actually a 100-year-old remake, the Irish were simultaneously accused of stealing all the good jobs and branded as “lazy” and “shiftless.” They were also thought to be the nonwhite “missing link” between the superior European and the savage African based on stereotypes from the early American media, according to the Boston Globe:

    In the popular press, the Irish were depicted as subhuman. They were carriers of disease. They were drawn as lazy, clannish, unclean, drunken brawlers who wallowed in crime and bred like rats. Most disturbingly, the Irish were Roman Catholics coming to an overwhelmingly Protestant nation and their devotion to the pope made their allegiance to the United States suspect.

    In 1798, Congress passed three “Alien Acts” based mainly on fears of Irish-Catholic, anti-immigrant sentiment. These new laws gave the president the power to stop immigration from any country at war with the U.S. and the right to deport any immigrant, and made it harder for immigrants to vote. Then, again in the late 1840s, a nationalist political group called the Know-Nothings sprang from a populist movement of poor whites who were dissatisfied with the two-party system and started the American Party, intent on preserving America’s culture by restricting immigration, especially from Catholic countries—including by Irish Catholics. They managed to get candidates elected into the highest political offices in America, including a president.

    Does this sound familiar to anyone?

    So how did the Irish become white?

    Russell suggests they did it by coalescing their political power while simultaneously assimilating into the American mainstream, specifically with jobs in civil service (which is why most cities’ St. Patrick Day parades are ostensibly celebrations of police and fire departments):

    In 1840, at the beginning of the great wave of Irish immigration, there was only a handful of Irish police officers on the force. ... By the end of the year, Irish made up more than one-quarter of the New York City police, and by the end of the century, more than half the city’s police and more than 75 percent of its firefighters were Irish Americans. In addition, Irish were disproportionately represented among prosecutors, judges and prison guards. Soon, the Irish cop was a stock figure in American culture. Once known as apelike barbarians, the Irish were now able to show themselves as the most selfless and patriotic civil servants.
    http://www.theroot.com/when-the-iris...ite-1793358754

    The refugees seeking haven in America were poor and disease-ridden. They threatened to take jobs away from Americans and strain welfare budgets. They practiced an alien religion and pledged allegiance to a foreign leader. They were bringing with them crime. They were accused of being rapists. And, worst of all, these undesirables were Irish.
    http://www.history.com/news/when-ame...refugee-crisis
    Last edited by Ender; 06-10-2017 at 08:48 PM.
    There is no spoon.

  7. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post



    Again, the point is that their presence/absence has no effect on political outcomes, since they vote the same as natives.
    I did not know that Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Justin Amash, and Walter Jones were all elected with majority support from immigrants. This changes everything. Or else you're simply wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe






  8. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  9. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    History does repeat itself:
    Those are fine examples to demonstrate hysteria against immigration in general. I would certainly use the same examples against people who are for restricting immigration from Mexico, which I am against. I think it should be very easy to come to the US to work.

    None of those arguments apply to support Islamic immigration. Islam is a religion, not a race or ethnicity. The ideas of even "moderate" Muslims, have nothing in common with a free society. Only 2 Muslim majority countries rank in the top 50 in economic freedom. An insane percentage of Muslims (80%+ in some countries) believe in Sharia Law as well as killing people for adultery, renouncing the religion, drinking alcohol, a woman wants a divorce and even being the victim of rape. I am not tolerant of those views and see no reason to allow people who do tolerate those views into the country.

    All religions have anti-liberty underpinnings. The difference is Jews and Catholics don't actually believe what their religions say and have never believed the insane parts since the founding of the US. If you polled European Jews in 1920, the majority wouldn't have thought stoning someone to death for working on the Sabbath was a very good idea. Whereas getting put to death for drinking is apparently just dandy for many in the Islamic world. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hol-times.html
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 06-10-2017 at 09:31 PM.

