muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

So you qualify as a "Heritage American based on your ancestors' attempt to end the Union? You are a regular Einstein.

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions. This is all just BS. It is people frightened of "them." You and your friends should be ashamed; you do not understand the core ideals of Christianity or America.

---

The confederates attempted to leave peacefully but the treacherous yankess wouldnt allow it. The South are the true Heritage Americans.

---

We will never know, given that it was the peaceful and freedom-loving (well, freedom for some) Southerners who started the firing. I will fill you in on how the rest of the argument goes-You and the other redenck racists start to argue how it wasn't really about slavery, and Lincoln himself would have let the slave trade go on. Never connecting the dots to the fact that the reason they started firing was that they were sure Lincoln was not going to let them have their human chattel. Given that you now are praising slaveowners. I am going to double down on your ignorance about Christian and American ideals.

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

So you qualify as a "Heritage American based on your ancestors' attempt to end the Union? You are a regular Einstein.

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions. This is all just BS. It is people frightened of "them." You and your friends should be ashamed; you do not understand the core ideals of Christianity or America.

---

The confederates attempted to leave peacefully but the treacherous yankess wouldnt allow it. The South are the true Heritage Americans.

---

We will never know, given that it was the peaceful and freedom-loving (well, freedom for some) Southerners who started the firing. I will fill you in on how the rest of the argument goes-You and the other redenck racists start to argue how it wasn't really about slavery, and Lincoln himself would have let the slave trade go on. Never connecting the dots to the fact that the reason they started firing was that they were sure Lincoln was not going to let them have their human chattel. Given that you now are praising slaveowners. I am going to double down on your ignorance about Christian and American ideals.

---

I guarantee you with 100% certainty that the cadets at the Citadel that did the firing didnt own any slaves or give one rip about slavery. It was only about the treacherous tyrannical outsider yankees coming to their home to tell them how it was gonna be.

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

So you qualify as a "Heritage American based on your ancestors' attempt to end the Union? You are a regular Einstein.

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions. This is all just BS. It is people frightened of "them." You and your friends should be ashamed; you do not understand the core ideals of Christianity or America.

---

The confederates attempted to leave peacefully but the treacherous yankess wouldnt allow it. The South are the true Heritage Americans.

---

We will never know, given that it was the peaceful and freedom-loving (well, freedom for some) Southerners who started the firing. I will fill you in on how the rest of the argument goes-You and the other redenck racists start to argue how it wasn't really about slavery, and Lincoln himself would have let the slave trade go on. Never connecting the dots to the fact that the reason they started firing was that they were sure Lincoln was not going to let them have their human chattel. Given that you now are praising slaveowners. I am going to double down on your ignorance about Christian and American ideals.

---

I guarantee you with 100% certainty that the cadets at the Citadel that did the firing didnt own any slaves or give one rip about slavery. It was only about the treacherous tyrannical outsider yankees coming to their home to tell them how it was gonna be.

---

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.

I was about to lament that this illuminating thread was going to wander into a civil war tangent, until I realized Bo French and Historian are still fighting that war.

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions...

---

If we are talking about Indians from the Indian subcontinent…you might want to check those figures

[The 1970 United States Census recorded 51,000 foreign-born individuals from India living in the U.S.

Up from about 12,296 in 1960]

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/journal/spotlight/indian-immigrants-united-states-2010

Redbrickbear said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions...

---

If we are talking about Indians from the Indian subcontinent…you might want to check those figures

[The 1970 United States Census recorded 51,000 foreign-born individuals from India living in the U.S.

Up from about 12,296 in 1960]

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/journal/spotlight/indian-immigrants-united-states-2010

---

You are correct.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions...

---

If we are talking about Indians from the Indian subcontinent…you might want to check those figures

[The 1970 United States Census recorded 51,000 foreign-born individuals from India living in the U.S.

Up from about 12,296 in 1960]

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/journal/spotlight/indian-immigrants-united-states-2010

---

Yeah the answer is no Indian would qualify as a heritage American until we are long dead and AI kills us all. They are pagan outsiders that have been allowed into Texas in crazy numbers.

muddybrazos said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions...

