Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Conserative Morality]

I'm not necessarily opposed to it. But America is not a Nation as it once was.

John Jay in The Federalist Papers

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice, that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people; a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established their general Liberty and Independence.

American population growth from 1776 to the 1880s was almost entirely through natural births. The "nation of immigrants" meme really didn't exist until the 1910s. It'd be more accurate to call America a nation of immigration restrictionists who have had various periods where immigration was more open.

>> when 1780s America didn't descend from the same ancestors
>> or speak the same language
>> or profess the same religion
>> or were attached to the same principles of government

:thonk:

[Bear Stearns]

They are the ethnonationalists.

Is that what you call someone who wants to move to and integrate into a country not of their ethnic origin?

Funny how words don't mean anything anymore to some people. I believe there's a quote about that.

No, as in the majority of Mexicans believe that the Southwest is theirs. You really think integration is on their to-do list?

It's been noted by many scholars that they are assimilating far more slowly than any other immigrant group since the nation's founding.

[Nea Byzantia]

Are you going to check their political creeds when they cross over the border, Citoyen?

Absolutely.

[Novus America]

Why?
Borders change. Should we roll back all borders to to 1783?

There should, preferably, be more than one sovereign state in the territory that the United States holds, at least in my opinion.

Why? Why such an arbitrary decision? We are not the biggest in terms of land or population.
And unless you break up China too, you are handing China the world on a silver platter.

We need a stronger larger US to compete with China and India long term.

[Conserative Morality]

No, as in the majority of Mexicans believe that the Southwest is theirs. You really think integration is on their to-do list?

It's been noted by many scholars that they are assimilating far more slowly than any other immigrant group since the nation's founding.

lol

I've already responded to this low-grade Facebook Boomer meme level bullshit so many times, it's truly become exhausting.

[Bear Stearns]

John Jay in The Federalist Papers



American population growth from 1776 to the 1880s was almost entirely through natural births. The "nation of immigrants" meme really didn't exist until the 1910s. It'd be more accurate to call America a nation of immigration restrictionists who have had various periods where immigration was more open.

>> when 1780s America didn't descend from the same ancestors
>> or speak the same language
>> or profess the same religion
>> or were attached to the same principles of government

:thonk:

About 80% of American whites in the 1780s (which for all intents purposes were the only Americans in the eyes of people who created the country) were descended from the British Isles, and of them, most had been born in the colonies. Most were Protestant and most spoke English.

Exceptions do not dictate the rule.

[Novus America]

John Jay in The Federalist Papers



American population growth from 1776 to the 1880s was almost entirely through natural births. The "nation of immigrants" meme really didn't exist until the 1910s. It'd be more accurate to call America a nation of immigration restrictionists who have had various periods where immigration was more open.

>> when 1780s America didn't descend from the same ancestors
>> or speak the same language
>> or profess the same religion
>> or were attached to the same principles of government

:thonk:

And twenty percent of the population was African American.

[Conserative Morality]

Absolutely.

The only thing Robespierre did wrong was not guillotine enough people.

[North German Realm]

There should, preferably, be more than one sovereign state in the territory that the United States holds, at least in my opinion.

Why? Why such an arbitrary decision? We are not the biggest in terms of land or population.
And unless you break up China too, you are handing China the world on a silver platter.

We need a stronger larger US to compete with China and India long term.

Bold of you to assume I don't believe the same should be done to China or Russia, but that's not the point. The problem isn't the population or the land area, it's that the US holds the larger populated parts of an entire Continent. Continental Unions shouldn't be allowed to exist, if necessary, they should be partitioned and balkanized. But then again, I am talking about an Alt-His scenario, not our timeline.

[Fahran]

The only thing Robespierre did wrong was not guillotine enough people.

"...Robespierre did wrong..."

This is all I can accept from your sentence, citoyen. Do you know who truly did nothing wrong? Bismarck.

[Novus America]

Don't worry, we can kick out the ethnonationalists to make room for them.

They are the ethnonationalists.

True ethno nationalists would go back to the European country they claim as their ethnic nation.

[Bear Stearns]

It's pretty interesting 19th Century German nationalists considered Irish and Finns Germanic, as well as seemed to support the U.S. annexing Mexico.

I mean, I'm not very surprised about the Mexico thing, but I am surprised about the Irish and Finn thing. Was it the "place" (i.e. Ireland and Finland) that they saw Germanic or the people? (Because iirc, the German Empire wasn't that big a fan of the Baltic People either)

Germanic as in they had large Germanic minorities or were targets of conquest by Germanic nations.

[North German Realm]

The only thing Robespierre did wrong was not guillotine enough people.

"...Robespierre did wrong..."

This is all I can accept from your sentence, citoyen. Do you know who truly did nothing wrong? Bismarck.