  10. #98
    With enough money anyone can win anywhere
    Wrong. If this was true there would be no such thing as solid red or solid blue districts. Hillary Clinton will never win in Oklahoma. Ever. Donald Trump will never win in Harlem. Ever. Not with a billion dollars per precinct short of handing individual voters $10,000 cash each to sell out their neighborhoods.

    but in reality, the odds of a liberty candidate winning anywhere is very, very small.
    No, it isn't. Liberty candidates win when they work hard enough and are well enough funded to get their messages out. Slapping an Ayn Rand meme up on your facebook page won't get you elected however, you have to meet with the individual voters and share how you will stand up for some of the things they care about.

    The odds of them winning in a GOP district drop as nativism (a competing ideology) gets stronger.
    Not really. The odds of someone like you winning in a GOP district might drop, but not those liberty guys who agree with the nativists that our RINO's have sold out to foreign interests. Just go to Breitbarf and see if Massie or Paul Ryan is more popular. Any issue a candidate can find overlap with the voters wishes is a winning issue in each district.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  11. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Those are fine examples to demonstrate hysteria against immigration in general. I would certainly use the same examples against people who are for restricting immigration from Mexico, which I am against. I think it should be very easy to come to the US to work.

    None of those arguments apply to support Islamic immigration. Islam is a religion, not a race or ethnicity. The ideas of even "moderate" Muslims, have nothing in common with a free society. Only 2 Muslim majority countries rank in the top 50 in economic freedom. An insane percentage of Muslims (80%+ in some countries) believe in Sharia Law as well as killing people for adultery, renouncing the religion, drinking alcohol, a woman wants a divorce and even being the victim of rape. I am not tolerant of those views and see no reason to allow people who do tolerate those views into the country.

    All religions have anti-liberty underpinnings. The difference is Jews and Catholics don't actually believe what their religions say and have never believed the insane parts since the founding of the US. If you polled European Jews in 1920, the majority wouldn't have thought stoning someone to death for working on the Sabbath was a very good idea. Whereas getting put to death for drinking is apparently just dandy for many in the Islamic world. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hol-times.html
    Dude- the hatred of the Irish was because they were:

    CATHOLIC.

    The same things were said about them as reasons to hate and ban them from coming.
    There is no spoon.

  12. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Not all immigrants are the same. A Russian immigrant is far different from a Hispanic immigrant. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ssians/477045/
    How are trump supporters a good thing or even meaningfully different from democrats?

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Hispanics as a whole are antagonistic to capitalism and 1st generation Mexicans are especially bad.
    So are non-Hispanics. Y'all keep ignoring this.


    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Voting for Democrats does interfere with my life and is an act of aggression. "Ninety percent of Hispanics who primarily speak Spanish identify as Democrats." http://fortune.com/2016/10/29/hispan...ration-divide/
    Um, so what? Voting for Republicans also interfere's with your way of life and is also an act of aggression. I can't find the pew poll referenced, but 95% of whites voted for Clump, so what difference does it make?
    Amash>Trump

    ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ЄCΤΙΝ ЄξΟΥCΙΑ ЄΙ ΜΗ ΥΠΟ ΘЄΟΥ

    "Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping graven images" - Ironman77

    "ideas have the potential of being more powerful than any army....The concept of personal sovereignty was pulled screaming from the ether into this reality by the force of men believing in a self evident truth, that men are meant to be free." - The Northbreather

    "Trump is the security blanket of aggrieved white men aged 18-60." - Pinoy

  13. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Not really. The odds of someone like you winning in a GOP district might drop, but not those liberty guys who agree with the nativists that our RINO's have sold out to foreign interests. Just go to Breitbarf and see if Massie or Paul Ryan is more popular. Any issue a candidate can find overlap with the voters wishes is a winning issue in each district.
    Why do you think Breitbart and their ilk went for Trump over Rand by a gigantic margin? Rand's not (publicly) for free immigration. Could it be that they care far more about immigration than liberty, and will vote for the most radically anti-immigrant voice, regardless of his radically anti-liberty positions on other issues?
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 06-10-2017 at 10:08 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  14. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Dude- the hatred of the Irish was because they were:

    CATHOLIC.