---

If we are talking about Indians from the Indian subcontinent…you might want to check those figures

[The 1970 United States Census recorded 51,000 foreign-born individuals from India living in the U.S.

Up from about 12,296 in 1960]

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/journal/spotlight/indian-immigrants-united-states-2010

---

Yeah the answer is no Indian would qualify as a heritage American until we are long dead and AI kills us all. They are pagan outsiders that have been allowed into Texas in crazy numbers.

---

Funny you mention that. When AI attacks, we might want them on our side.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological- sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, "oppressed vs oppressor", etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

The facts being taught were correct. America has oppressed many groups. That should be taught and many don't want it taught.

The hard parts are whether the context is an excuse or an explanation and wheter the oppression is continuing.

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

The facts being taught were correct. America has oppressed many groups. That should be taught and many don't want it taught.

The hard parts are whether the context is an excuse or an explanation and wheter the oppression is continuing.

---

So when you do that you have these newcomer like the Indian guiy I talked to in NYC trying to automatically come at me about "white privlege". Nobody who was born after the 60s legally had any white privilege.and damn sure no Indian gets to claim to be oppressed like a heritage black American. Thats the problem with the liberals is that all these newcomers think they get to act like they were opressed by whites and that couldnt be farther from the truth. We the people who have to share our country with Indians and Pakistanis are oppressed by them. At least hispanics like chevys and beer and latina ladies are baddies. At this point we just need more hispanics to come and thelp us out.

---

No white privilege. Like the CIvil Rights Act wiped the slate clean and everyone is on an even playing field. Not close to true, as evidenced by your assumption that Hispanics are here to help us. Finally, the idea that we are "oppressed by the Pakistanis" may be the single dumbest thing ever posted on this board.

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

The facts being taught were correct. America has oppressed many groups. That should be taught and many don't want it taught.

The hard parts are whether the context is an excuse or an explanation and wheter the oppression is continuing.

---

So when you do that you have these newcomer like the Indian guiy I talked to in NYC trying to automatically come at me about "white privlege". Nobody who was born after the 60s legally had any white privilege.and damn sure no Indian gets to claim to be oppressed like a heritage black American. Thats the problem with the liberals is that all these newcomers think they get to act like they were opressed by whites and that couldnt be farther from the truth. We the people who have to share our country with Indians and Pakistanis are oppressed by them. At least hispanics like chevys and beer and latina ladies are baddies. At this point we just need more hispanics to come and thelp us out.

---

No white privilege. Like the CIvil Rights Act wiped the slate clean and everyone is on an even playing field. Not close to true, as evidenced by your assumption that Hispanics are here to help us. Finally, the idea that we are "oppressed by the Pakistanis" may be the single dumbest thing ever posted on this board.

---

Bro, there is no slate. People are born smart, dumb, ugly or pretty. Nobody is equal in this world. The smarter and better looking you are the better off you are. If youre a smart indian you can scam your way to a good job and live in Plano. Also, if you're mid level but youre good w people you can go far. People like a nice black guy who is personable and has sales skills. Everyone loves hispanic people who are nice and hard working. You and your lib grievance crap is in the past.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

I just don't buy the idea that people like Heil Harrison and Danny Jackboot are ranting against brown people because they've spent their whole lives being indoctrinated by liberals. There has to be something else going on there.

---

Another way to describe it is that…"American youth are being trained to see race, group, grievance, and oppression"

This will have consequences. (It already has). And both sides youth will embrace it in different ways.

Baylor has scholarships now for kids to discuss race issues.

People might come to far different conclusions than what even those teaching them think they will come to…

"Racial healing" and racial "justice" will not be things easy to define or keep to any set interpretation.

[President Linda Livingstone, Ph.D. announced the establishment of the Trailblazer Scholars Program on July 13, 2020. The scholarship program is designed to recognize the importance of fostering diversity…

Students in the Trailblazer Scholars Program will participate in leadership and opportunities through Baylor's Multicultural Affairs Department and through other groups and programs on Baylor's campus.

Part of Baylor's commitment to listen, learn and take actionable steps regarding racial healing and justice in America….]

