Once upon a time, forum members believed and respected Ron Paul and joined this forum to connect with other liberty-minded people. RP will not support Trump- so why do you still have him in your avatar. It's obvious that you do not believe or respect his POV anymore.Originally Posted by LibertyEagle
There is no spoon.
Is there any difference between Rev appointing himself to the forum purity squad vs. you appointing yourself to the national purity squad?
Can't have war without nationalism. How you gonna rally the troops and pay for the guns?
"If my sons did not want wars, there would be no wars." --Mother of They That Shall Not Be Named, in her last days
Last edited by Jamesiv1; 06-10-2016 at 03:05 AM.
He's a negotiator. He makes deals.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ender again.
Touché
I was talking to the OP at that point.
I was talking to the OP at that point too. You'll notice all of that is above where I quoted you. In fact, I didn't see your post until I posted my post, and edited to address you. I don't know why the system didn't make note of that. But no matter how paranoid you are, not everything said is said about you.
The neanderthals are not around laying prior claims. Though some people might look at your candidate and wonder if some are.
The subset of regular posters on the forum who don't hate everyone they see, and their own ancestors too.
Being a white Christian of purely European descent, I can't help but wonder who you think you're talking to.
Ah, but if you paid any attention to history, you'd realize that not all whites are quite so magnanimous toward you.
So, you're a person who, whatever she might consider herself to be, is allying with people who consider her inferior to promote a candidate who would jump on a world government if he can get himself in a position to deal his way into the top dog seat of it. Of course, he hasn't said so out loud. But anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear know I'm right about him.
Patriots support, defend and uphold the Constitution. Trump would just be another using it as toilet paper. The Constitution is what turned this melting pot into the greatest nation on earth, not white skin. Patriots know this.
Last edited by acptulsa; 06-10-2016 at 06:21 AM.
Speaking of study, perhaps you should take your own advice.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwor...gration-theorySince the early 1990s, however, the genetic evidence indicates that Indians, as a distinct peoples, are at least 30,000 years old, and likely much older. Linguistic evidence has also pointed to Indians being at least 35,000 years old, and possibly 50,000 years old. The Beringian Standstill theory thus allows the archeologists and the geneticists to have their cake and eat it too, as it gives the time for the Paloeindians to develop unique genetic and linguistic characteristics, while at the same time, it keeps them out of the Americas.
But like the Bering Strait theory, the Beringian Standstill theory requires some unusual circumstances to make it work, the most important of which is that the Paleoindians who lived in Beringia were completely isolated from any other humans for more than 10,000 years and maybe up to 20,000 years, to prevent genetic and linguistic mixing. Rather than confirming that Paleoindians lived in Beringia, the new study seems to be anther example of “science by press release,” where the conclusions are hyped well beyond what the actual findings show. New evidence, especially from South America, is rapidly changing our understanding of the ancient past, making it hopeful that a century and a half of long-held dogma may be overturned, and other views about Indian origins will finally see the light.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwor...-theory-154063Deloria also argued that science, when studying people, was not neutral. In his view, some scientific theories harbored social and political agendas that were used to deprive Indians and other minorities of their rights. Many of the assumptions that underlay certain scientific principles were based on obsolete religious or social views, and he urged science to shed these dubious relics. The issue for Deloria was not science vs. religion (or tradition), it was good science vs. bad science, and in his view, the Bering Strait Theory was bad science.
Nor was Deloria alone in this opinion. Since it was first proposed in the late 16th century, and especially in its most recent incarnations in the late 19th and the 20th centuries, the most vociferous critics of the Bering Strait Theory have been scientists. Even among archaeologists and physical anthropologists, generally the most dogmatic proponents of this theory, it has always been extremely factious. And the abuse they would heap upon each other was no less acidic than that they spewed on outsiders.
... Other than Eskimo-Aleut and Na-Dené, linguists have yet to find any connection with any language stocks of the Americas and those of Asia. Along with the tremendous hemispheric diversity, this created serious doubts about the dates proposed by archaeologists and physical anthropologists for Indian origins. At the beginning of the 20th century it was held to be at most 10,000 years and generally only 5,000 years. In 1916, Edward Sapir, among the most important and influential linguists in history, countered the prevailing archaeological view; “ten thousand years, however, seems a hopelessly inadequate span of time for the development from a homogeneous origin of such linguistic differentiation as is actually found in America.” Instead he argued that, “the best piece of evidence of great antiquity of man in America is linguistic diversification rather than archaeological.”
...Starting in 1987, the tensions between the proponents of the Bering Strait Theory and linguists turned into open warfare as archaeologists and geneticists used a highly disputed (and now completely discredited) theory by the linguist Joseph Greenberg to claim that the linguistic evidence now (after hundreds of years of refuting it) showed that Indians migrated from Asia to the New World around 15,000 years ago. The dispute led to a torrent of scientific papers by the world’s most prominent linguists denouncing the use of “non-science” and faulty data to back the Bering Strait Theory. The archaeologists and geneticists largely ignored the objections, forcing a group of linguists–led by Lyle Campbell, author of the standard work in that field, American Indian Languages: the Historical Linguistics of Native America, and Ives Goddard, curator at the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution and the linguistic and technical editor of the massive Handbook of North American Indians–to write to the American Journal of Human Genetics in 2004 and condemn the widespread use of pseudo-scientific linguistic “evidence” in genetic studies about Indian origins.