    The same things were said about them as reasons to hate and ban them from coming.
    No. Actually that isn't true. More importantly, it wasn't reality. There wasn't a problem of adulterers or people working on Sundays being put to death in Ireland. If you surveyed the Irish in 1880, they wouldn't believe in the primitive parts of Christianity.

    There is a problem in 2017 with the views of Muslims. It isn't a small minority. And there is evidence that Muslims don't assimilate. The unemployment numbers and crime numbers in Europe show this. Theo Van Gogh getting assassinated wasn't an isolated incident. Neither was the terrorism plot against Pamela Geller in Texas. The South Park guys and Comedy Central were on lockdown for even putting a blurred out picture of Muhammad on TV. America needs to learn the lessons of Muslim immigration from the problems in Europe. I don't remember the stories of Irish Catholics attacking satirists like Muslims attacking Charlie Hebdo.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 06-10-2017 at 10:10 PM.

  15. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by The Rebel Poet View Post
    How are trump supporters a good thing or even meaningfully different from democrats?
    Oh because there is a huge difference. Neil Gorsuch wouldn't be on the Supreme Court right now with a Democrat. There is massive difference between Scalia, Thomas, and even Anthony Kennedy from Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan. Bernie Sanders won 23 states. Trump is a semi-socialist but he isn't Elizabeth Warren or Sanders. Liberal judges do not believe in the original meaning of the Second Amendment. They don't believe in property rights. As much as I hate Breitbart, I don't see articles like this at Breitbart. http://www.salon.com/2014/02/02/why_...nd_capitalism/

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rebel Poet
    So are non-Hispanics. Y'all keep ignoring this.
    Nobody is ignoring it because it is factually untrue. 44% of Hispanics have a favorable view of socialism whereas 68% of whites have an unfavorable view of socialism



    Quote Originally Posted by The Rebel Poet
    Um, so what? Voting for Republicans also interfere's with your way of life and is also an act of aggression. I can't find the pew poll referenced, but 95% of whites voted for Clump, so what difference does it make?
    Republicans are not good but it is a matter of degree. My life won't change one way or another with almost any Republican unless I get a tax cut. My life could materially change for the worse in the short term and get much worse long term with a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren Presidency.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 06-10-2017 at 10:31 PM.

  16. #104
    @Krugminator2

    Unemployment among Muslim immigrants is a result of their religion?

    Are you sure it isn't a result of welfare paying more than work?
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken



  17. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  18. #105
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Why do you think Breitbart and their ilk went for Trump over Rand by a gigantic margin? Rand's not (publicly) for free immigration. Could it be that they care far more about immigration than liberty, and will vote for the most radically anti-immigrant voice, regardless of his radically anti-liberty positions on other issues?
    Immigration is the number one issue far and away at the moment. Breeding dependent voters on taxpayer dollars closes any long shot window of initiating liberty based legislation in the future. Libertarians are 90% white for a reason and it has to do with a cultural anchor that makes the ideological transition easier.

  19. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    Immigration is the number one issue far and away at the moment. Breeding dependent voters on taxpayer dollars closes any long shot window of initiating liberty based legislation in the future. Libertarians are 90% white for a reason and it has to do with a cultural anchor that makes the ideological transition easier.
    I refer you to what I already posted in this thread.

    I'll just add that the reasons you oppose immigration are not the reasons most anti-immigrant people do. They don't know or care about liberty at all, and libertarians do not benefit by encouraging them. You're like the liberal anti-communists in Germany who thought you could use and control the NAZI party; you can't. It's the other way around.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  20. #107
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I refer you to what I already posted in this thread.

    I'll just add that the reasons you oppose immigration are not the reasons most anti-immigrant people do. They don't know or care about liberty at all, and libertarians do not benefit by encouraging them. You're like the liberal anti-communists in Germany who thought you could use and control the NAZI party; you can't. It's the other way around.
    It's more about stopping the hemorrhaging to the state in any way possible. For every immigrant that comes in, the liberty lovers get progressively weaker. Think of the Trump movement as the the political equivalent of throwing chairs and pint glasses like the desperate patrons did in Manchester. Stop immigration so we can live to fight another day. That's priority #1, 2 and 3 as I see it.