Frank Galvin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

The facts being taught were correct. America has oppressed many groups. That should be taught and many don't want it taught.

The hard parts are whether the context is an excuse or an explanation and wheter the oppression is continuing.

---

And in truth all human groups have oppressed others and vice versa. Any ready of history tells us that.

And what was it ATL telling us about constantly fixating on things of this nature?

"Obsession on the past serves as a nostalgic anchor distracting us from the ways forward and a convenient excuse for unrelated failings.

Whether you feel you are opportunity oppressed by…you're still reveling in the same victimhood"

When you train young people to think in terms of race/group and who oppressed whom….people will grow up thinking in these terms. And then acting on it

Don't blame the kids for drinking the mothers milk of race and grievance that was offered to them constantly.

Not hard to see it's now being embraced by all sides in different forms

You are using my words selectively. I said anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our history, culture, and values. Assimilation is necessary, a foreigners on visas, building statues to pagan gods, or coming here to conquer and impose alien values are the opposite of Heritage Americans and their behavior is the opposite of assimilation.

It appears that you deliberately and dishonestly ignored my main point. You are trying to make everything about ethnicity so you can falsely accuse us of racism and I repeatedly stress that ethnicity is irrelevant.

You do realize that it's generally considered racist to compare people to monkeys, right?

I know you were joking but it wasn't funny.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

OK, how did they get it so wrong?

---

I'm asking you..

I would guess that taking their cues from those above them in cultural power…constantly being obsessed with race, identity, grievances…that could not have helped them

Example being Baylor and its land acknowledgment grievance mongering and race-DEI-diversity narratives

The kids were taught this stuff

Constantly call up balkanization and the Balkans mentality will eventually answer

---

So in addition to blaming others for our misfortune, we're now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune.

---

I'm asking a simple question of where the younger generation got their ideas about identify based politics and grievance from

Do you think the kids created this stuff ex nihilo?

Do you have any other ideas or contributions to that discussion?

---

I would suggest that xenophobia might not be entirely an invention of the left.

---

So we are admitting toxic narratives and ideas can be passed down to the kids?

Or are we "now blaming others for the fact that we're blaming others for our misfortune."

---

I'm sick of the response to every problem being "but but they did it fiiiirrsst!" It's one thing to deflect criticism by saying you're just following the left's playbook. It's another thing to actually believe it. I mean let's not get carried away here.

---

Another way to look at it might be just "you should be careful what you are teaching the youth"

The young are actually the one group does get the benefit of pointing out that they are coming into a system as the new humans in the group.

They are being acted on first. Being that they are young and without the power/ability to form their own educational institutions or value systems as mere children.

That not "whataboutism"…that's a biological sociological fact

Someone taught them about race politics, oppressed vs opressed, etc. Because as young kids they had no preconceived political & social beliefs

---

The facts being taught were correct. America has oppressed many groups. That should be taught and many don't want it taught.

The hard parts are whether the context is an excuse or an explanation and wheter the oppression is continuing.

---

And in truth all human groups have oppressed others and vice versa. Any ready of history tells us that.

And what was it ATL telling us about constantly fixating on things of this nature?

"Obsession on the past serves as a nostalgic anchor distracting us from the ways forward and a convenient excuse for unrelated failings.

Whether you feel you are opportunity oppressed by…you're still reveling in the same victimhood"

When you train young people to think in terms of race/group and who oppressed whom….people will grow up thinking in these terms. And then acting on it

Don't blame the kids for drinking the mothers milk of race and grievance that was offered to them constantly.

Not hard to see it's now being embraced by all sides in different forms

---

Three reactions, the first the easiest. It is very convenient for the descendants of the oppressors to say "don't focus on that race stuff-although it was one of our guiding principles for centuries." The just-get-over-it crowd offers a callous position that is not helpful and automatically provokes a negative response.

Second, in my personal experience, fairly virulent racism still exists . I read it here daily and I see it in action in the world. Pretending it doesn't also provokes a negative response.

Third, there is a spectrum between "obesession" and "cover up." I am sure that teaching about historical race relations in this country falls at all points in the spectrum. Racists and race-baiters each pretend that the bulk of the teaching is at the opposite end of the spectrum from where they are. In reality, it is much more centrist.