The dispute also led the influential linguist, Johanna Nichols, to publish “Linguistic Diversity and the First Settlement of the New World,” in the journal Language in 1990. In her introduction, she first made two important scientific points: the diversity of the languages of the New World is due to “the operation of regular principles of linguistic geography;” and that the linguistic and archaeological evidence from the Sahul clearly contradicted the attempts to assign early dates for the Bering Strait migration, since the assignment of early dates in the New World would create a scientific anomaly; “but such a discrepancy–one of at least an order of magnitude–must be assumed if we adhere to the Clovis [15,000 years ago] or received chronology [20,000 years ago] for the settlement of the New World.”
Nichols’ paper used six independent linguistic methods for calculating American Indian antiquity and she determined that it would have taken a minimum of 50,000 years for all of the American Indian languages to have evolved from one language, or 35,000 years if migrants had come in multiple waves. She concluded that, “The unmistakable testimony of the linguistic evidence is that the New World has been inhabited nearly as long as Australia or New Guinea.”
The advocates of the Bering Strait Theory have countered that the linguistic evidence, strong as it may be, is not “proof” that Indians have inhabited the Americas for more than 15,000 years, and granted, it is not proof, it is evidence. The demand by the proponents of the Bering Strait Theory for “indisputable proof” is actually a curious but important aspect of that theory. Science is only rarely able to prove things with absolute certainty, and it normally confines itself to mathematical probability. As one scientist put it, “proof is not a currency of science,” and virtually all widely accepted scientific theories are based upon the preponderance of the evidence, not proof. This strident demand for “proof” while ignoring the evidence is abnormal in science and reflects the fact that originally the Bering Strait Theory was not a scientific theory at all, but a dogma. And this dogmatic stance, along with the vicious nature of the debate surrounding it, has long been a sore point for many scientists, not just for Indians.
We will be known forever by the tracks we leave. - Dakota
Go Forward With Courage
When you are in doubt, be still, and wait;
when doubt no longer exists for you, then go forward with courage.
So long as mists envelop you, be still;
be still until the sunlight pours through and dispels the mists
-- as it surely will.
Then act with courage.
Ponca Chief White Eagle
The world is in a constant state of change. Humans can't stop it. Nor can any country stop itself from changing. If you stop change, you die. Yes, for some the idea of change is difficult but you can't halt the changes- you can only adapt to them. "But back in the good old days....." Got news for you. The Good Old Days were not as fun and easy as we may think we remember them to be.
There are three certainties in life. One is change. The second is that it will be a struggle with ups and downs. The third is death.
People, animals, and even plants migrate. They go towards the best place for them to live. If you don't want people coming here, you need it to be the crappiest place on Earth. But then you won't want to be here either. People are free to complain about it but they are not able to do anything about it. So deal with it. Life is too short.
Last edited by Zippyjuan; 06-10-2016 at 01:33 PM.
Point of order on this. If race-delineation is the fundamental backbone of this question, then the race is Caucasian rather than White ... and it includes most of the Hispanics that La Raza advocates for. Does that change the nature of these questions in any way?
Race as "White" is kind of a loaded term. It's often written to exclude certain people collectives - such as non-Hispanic Whites ... or in the 1830's, the non-Irish Whites and non-Catholic Whites
Last edited by Voluntarist; 06-11-2016 at 12:02 PM.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.
Yes, we can adapt, by adopting a policy of kicking all foreigners out of the country.
Now that would be a Great change.
- Kim KardashianIt's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!
My pronouns are he/him/his
There's a reason this country is called America.
Because its made of Americans.
If you aint American you can get out
- Kim KardashianIt's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!
My pronouns are he/him/his
"If you don't elect Trump," Romney,, McCain,, etc.
I have heard this tune before.
I could never dance to it.
Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
Ron Paul 2004
Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
It's all about Freedom
Did the Anglo Saxon's lose their country 100 years ago to the Celts, Germans, Italians, and Poles?
Stop believing stupid things
What does that even mean, for a nation to die? I'd love to see the federal government die.
Just stay tuned and watch the show.
Our country is long gone.
“[T]he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.” (Heller, 554 U.S., at ___, 128 S.Ct., at 2822.)
How long before "going liberal" replaces "going postal"?
this is true
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it."
James Madison
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams
Μολὼν λάβε
Dum Spiro, Pugno
Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito
When I said "individualism" I meant the sovereignty of the individual.
I had LE down as several things, but up to this point White Nationalist wasn't one of them.
Allowing other races to exist doesn't mean that you hate your own race.
I think it's a stretch to call her a white nationalist. I think xenophobe would be more apt.
I got your back.
^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.
What usually follows populist nationalism?
FASCISM.
White nationalists want that, so they like Trump. And the idea you hate white people or America simply because you reject collectivist thinking, like nationalism and ethnic pride, and instead embrace individualism fully, is nonsense...
^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.
You can't have nationalism (a form of collectivism) and individualism simultaneously, logically. Cognitive dissonance/logical inconsistency.
^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.
Nah, Lew never gave up courting racists like he and Rothbard attempted years back, to forge some coalition of paleocons and libertarians and white nationalists. This isn't a new gimmick for him. It's the one major stain on Rothbard's record too.
^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.
This forum has been allowed to drift so far from libertarianism and Ron Paul's message that it's basically unrecognizable. Big tent nonsense doesn't work. A pure message to wake people up, and not try to win over that, does.
^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.
I suspect that for Rothbard it was a Machiavellian strategy, which hasn't turned out so well, but must have seemed plausible at the time.
For Lew, I think he actually bought into his own bull$#@!.
...assuming he isn't an entirely unprincipled click whore.
Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 06-11-2016 at 02:34 PM.
The nation I want to preserve died about 75 years ago. At this point I'm just hoping to have a job until I drop dead.
Take this cult of personality garbage to Mussoliniforums. Libertarians don't get told what to think, they make up their own minds. At least that's how it used to be.
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us