    As far as trying to control Nazis, it's a small minority segment in the movement that happens to be the shrillest. I have engaged in fierce arguments with white nationalists who foolishly believe that white based socialism is the answer to our woes.

  21. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    It's more about stopping the hemorrhaging to the state in any way possible. For every immigrant that comes in, the liberty lovers get progressively weaker. Think of the Trump movement as the the political equivalent of throwing chairs and pint glasses like the desperate patrons did in Manchester. Stop immigration so we can live to fight another day. That's priority #1, 2 and 3 as I see it.

    As far as trying to control Nazis, it's a small minority segment in the movement that happens to be the shrillest. I have engaged in fierce arguments with white nationalists who foolishly believe that white based socialism is the answer to our woes.
    http://www.hbletter.com/why-objectiv...97656250000000


    I think a better solution is this. (I left out the first part about preemptively striking Iran, which I think is a terrible idea.) Societies like Japan that restrict immigration to a large degree tend to stagnate.

    2. Make immigrants sign away their right–for their whole lives–to any government loot. That would end the worry about poorer immigrants coming to get welfare

    .
    3. Make it impossible for immigrants to get the vote–for their whole lives. That would end the worry about immigrants from statist cultures voting in more statists.

    4. Replace multicultural BS with the proud, morally confident assertion of America’s moral superiority over the statist and theocratic societies from which the immigrants are coming. We are right and they are wrong–politically, philosophically, and in other ways. Standing up for our values would end the worry about immigrants diluting (the fast-fading remnants of) American individualism.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 06-10-2017 at 11:01 PM.

  22. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    No. Actually that isn't true. More importantly, it wasn't reality. There wasn't a problem of adulterers or people working on Sundays being put to death in Ireland. If you surveyed the Irish in 1880, they wouldn't believe in the primitive parts of Christianity.

    There is a problem in 2017 with the views of Muslims. It isn't a small minority. And there is evidence that Muslims don't assimilate. The unemployment numbers and crime numbers in Europe show this. Theo Van Gogh getting assassinated wasn't an isolated incident. Neither was the terrorism plot against Pamela Geller in Texas. The South Park guys and Comedy Central were on lockdown for even putting a blurred out picture of Muhammad on TV. America needs to learn the lessons of Muslim immigration from the problems in Europe. I don't remember the stories of Irish Catholics attacking satirists like Muslims attacking Charlie Hebdo.
    Really? You are using Geller as an example?

    THIS is what was said of the Irish and done to them:

    In the early 20th century, the backlash against Catholic and Jewish immigrants found its most powerful expression in the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan, an organization born in the 1860s in violent opposition to the emancipation of black slaves.

    Unlike the original Klan, the new organization sought a national profile and identified several groups—not just African Americans—as alien threats to family and nation: Catholics, Jews, immigrants, “new women,” bootleggers, criminals and—of course—black Americans. In effect, the Klan became the sworn enemy of all persons who threatened, whether by heritage, race or behavior, the imagined ideals that had so recently held a nation of small, Protestant communities together. Above all, the Klan touted “one hundred percent Americanism” as an antidote to the social and cultural decay that seemed to be rotting away the core of American values.

    Klan members often infused their reflexive anti-Catholicism with a voyeuristic interest in the Catholic Church’s rumored (and wholly fictitious) violations of sexual propriety. Klan literature chronicled the delight that nuns took in whipping young girls. It claimed that members of the Knights of Columbus vowed to “burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive [non-Catholic] heretics; rip open the stomachs and wombs of their women and crash their infants’ heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race.”
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...tholics-213177

    When Pilgrims and Puritans settled in New England half a century later they brought fresh venom from Europe’s religious conflicts, including the idea that the Pope was the “anti-Christ” and the “whore of Babylon”.