Honestly though, the number of gambits Bismarck played that only succeeded based on pure luck and nothing more are unbelievable. Dude was a stone-cold political chessmaster, but the number of times luck basically saved his ass is astoundingly high.

[Fahran]

And twenty percent of the population was African American.

Who spoke English and practiced forms of Protestantism in the majority.

[Conserative Morality]

About 80% of American whites in the 1780s (which for all intents purposes were the only Americans in the eyes of people who created the country) were descended from the British Isles, and of them, most had been born in the colonies. Most were Protestant and most spoke English.

Exceptions do not dictate the rule.

>> ignoring the Dutch
>> ignoring the Germans
>> ignoring that the British Isles at the time did not regard themselves all as one people
>> ignoring that Protestants hate each other almost as much as they hate Catholics

[Bear Stearns]

They are the ethnonationalists.

True ethno nationalists would go back to the European country they claim as their ethnic nation.

What about people whose ethnic origin is in the United States?

[Conserative Morality]

The only thing Robespierre did wrong was not guillotine enough people.

"...Robespierre did wrong..."

This is all I can accept from your sentence, citoyen. Do you know who truly did nothing wrong? Bismarck.

Bismarck didn't guillotine Wilhelm II, your argument is invalid.

[Fahran]

They are the ethnonationalists.

True ethno nationalists would go back to the European country they claim as their ethnic nation.

Weird assumption given that most Anglo-Americans and German-Americans probably have more in common with African-Americans or Mexican-Americans than Englishmen or Germans.

[Conserative Morality]

They are the ethnonationalists.

True ethno nationalists would go back to the European country they claim as their ethnic nation.

I wish they would. We could pay for their ticket and bar them from ever returning.

[Fahran]

"...Robespierre did wrong..."

This is all I can accept from your sentence, citoyen. Do you know who truly did nothing wrong? Bismarck.

Bismarck didn't guillotine Wilhelm II, your argument is invalid.

Bismarck also didn't create mass hysteria and get guillotined.

[Conserative Morality]

Bismarck also didn't create mass hysteria and get guillotined.

That's also a point against him.

[North German Realm]

True ethno nationalists would go back to the European country they claim as their ethnic nation.

What about people whose ethnic origin is in the United States?

So... the Native Americans? I mean, even that is stretching it.

"...Robespierre did wrong..."

This is all I can accept from your sentence, citoyen. Do you know who truly did nothing wrong? Bismarck.

Bismarck didn't guillotine Wilhelm II, your argument is invalid.

Ignoring how better the Reich would have fared if that were to happen, Wilhelm was pretty mild during the late Bismarckian era. Bismarck's opposition to Wilhelm was more a "he doesn't do what I say like his grandfather", rather than anything legitimate (and there are many things one can and should oppose Wilhelm II for, but "not doing what uncle Otto told him to" ain't one of 'em.)

[Novus America]

Why? Why such an arbitrary decision? We are not the biggest in terms of land or population.
And unless you break up China too, you are handing China the world on a silver platter.

We need a stronger larger US to compete with China and India long term.

Bold of you to assume I don't believe the same should be done to China or Russia, but that's not the point. The problem isn't the population or the land area, it's that the US holds the larger populated parts of an entire Continent. Continental Unions shouldn't be allowed to exist, if necessary, they should be partitioned and balkanized. But then again, I am talking about an Alt-His scenario, not our timeline.

I see no basis for such an arbitrary rule. Europe as a “continent” for example is a social construct with no legitimate geographic basis.

And the US does not cover the whole continent (yet).

But sure, you can make whatever alternative histories you want.

But generally a Balkanized area is a more violent one, as numerous small states swallow the other up, (thus becoming bigger) unless their are big powers to prevent it.

[Conserative Morality]

Ignoring how better the Reich would have fared if that were to happen, Wilhelm was pretty mild during the late Bismarckian era. Bismarck's opposition to Wilhelm was more a "he doesn't do what I say like his grandfather", rather than anything legitimate (and there are many things one can and should oppose Wilhelm II for, but "not doing what uncle Otto told him to" ain't one of 'em.)

Uncle Otto knew better than he did.

[Fahran]

Bismarck also didn't create mass hysteria and get guillotined.

That's also a point against him.

Oscar Wilde, is that you?

Ignoring how better the Reich would have fared if that were to happen, Wilhelm was pretty mild during the late Bismarckian era. Bismarck's opposition to Wilhelm was more a "he doesn't do what I say like his grandfather", rather than anything legitimate (and there are many things one can and should oppose Wilhelm II for, but "not doing what uncle Otto told him to" ain't one of 'em.)

Uncle Otto knew better than he did.

Uncle Otto wanted to mow down commie revolutionaries. So I'm conflicted but lean towards that not being a good thing.