So I can't agree with either your diagnosis or prescription except for this. I have seen people of good faith argue for decades that the best way to eradicate racism and its effects is either: (a) find, and root out through the legal process, all forms of systematic racism, or (b) have the alleged victims exercise the rights that they have already won in a way that emphasis personal resonsibilty for their outcomes. I have never understood why the answer isn't "Both."

historian said:

---

You are using my words selectively. I said anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our history, culture, and values. Assimilation is necessary, a foreigners on visas, building statues to pagan gods, or coming here to conquer and impose alien values are the opposite of Heritage Americans and their behavior is the opposite of assimilation.

It appears that you deliberately and dishonestly ignored my main point. You are trying to make everything about ethnicity so you can falsely accuse us of racism and I repeatedly stress that ethnicity is irrelevant.

---

We still have a First Amendment, at least on paper.

Indians aren't trying to conquer anybody. They see an opportunity to build a good life. Quit demonizing people.

historian said:

---

You do realize that it's generally considered racist to compare people to monkeys, right?

I know you were joking but it wasn't funny.

---

So why are you supporting a candidate who refers to the reduction in SNAP benefits as "chimping out?"

Sam Lowry said:

---

The fact remains that communists and fascists never coexisted for long, and certainly not within the same party. It's yet another reason to question whether you have proper definitions of the terms, or any real definitions at all.

---

Different groups of socialists often have trouble coexisting, hence the purges and violent clashes among them. The socialists expelled Mussolini so he created the racist party with many of the same ideas (he certainly did not make an ideological 180 over it). Lenin & Trotsky fought a civil war against the Mensheviks, Hitler purged the SA, Stalin purged other Bolsheviks, and so on. You are helping to prove my point that there are more similarities than differences.

Heritage Americans include refugees from communism during the Cold War, such as the parents of Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. They don't have to be descended from 19th century Americans or WWII vets. They only have to live here because they want to embrace our culture and values (greed is not enough). The Cubans in South Florida are an excellent example but so are the Vietnamese & Laotians who came in the 1970s & 1980s. Elon Musk is too.

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The fact remains that communists and fascists never coexisted for long, and certainly not within the same party. It's yet another reason to question whether you have proper definitions of the terms, or any real definitions at all.

---

Different groups of socialists often have trouble coexisting, hence the purges and violent clashes among them. The socialists expelled Mussolini so he created the racist party with many of the same ideas (he certainly did not make an ideological 180 over it). Lenin & Trotsky fought a civil war against the Mensheviks, Hitler purged the SA, Stalin purged other Bolsheviks, and so on. You are helping to prove my point that there are more similarities than differences.

---

I didn't ask whether there were more similarities than differences. I asked whether the Democratic Party was communist or fascist. It can't very well be both at the same time.

Frank Galvin said:

---

I was about to lament that this illuminating thread was going to wander into a civil war tangent, until I realized Bo French and Historian are still fighting that war.

---

I agree with you more than muddy when it comes to the Civil War. I don't understand how any modern Texan or southerner can be bitter about a war their ancestors lost 160 years ago. We don't know what would have happened had some event had occurred differently. Such speculation is a waste of time.

Yes, it was about slavery and much more. The south started the war and were responsible for a series of events leading up to it. Lincoln was willing to allow slavery to continue (the Republicans were antislavery but did not think abolition was constitutional) but he was unwilling to allow its expansion. It was the Dems that guaranteed he would win the election by splitting and nominating a second candidate. It was the Dems who ranked efforts at compromise by making demands Lincoln had already rejected (expansion, a major plank in the GOP agenda). It was the southern Dems who unconstitutionally seceded and it was southern Dems who fired the first shots. The Dems were responsible every step of the way.

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The fact remains that communists and fascists never coexisted for long, and certainly not within the same party. It's yet another reason to question whether you have proper definitions of the terms, or any real definitions at all.

---

Different groups of socialists often have trouble coexisting, hence the purges and violent clashes among them. The socialists expelled Mussolini so he created the racist party with many of the same ideas (he certainly did not make an ideological 180 over it). Lenin & Trotsky fought a civil war against the Mensheviks, Hitler purged the SA, Stalin purged other Bolsheviks, and so on. You are helping to prove my point that there are more similarities than differences.