    At first banned from the colonies, “papists” were grudgingly allowed entry but with severe civic restrictions, including exclusion from political power. Jews and Quakers also suffered discrimination but were seen as a lesser threat.

    The establishment of a secular republic which separated church and state did not end prejudice.

    Lurid myths about Catholic sexual slavery and infanticide spread through pamphlets and books such as Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk, an 1834 supposed memoir about a Canadian convent.

    Demagogues in the nativist movement incited fury and fear about the huge numbers of impoverished German and Irish Catholic immigrants, many barely speaking English, who spilled off ships.

    Newspapers and Protestant clergymen, including Lyman Beecher, co-founder of the American Temperance Society, swelled the outcry, warning the influx would take jobs, spread disease and crime and plot a coup to install the Pope in power.

    In 1844 mobs burnt Catholic churches and hunted down victims, notably in Philadelphia where, coincidentally or not, Francis will wrap up his week-long visit.

    Abuse from Protestant officers partly drove hundreds of Irish soldiers to defect from the US army to the Mexican side before and during the 1846-48 war with Mexico. The deserters obtained revenge, for a while, by forming the San Patricio battalion and targeting their former superiors in battle, only to wind up jailed, branded and hanged after Mexico surrendered.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ting-catholics

    American anti-Catholicism was rooted in both religious and political ideas. Many Protestants doubted that Catholics could be truly American, not only because they held allegiance to a “foreign despot”—i.e. the Pope—but because the inherently hierarchical nature of Catholicism seemed anti-republican. America was a bottom-up nation that believed in the power of the common man (provided he was white, straight, and male). Catholicism was a top-down religion that discouraged the common man from finding religious truth for himself.

    Anti-Catholicism reached a fever pitch in the middle of the 19th century. The influx of Catholic immigrants, particularly from Ireland, set off a wave of anti-immigration and anti-Catholic political movements and protests. Perhaps none was more intense than the Philadelphia Bible Riots of 1844.

    Pennsylvania created its first real public school system in 1834. Like most schools of the day, the Bible featured prominently in instruction. Yet, this raised the question: which Bible? Protestants and Catholics use different versions of the Bible. For Protestants, it was a religious act to read the Bible in public schools; for Catholics it was a form of Protestant sectarianism.

    Some Catholics urged parents to remove their children from schools that read Protestant Bibles. Others petitioned the government to allow parents to decide whether or not their children would participate in Bible reading activities.

    Even this moderate request for accommodation met with Protestant vitriol. According to the Presbyterian newspaper, allowing a Catholic exemption was merely a “determined attempt to exclude…all semblance of religious instruction.” Removing the Bible from the schools would convert them to “infidel” institutions. Another newspaper asked “Are we to yield our personal liberty, our inherited rights, our very Bibles, the special blessed gift of God to our country, to the will, the ignorance, or the wickedness of these hordes of foreigners, subjects of a foreign despot…?”

    Tensions hit a breaking point in May, 1844. In the Philadelphia district of Kensington, Catholics began breaking up meetings of “nativists.” As the fighting mobs grew, shots were fired, killing an 18-year-old Protestant boy. Soon the homes of Irish Catholic were being raided, burned, and destroyed. Catholics fired upon nativists as they tried to set fire to a Catholic schoolhouse, killing two and wounding more.

    Violence continued over the next few days. Nativist newspapers fanned the flames. The Native American newspaper wrote that “the bloody hand of the Pope has stretched itself forth to our destruction.” Handbills and fliers called for mass Nativist organization in Independence Square: “Let every American come prepared to defend himself.”

    A crowd of six thousand showed up. Soon they were marching on Kensington, and, despite the presence of the militia, approximately 30 Catholic homes were burned. In addition, St. Augustine’s Church and St. Mary’s Church were battered, pilfered, and partially burned.
    https://www.cato.org/publications/co...-anti-catholic
    There is no spoon.

  23. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Really? You are using Geller as an example?

