- Dołączono
- 12 Wrz 2016
After reading through your post, I remember you, you're the one on the site that is concerned with liberal outreach, and what they think.
My counter argument would be that Indians don't want White people to leave the continent, I would also argue that leftists bringing in a bunch of foreigners to settle the land is something they also don't want but leftists are doing it anyway. Amerindians just want more gibs, they don't want to go back to living off the land hunting with bows and arrows.
If we're talking about concepts of morality and restitution, we have no choice but to live in the present. It's too late to persecute Christopher Columbus or Andrew Jackson, and to put them on trial (along with the chiefs who sold their land). We can only live in the present with people who did nothing wrong trying to find a moral compromise that benefits all parties involved. "Doing what's right" not out of guilt but out of moral principle.
Probably something like half of the White population of America didn't even have ancestors dating back to the 1800's, and probably something like 90% don't half ancestry in America prior to 1800. The argument about the Amerindian issue is one between Indians and Non-Indians, not Indians and Whites like the Liberals frame it as, because it makes no sense to blame modern Whites for things that happened hundreds of years ago, and even less sense to blame modern Whites for things they have nothing to do with that happened hundreds of years ago.
Meanwhile, the Jews are aggressively colonizing now in the present immorally. An argument could also be made for immigration though that is more abstract. Certainly many immigrants see themselves as colonizers and have no problem with it.
They're retarded though, they refuse to look at the issue objectively. I've talked about this subject with a couple Indians, and the thought doesn't even cross their mind that they owe the British just as much as they believe the British owe them. I would point out that while it's true that Britain extracted resources, they also built institutions, railways, buildings, etc. I supported their notion that Reparations should be paid, but that we should add up the value of everything the British invested into India and subtract all the value they extracted from India and have whoever owes money pay the other.
The Indians I spoke to looked shocked, and would respond with things like "I guess" or "I never thought of it that way".
Some Leftists though will be able to listen to the logic of "Restitution is fine, but no one alive today is to blame, and that restitution has to be fair on both sides".
Israel's situation is morally reprehensible because it's something happening TODAY supported by people living TODAY who have no intention whatsoever to be fair to people living TODAY. It's the moral action to oppose such a thing, and a leftist claiming that's "weak" due to your ethnic heritage or political leaning either doesn't actually believe the principle they claim they do, or are simply trolling you.
If you followed TRS for some time, they've often in the past talked about how you have to hold the Left to their own stated principles. You have to be aggressive with them and put them on the backfoot. You don't agree with them and say "but it's not a bad thing..."
Russia sees Ukraine as a fraternal people which makes it a different story and is in line with modern European sensibilities of fighting over who has the real claim to a land or people. It's not colonialism.
The left is made up of wealthy exploitive receivers, underclass mobs, and virtue signaling upper and upper middle class Whites. What do you even mean by "no one"?
I'd blanket consider them to be aggressors themselves if they believe "all White people bad". I'd charge them with wanting to harm innocent people themselves in order to extract wealth for personal gain.
If you provide a coherent argument like the ones I presented above, the virtue signalers would have to passively accept it, since it would reframe them as good and moral Whites. The other groups on the Left would have mixed feelings, Amerindians and Palestinians would likely be fine with it, Blacks somewhere in the middle, and Hispanics/Jews/Fags would be reeing.
Your issue Ishtar is that you care way too much what the Left thinks. I'm not sure if it's due to altruism, that you believe the left can be won over like Eric Striker seems to fantasize about, but you can't save them all. Some drug addled welfare tranny who thinks "she" is owed money by a single 45 year old White man making minimum wage on the justification he is cis isn't going to have a change of heart because of an argument you made. They just want the money and schadenfreude that someone who may have misgender them is now their bitch.
You can't rationalize someone out of a position they didn't rationalize themselves into.