---

I didn't ask whether there were more similarities than differences. I asked whether the Democratic Party was communist or fascist. It can't very well be both at the same time.

---

You sure about that?

[Beefsteak Nazi: term used to the describe communists and socialists who joined the Nazi Party. Munich-born American historian Konrad Heiden- was one of the first to document this phenomenon in his 1936 book Hitler: A Biography, remarking that in the Sturmabteilung (Brownshirts, SA) ranks there were "large numbers of Communists and Social Democrats" and that "many of the storm troops were called 'beefsteaks' brown outside and red within"

Ernst Rohm, SA co-founder and later commander, developed an "expanding Röhm-cult" within the SA ranks, through which many members sought a revolutionary socialist regime, radicalizing the SA

Röhm's radicalization came to the forefront in 1933-1934 when he sought to have his plebeian SA troopers engage in permanent or "second revolution" after Hitler had become Chancellor. With 2.5 million stormtroopers under his command by late 1933, Röhm envisaged a purging of the conservative faction, the "Reaktion" in Germany that would entail more nationalization of industry, "worker control of the means of production", and the "confiscation and redistribution of property and wealth of the upper classes".

In some cities, the number of party-switching beefsteak Nazis was thought to be significant. Rudolf Diels, head of the Gestapo from 1933 to 1934, reported that "70 percent" of new SA recruits had been communists in the city of Berlin...]

The Terminator movies are science fiction. The most important thing to remember about sci-fi is that it is fiction. Likewise the most important thing about AI is that it is artificial. You cannot make any serious points about reality from such a film.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The fact remains that communists and fascists never coexisted for long, and certainly not within the same party. It's yet another reason to question whether you have proper definitions of the terms, or any real definitions at all.

---

Different groups of socialists often have trouble coexisting, hence the purges and violent clashes among them. The socialists expelled Mussolini so he created the racist party with many of the same ideas (he certainly did not make an ideological 180 over it). Lenin & Trotsky fought a civil war against the Mensheviks, Hitler purged the SA, Stalin purged other Bolsheviks, and so on. You are helping to prove my point that there are more similarities than differences.

---

I didn't ask whether there were more similarities than differences. I asked whether the Democratic Party was communist or fascist. It can't very well be both at the same time.

---

You sure about that?

[Beefsteak Nazi: term used to the describe communists and socialists who joined the Nazi Party. Munich-born American historian Konrad Heiden- was one of the first to document this phenomenon in his 1936 book Hitler: A Biography, remarking that in the Sturmabteilung (Brownshirts, SA) ranks there were "large numbers of Communists and Social Democrats" and that "many of the storm troops were called 'beefsteaks' brown outside and red within"

Ernst Rohm, SA co-founder and later commander, developed an "expanding Röhm-cult" within the SA ranks, through which many members sought a revolutionary socialist regime, radicalizing the SA

Röhm's radicalization came to the forefront in 1933-1934 when he sought to have his plebeian SA troopers engage in permanent or "second revolution" after Hitler had become Chancellor. With 2.5 million stormtroopers under his command by late 1933, Röhm envisaged a purging of the conservative faction, the "Reaktion" in Germany that would entail more nationalization of industry, "worker control of the means of production", and the "confiscation and redistribution of property and wealth of the upper classes".

In some cities, the number of party-switching beefsteak Nazis was thought to be significant. Rudolf Diels, head of the Gestapo from 1933 to 1934, reported that "70 percent" of new SA recruits had been communists in the city of Berlin...]

---

Yes, I'm sure about it. All of the fascist parties were rooted in some form of Marxism, so it's not surprising that there were converts and holdovers from communism. The fact remains that fascism was its own movement.

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

So you qualify as a "Heritage American based on your ancestors' attempt to end the Union? You are a regular Einstein.

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions. This is all just BS. It is people frightened of "them." You and your friends should be ashamed; you do not understand the core ideals of Christianity or America.

---

The confederates attempted to leave peacefully but the treacherous yankess wouldnt allow it. The South are the true Heritage Americans.