    THIS is what was said of the Irish and done to them:
    Why wouldn't I use Geller as an example? She can say whatever she wants. You don't have the right to physically attack someone because they hold a draw Muhammad competition. Civilized people don't use violence to curb speech. And she wasn't asking for it anymore than a woman wearing a short skirt is asking to be raped.

    Apparently the Ku Klux Klan attributed violence to Catholics. Not really what I had in mind. I doubt that was a major argument against Catholicism. It doesn't really matter. But okay. The second part of the statement that begins "more importantly" was kind of the important part. A large percentage of Catholics didn't ACTUALLY hold extremely primitive views. It isn't my opinion that a large percentage of Muslims hold primitive views. It is a fact. And l listed numerous examples of commonly held views which over 80% of Muslims believe in some countries.

  24. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    It's more about stopping the hemorrhaging to the state in any way possible. For every immigrant that comes in, the liberty lovers get progressively weaker.
    No, for every immigrant that comes in, the GOP gets weaker (though that dynamic need not be permanent).

    What's weakening liberty lovers is the nativists squeezing them out of the party and/or coopting them.

    Think of the Trump movement as the the political equivalent of throwing chairs and pint glasses like the desperate patrons did in Manchester. Stop immigration so we can live to fight another day. That's priority #1, 2 and 3 as I see it.
    If we don't control the GOP, there's no reason to care about its competitiveness against the Dems.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  25. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Why wouldn't I use Geller as an example? She can say whatever she wants. You don't have the right to physically attack someone because they hold a draw Muhammad competition. Civilized people don't use violence to curb speech. And she wasn't asking for it anymore than a woman wearing a short skirt is asking to be raped.

    Apparently the Ku Klux Klan attributed violence to Catholics. Not really what I had in mind. I doubt that was a major argument against Catholicism. It doesn't really matter. But okay. The second part of the statement that begins "more importantly" was kind of the important part. A large percentage of Catholics didn't ACTUALLY hold extremely primitive views. It isn't my opinion that a large percentage of Muslims hold primitive views. It is a fact. And l listed numerous examples of commonly held views which over 80% of Muslims believe in some countries.
    Not facts- there are as many sects of Muslims as there are Christians and most of them are peaceful. History repeats itself continually by hating certain religions/races and lying about them.

    And Geller's a hater that is known for setting up stuff for her audience.
    There is no spoon.



  26. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  27. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Not facts- there are as many sects of Muslims as there are Christians and most of them are peaceful. History repeats itself continually by hating certain religions/races and lying about them.

    And Geller's a hater that is known for setting up stuff for her audience.
    Not lying about anything. No shortage of polls I could post (and have posted) that shows what their views are. Where are all the super civilized Muslims? They aren't in Africa. I wonder if Lara Logan has a high opinion of Egytian Muslims after they finger banged her? Here are the attitudes of Egyptian men, one of the more civilized countries in that region. http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/20...-of-muslim-men They aren't in the Middle East. I guess India and Indonesia.

    So you think Geller paid two Muslim guys to shoot a police officer and then get killed themselves? Hmm..
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 06-10-2017 at 11:35 PM.

  28. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    My experience is also that we have a 1 party system- no big diff between Repubs and Dems.The answer in to end the FED, bring back free markets and end the welfare/warfare system, then - we will all be freer.
    The PRCalifornia is a 1 party system, if we let in a flood of statist immigrants we will find ourselves even worse off in the whole country.

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    In the 19th century, immigrants were voting for Jefferson's laissez faire Democrats, natives for Hamilton/Lincoln's proto-progressive GOP.

    Religion % Dem % Rep
    Immigrants
    Irish Catholics 80 20
    All Catholics 70 30
    Confessional German Lutherans 65 35
    German Reformed 60 40
    French Canadian Catholics 50 50
    Less Confessional German Lutherans 45 55
    English Canadians 40 60
    British Stock 35 65
    German Sectarians 30 70
    Norwegian Lutherans 20 80
    Swedish Lutherans 15 85
    Haugean Norwegians 5 95
    Natives
    Northern Stock
    Quakers 5 95
    Free Will Baptists 20 80
    Congregational 25 75
    Methodists 25 75
    Regular Baptists 35 65
    Blacks 40 60
    Presbyterians 40 60
    Episcopalians 45 55
    Southern Stock
    Disciples 50 50
    Presbyterians 70 30
    Baptists 75 25
    Methodists 90 10

    Source: Paul Kleppner,
    The Third Electoral System 1853-1892 (1979) p. 182

    It changed in the 20th century, of course, with the Jeffersonians being pushed out and the Dems adopting the progressivism of the GOP. From that time forward, they were quite similar, fighting over power rather than ideology. The 16th Amendment was proposed by a Republican President and passed by a Republican Senate and a Republican House. The Federal Reserve Act was passed with broad bipartisan support in the House and Senate (and was really just a rehashed version of GOP Senator Nelson Aldrich's plan from a few years earlier - what Republican opposition there was to the bill was based on wanting the bank to be less accountable to Congress). Both income tax and a central bank had been part of the GOP platform from the beginning of the party, in any event. Hoover was as bad as FDR (just not as good at winning elections), FDR's psychotic relative Teddy was as bad as Wilson. No one has anything to brag about in the 20th century.

    The theory that the US was originally inhabited by liberty lovers, who were corrupted by immigrants simply doesn't correspond to reality. A better, short account of US history might go as follows: In the beginning, there were nutjobs in New England, and rational Whiggish people in the South. Then immigrants arrived and sided with the South. But by about 1900 the nutjobs outmaneuvered and converted the others, the original Southerners and the immigrants, and now everyone's a nutjob. Of course, behind the ideology of the nutjobs is a great deal of self-interest, from boodle-seekers, which would have ultimately expressed itself in a growing state regardless. So, in that sense, the nutjobs don't really matter, things would have played out about the same anyway, but if you want to blame anyone for corrupting the American liberal tradition, you should blame that faction of natives known as Yankees, not immigrants.
    All the immigrants below French Canadian Catholics were voting R on that chart. And I Know Yankees were and are a large part of the problem, the south never should have joined the union, but it is easier to keep out new socialists than to throw out the old ones, hopefully CALExit will let us get rid of some of our own maniacs.


    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    No, for every immigrant that comes in, the GOP gets weaker (though that dynamic need not be permanent).

    What's weakening liberty lovers is the nativists squeezing them out of the party and/or coopting them.



    If we don't control the GOP, there's no reason to care about its competitiveness against the Dems.
    For every immigrant that comes in Socialism gets stronger, if it gets strong enough we will have no hope at all.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  29. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    All the immigrants below French Canadian Catholics were voting R on that chart.
    Virtually all immigrants at the time were Italian/Irish Catholics or German Lutherans. The other categories aren't important.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  30. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Virtually all immigrants at the time were Italian/Irish Catholics or German Lutherans. The other categories aren't important.
    The UNION YANKEE army was filled with Irish and German immigrants eager to serve the almighty state and subjugate the south.
    Besides the immigrants we get NOW are more communist than the average American.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  31. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Not lying about anything. No shortage of polls I could post (and have posted) that shows what their views are. Where are all the super civilized Muslims? They aren't in Africa. I wonder if Lara Logan has a high opinion of Egytian Muslims after they finger banged her? Here are the attitudes of Egyptian men, one of the more civilized countries in that region. http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/20...-of-muslim-men They aren't in the Middle East. I guess India and Indonesia.
    From the link:

    The report, produced by International Men and Gender Equality Survey (IMAGES) found that "The majority of Egyptian men consider it their duty to protect the honour of women and girls in their family, and nearly three-fifths agree with honour killing in some circumstances. More than 90 per cent of men saw male honour as directly contingent on their female relatives' dress and behaviour".

    Just 45% of Egyptian men believed there should be laws "criminalizing domestic violence, including marital rape." And only 70% of Egyptian women agreed with this statement.

    43% of Egyptian Muslim men said they would approve of their son having multiple wives, though just 9.5% said they would approve of their daughter marrying a man who already had other wives.