---

We will never know, given that it was the peaceful and freedom-loving (well, freedom for some) Southerners who started the firing. I will fill you in on how the rest of the argument goes-You and the other redenck racists start to argue how it wasn't really about slavery, and Lincoln himself would have let the slave trade go on. Never connecting the dots to the fact that the reason they started firing was that they were sure Lincoln was not going to let them have their human chattel. Given that you now are praising slaveowners. I am going to double down on your ignorance about Christian and American ideals.

---

I guarantee you with 100% certainty that the cadets at the Citadel that did the firing didnt own any slaves or give one rip about slavery. It was only about the treacherous tyrannical outsider yankees coming to their home to tell them how it was gonna be.

---

Slavery

Them not owning slaves doesn't negate that they are doing the bidding of the slave owners.

I have no doubt that most republicans in Congress are not in the Epstein files. Yet, they're not forcing the full release of the files.

American does have a history of oppression. That's undeniable. But so does every other nation in history. It's dishonest to blame current Americans for what happened decades or a century ago. For example, no black living in America now was ever enslaved in this country (unless trafficked with the aid of Biden & other Dems). No white American white has ever owned slaves (unless they participated in the trafficking with Dems aiding). The reparations movement, like BLdM, the 1619 Project, DEI, CRT, etc ard all extortion rackets designed to enrich a few Marxists at the expense of everyone else, including blacks.

Native Americans also suffered but they have a history of brutality, oppression, and warfare long before Europeans arrived. The truth of each of these issues is much more complicated than the race hustlers are willing to admit. They might be ignorant but that does not excuse their lies.

Leftists who blame everything on racism, white supremacy, or other such propaganda are liars and bigots.

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

I was about to lament that this illuminating thread was going to wander into a civil war tangent, until I realized Bo French and Historian are still fighting that war.

---

I agree with you more than muddy when it comes to the Civil War. I don't understand how any modern Texan or southerner can be bitter about a war their ancestors lost 160 years ago. We don't know what would have happened had some event had occurred differently. Such speculation is a waste of time.

---

Its not Texans adn Southerners tearing down statues today.

The most bitter people today about that war are the ones that actually won it.

Its the strangest phenomena.

What I think you are descripting is that most Southerners &Texans are not willing to buying into political narratives about the war. One side the distillation of Goodness the other side Evil.

The war waged for the Union was not a abolitionist crusade to end slavery. The States having the right to seceded in 1860 was very much in debate. Indeed the North was not sure they did not have that right at the beginning. And Lincoln's call for force against these States was very much see as a horrible Constitutional crime that send more States out the door. And the Southern soldiers did in fact fight hard and long against a much better equipped and far larger numerical opponent...most being extremely poor farm boys.

Its these same Southerners today who see no contradiction in flying the USA's flag and the Confederate battle flag together.

Because they are the ones who have moved on from bitter to brotherhood. They are just not willing to spit on their ancestors.

The other side has not apparently gotten over it. And that side is increasingly taking on a leftwing orientation.

(heck it just got the statue of one of Baylor's major Presidents taken down and shoved in a box because he was a Confederate chaplain...talk about bitter bitter horrid people)

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

You are using my words selectively. I said anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our history, culture, and values. Assimilation is necessary, a foreigners on visas, building statues to pagan gods, or coming here to conquer and impose alien values are the opposite of Heritage Americans and their behavior is the opposite of assimilation.

It appears that you deliberately and dishonestly ignored my main point. You are trying to make everything about ethnicity so you can falsely accuse us of racism and I repeatedly stress that ethnicity is irrelevant.

---

We still have a First Amendment, at least on paper.

Indians aren't trying to conquer anybody. They see an opportunity to build a good life. Quit demonizing people.

---

I don't think Indians are trying to conquer us but many are involved in fraudulent activities. Muslims in general are conquerors. It's a central characteristic of their religion, including lying and killing to achieve their goals.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Anyone can be a Heritage American if they embrace our culture and assimilate.

As for the photo, you make multiple assumptions about the people depicted. We don't know how hard working, smart, or family oriented (your criteria) those few dozen are. It's impossible to tell just by looking at them. In fact, that looks a lot like a racial stereotype! lol

Seriously, though, even if each one of those students are accurately described as such, it does not mean they are Americans. Some might be on student visas. They might be moderately intelligent or lazy. We can only speculate on such things. Like all humans, they represent all facets of the human condition including the traits mentioned.

We don't even know how much they like football based upon one photo. It's safe to assume they enjoyed the one game and might even attend more. But it's also possible they will stop attending gif one reason or another.

More importantly, the point French made was not about this specific group of people. The photo merely provided the pretext for a comment (which might have been unwise). The larger point about the large number of immigrants from South Asia (& the Middle East) that gave come into Texas in a short time is concerning. The experiences of Texans in the Frisco, Houston, and other cities are real.

The Muslims are probably a bigger threat because they are part of a movement of conquest and push for sharia. Sharia has no place anywhere in the Texas, the US, or any western nation. It's incomparable. Hindus building huge statues to pagan gods represent the same cultural issue but in a different way.

---

You do realize that you are agreeing with my main point? If anyone can be a "Heritage American," you cannot look at a photo and say those are not Heritage Americans--like Bo French and half the posters on this thread did.

---

No, not anyone can be a heritage American. A heritage American has grandparents who were in ww2 and ancestors who were confederates and Texas veterans. Pioneers who settled the south and the west. Also, descendants of slaves are heritage Americans. Guillahs in the the lowcountry, creoles in the gulf coast and share croppers in Miss. Tejanos in Texas and obviously all of the Native Americans. The Acadains who were kicked out of Quebec and becam the Cajuns and the Germans who settled central Tx. Those are examples of heritage Americans. Indians or muslims who just got here and are taking advantage of the system arent part of our heriitage. I would even say Cubans in Miami are heritage now bc they have made Miami what it is.

---

So you qualify as a "Heritage American based on your ancestors' attempt to end the Union? You are a regular Einstein.

And how long until the Indians qualify? There were over 300,000 Indians here in the 1960s; their descendants probably number in the millions. This is all just BS. It is people frightened of "them." You and your friends should be ashamed; you do not understand the core ideals of Christianity or America.

---

The confederates attempted to leave peacefully but the treacherous yankess wouldnt allow it. The South are the true Heritage Americans.

---

We will never know, given that it was the peaceful and freedom-loving (well, freedom for some) Southerners who started the firing. I will fill you in on how the rest of the argument goes-You and the other redenck racists start to argue how it wasn't really about slavery, and Lincoln himself would have let the slave trade go on. Never connecting the dots to the fact that the reason they started firing was that they were sure Lincoln was not going to let them have their human chattel. Given that you now are praising slaveowners. I am going to double down on your ignorance about Christian and American ideals.

---

I guarantee you with 100% certainty that the cadets at the Citadel that did the firing didnt own any slaves or give one rip about slavery. It was only about the treacherous tyrannical outsider yankees coming to their home to tell them how it was gonna be.

---

Slavery

Them not owning slaves doesn't negate that they are doing the bidding of the slave owners.

---

How were they "doing the bidding of slave owners" exactly?

Slavery was protected in the Union by law. The North and President Lincoln offered to make slave protections even greater in a new Constitutional Amendment.

The young men that fought that war fought it because of a deeply held Constitutional view that the States are the source of political legitimacy and authority. They can join or leave a Union of States if they wish.

And the Federal (general) government has no right to hold them by force.

"I am a Union man but when they [the Lincoln admin] sends men south it will change my notion. I can do nothing against my own people."-Zebulon B. Vance (Gov. of NC)

"Sweeping aside all legal arguments and metaphysical disquisitions I do not think the answer admits of doubt. Nine men out of ten in the North and ninety-nine out of a hundred in the South would have said ultimate allegiance was due the State."~ Charles F. Adams

"If you bring these [Confederate] leaders to trial it will only condemn the North, for by the Constitution secession is not rebellion. Mr. Lincoln wanted Davis to escape abroad, and I strongly believe he was right in this matter. His capture was a great mistake. His trial, if it is so foolish as to take place, will be a greater one."- Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, USA