    Only 6.6% of unmarried men said they "have no problem with marrying someone of a different religion", and a tiny 2.3% of unmarried Egyptian women said the same.

    Just 39% of Egyptian men approved of women serving as leaders of political parties, though 93% said they should be able to vote.

    60% of Moroccan men said "if a woman is raped, she should marry her rapist."

    62% of Moroccan men said "a woman should tolerate violence to keep the family together", and 38% agreed "there are times when a woman deserves to be beaten". Shockingly, 20% of Moroccan women agreed with this.
    So, the average Muslim man in the third world is more or less Archie Bunker, or maybe Archie Bunker's father.

    ...rather meh IMO, compared to the apocalyptic visions we get from the anti-immigrant faction.

    Here are some other polls, about American Muslims in particular.

























    Americans Muslims are remarkably similar to conservative American Christians.

    Not libertarians, but not planning on massacring the infidels or stoning anyone either.

    Tempest in a teacup this
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 06-11-2017 at 12:22 AM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  32. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The UNION YANKEE army was filled with Irish and German immigrants eager to serve the almighty state and subjugate the south.
    The poor always fight the wars.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  33. #119

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post

    So, the average Muslim man in the third world is more or less Archie Bunker, or maybe Archie Bunker's father.
    "Pew asked asked survey respondents "whether honor killings are ever justified as punishment for pre- or extra-marital sex." In the practice, a person is killed -- often by his or her own family -- for having sex out of wedlock. The victim is typically a woman.
    Honor killings still happen, and the data reflect why: Majorities of Muslims surveyed rejected the practice in only 14 out of 23 countries. Support for honor killings appears to be highest in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c8bfa247551f

    I don't know anything about Archie Bunker. I suspect there isn't an isn't an honor killing episode.

    It is true, American Muslims are much less radicalized. I am aware. I don't think it is a useful reference. Muslims only make up 1% of the population and 75% of that 1% are not descended from the major problem areas. Only 26% of Muslims in the US are of Arab descent and a lot of those people are second and third generation Americans. The attitudes of new immigrants from the Middle East are much different.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States#Demographics

    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Dave Chappelle might call themselves Muslims. Black Muslims and Muslims from India are like Christians and Jews who just ignore the bad parts of their religion.

  34. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    "Pew asked asked survey respondents "whether honor killings are ever justified as punishment for pre- or extra-marital sex." In the practice, a person is killed -- often by his or her own family -- for having sex out of wedlock. The victim is typically a woman.
    Honor killings still happen, and the data reflect why: Majorities of Muslims surveyed rejected the practice in only 14 out of 23 countries. Support for honor killings appears to be highest in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan.
    I saw it, that's why I said "more or less," and included Archie Bunker Sr.

    Hey, where did all these farmer's daughter/shotgun jokes come from, I wonder?

    The cultural gap's just not as large as you're implying.

    It is true, American Muslims are much less radicalized. I am aware. I don't think it is a useful reference. Muslims only make up 1% of the population and 75% of that 1% are not descended from the major problem areas. Only 26% of Muslims in the US are of Arab descent and a lot of those people are second and third generation Americans. The attitudes of new immigrants from the Middle East are much different.
    So then the problem isn't the religion itself, but the environment where the people are living, right? And attitudes change when environment changes? And even third world Muslims abroad are mostly fine on the important issues (like, not exterminating non-Muslims, as in the hysterical vision of certain anti-immigrant groups).
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 06-11-2017 at 01:01 AM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken



  35. Remove this section of ads by registering.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. To fix immigration and welfare
    By alucard13mm in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-17-2016, 01:10 PM
  2. "You Can't Have Open Immigration With A Welfare State"
    By Sola_Fide in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 221
    Last Post: 10-10-2015, 01:47 AM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-24-2013, 05:17 PM
  4. Can we agree that if we abolished minimum wage and cut off welfare, immigration...
    By LayZayFaire in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-21-2011, 07:20 PM
  5. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-03-2007, 05:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •