American Politics VII: Virginia Reel

[Vassenor]

Nope, they're just wasting taxpayers money.

No, they aren't. Taxpayers would approve of this.

Are you going to prove that or just demand that we accept it based purely on your say so?

[Fahran]

Morals such as what?

Presumably, the Abrahamic notion that homosexual relations are a transgression. Y'all know the answer to this question already.

[Vassenor]

Morals such as what?

Presumably, the Abrahamic notion that homosexual relations are a transgression. Y'all know the answer to this question already.

Ah, so regressing America back to the 1950s because people being equal is scary.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Nope, they're just wasting taxpayers money.

No, they aren't. Taxpayers would approve of this.

Then why give me shit for being a American civic nationalist?

Civic nationalism is hardly nationalism at all.

It's as bad as being a centrist, or a principled conservative.

I have some cultural nationalistic traits as well, but still. I'm not Trumpian nor someone who puts Trump above my country, so you'll still be disappointed.

[Punished UMN]

He's talking about non-reservation people being able to move onto reservation land or not.

Either way, there is no legal right to immigrate, state sovereignty is the foundation of all international law, and part of that is a state being able to decide what crosses its borders.

Then why give me shit for being a American civic nationalist? You'd jump on me for believing in it and defending the concept of an American nation, while defending the rights of other nations to do even unjust things.

Because your idea of civic nationalism ignores the historical conditions in the United States, it has nothing to do with international law or the rights of nations. My issue with you on that matter is that I don't think American civic nationalism describes reality, Americans have wildly different civic ideas, cultures, and historical backgrounds. E.g. why would an indian on a reservation care about American civics or feel American? America isn't his nation, it's the nation that conquered his.

[Fahran]

No, they aren't. Taxpayers would approve of this.

The opinions of Texans are shifting on gay marriage.

[Punished UMN]

Presumably, the Abrahamic notion that homosexual relations are a transgression. Y'all know the answer to this question already.

Ah, so regressing America back to the 1950s because people being equal is scary.

Fahr's point though is that a lot of times you guys use rhetorical questions as if they're meaningful, but most of the time it's because you guys (talking of you and San Lumen) just end up looking incapable of understanding that people simply disagree with you.

[Fahran]

Ah, so regressing America back to the 1950s because people being equal is scary.

From one perspective, perhaps. "Banning a sinful practice because it's a sinful practice" would be the more accurate description if we're going from their perspective since religious conservatives don't tend to care as much about the "current year" argument, which is Whig historiography in the most diluted form.

Mind you, I don't believe a secular state has a vested interest in upholding a religious definition of marriage.

[Relden]

I have some cultural nationalistic traits as well, but still. I'm not Trumpian nor someone who puts Trump above my country, so you'll still be disappointed.

But, at the end of the day, you would still be open to compromise and negotiation with the left-wing.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Then why give me shit for being a American civic nationalist? You'd jump on me for believing in it and defending the concept of an American nation, while defending the rights of other nations to do even unjust things.

Because your idea of civic nationalism ignores the historical conditions in the United States, it has nothing to do with international law or the rights of nations. My issue with you on that matter is that I don't think American civic nationalism describes reality, Americans have wildly different civic ideas, cultures, and historical backgrounds. E.g. why would an indian on a reservation care about American civics or feel American? America isn't his nation, it's the nation that conquered his.

They have their own nations to be proud of if they don't identify as American, so I'm not concerned. I would fix problems with the reservation system but that's something different.

Other differences are not as stringent as you think. It's like saying British nationalism is illegitimate just because Scotland is different from England.

[Fahran]

But, at the end of the day, you would still be open to compromise and negotiation with the left-wing.

Governing any country requires compromises in the absence of absolute control by your faction of every political process.

[Punished UMN]

Because your idea of civic nationalism ignores the historical conditions in the United States, it has nothing to do with international law or the rights of nations. My issue with you on that matter is that I don't think American civic nationalism describes reality, Americans have wildly different civic ideas, cultures, and historical backgrounds. E.g. why would an indian on a reservation care about American civics or feel American? America isn't his nation, it's the nation that conquered his.

They have their own nations to be proud of if they don't identify as American, so I'm not concerned. I would fix problems with the reservation system but that's something different.

Other differences are not as stringent as you think. It's like saying British nationalism is illegitimate just because Scotland is different from England.

Okay, but with civic nationalism, it really only works as far as the civic ideas of your country are concerned, and like half the US population doesn't subscribe to those ideas in a meaningful way.

How would you fix the problems with the reservation system?

[Relden]

Governing any country requires compromises in the absence of absolute control by your faction of every political process.

Yes, but the right-wing aren't governing the country at the moment.

The left cannot be negotiated or compromised with.

It should be my way, or the highway, as the phrase goes.

[The Reformed American Republic]

They have their own nations to be proud of if they don't identify as American, so I'm not concerned. I would fix problems with the reservation system but that's something different.

Other differences are not as stringent as you think. It's like saying British nationalism is illegitimate just because Scotland is different from England.

Okay, but with civic nationalism, it really only works as far as the civic ideas of your country are concerned, and like half the US population doesn't subscribe to those ideas in a meaningful way.

How would you fix the problems with the reservation system?

1. Whether people agree with me or not does not make my view illegitimate. A problematic anti-democratic element also does not either.
2. I'm not going to write a blue print for changes on the forum, but I would increase their autonomy and increase social programs to the areas. I would also try to improve infrastructure there, as I heard the areas tend to be poor.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I have some cultural nationalistic traits as well, but still. I'm not Trumpian nor someone who puts Trump above my country, so you'll still be disappointed.

But, at the end of the day, you would still be open to compromise and negotiation with the left-wing.

Depends on how extreme the left-winger actually is, but mostly because we only have two parties, and I am not voting for an empty nationalism that is really about Trump and him wanting to throw out elections because he did not win.

I would not negotiate with someone who unironically wants to beat me up over an American flag for example or thinks its a "fascist symbol" or whatnot.

[Punished UMN]

Okay, but with civic nationalism, it really only works as far as the civic ideas of your country are concerned, and like half the US population doesn't subscribe to those ideas in a meaningful way.

How would you fix the problems with the reservation system?

1. Whether people agree with me or not does not make my view illegitimate. A problematic anti-democratic element also does not either.
2. I'm not going to write a blue print for changes on the forum, but I would increase their autonomy and increase social programs to the areas. I would also try to improve infrastructure there, as I heard the areas tend to be poor.

It's not about people agreeing or disagreeing with your view, it's that, when the idea of a civic nation is based on common civic ideas, it hurts your case when the nation doesn't actually hold those civic ideas in common.

[Fahran]

Yes, but the right-wing aren't governing the country at the moment.

The left cannot be negotiated or compromised with.

It should be my way, or the highway, as the phrase goes.

What policies would you like a conservative government to adopt?

[The Reformed American Republic]

1. Whether people agree with me or not does not make my view illegitimate. A problematic anti-democratic element also does not either.
2. I'm not going to write a blue print for changes on the forum, but I would increase their autonomy and increase social programs to the areas. I would also try to improve infrastructure there, as I heard the areas tend to be poor.

It's not about people agreeing or disagreeing with your view, it's that, when the idea of a civic nation is based on common civic ideas, it hurts your case when the nation doesn't actually hold those civic ideas in common.

They did, once, and those are values I would promote if I were in power. I'm sure a better government and system would get more people (probably a majority) to subscribe to them.

Voter apathy and losing faith in values is mainly due to our current problems, though some activists do not help either.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

In short, we're fucked and the United States of America is doomed. With facts like these, who needs alarmists?

Maybe we don’t have to be doomed. Maybe something can be done to prevent our demise.

Yes. That would be a massive worker's uprising on the scale of the French Revolution.

[Vassenor]

Governing any country requires compromises in the absence of absolute control by your faction of every political process.

Yes, but the right-wing aren't governing the country at the moment.

The left cannot be negotiated or compromised with.

It should be my way, or the highway, as the phrase goes.

Why? What makes your way so special that it is the only way that can be permitted?

[Kowani]

Governing any country requires compromises in the absence of absolute control by your faction of every political process.

Yes, but the right-wing aren't governing the country at the moment.

The left cannot be negotiated or compromised with.

It should be my way, or the highway, as the phrase goes.

Look, the left is on top. There's a lot of complaining about the "structural biases" that exist "in Congress," "the Supreme Court," and "the Electoral College." And sure their "economic agenda" might be opposed "by capital." But consider: Lil Nas X was on Good Morning America.

[Kannap]

Texas House of Representatives declares the state is exempt from the 14th Amendment and thus can declare same-gender marriages invalid within its borders.

Texas House is a bunch of smoothbrains who don’t know what the words “No State shall…” mean, more news at 11.

To give them the benefit of the doubt - though a very thin one - the Texas legislature hasn't done anything yet. This is just one state rep writing to the Attorney General for clarification. We'll have to wait and see what the Attorney General says.

Texas never removed the law that defined marriage as between a man and a woman from their books, now state representative James White argues that same sex marriage is still illegal in Texas and writes the Attorney General asking for clarification, states "the Supreme Court has no power to amend formally or revoke a state statute or constitutional provision — even after opining that the state law violates the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution"

Texas also never removed from their books the law that classifies "homosexual conduct" ("deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex") either, which was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2003.

[Kannap]

Please don't encourage them. They're wasting their time and our dollars by doing nonsense like this.

They aren't. They're promoting morals.

Sure hope those morals keep the heat on this winter when the power grid fails and Texans start dying in the cold.

[Kowani]

Presumably, the Abrahamic notion that homosexual relations are a transgression. Y'all know the answer to this question already.

Ah, so regressing America back to the 1950s because people being equal is scary.

there are a lot of americans who do think equality (in the sense that you're talking about here) is a negative and something to be avoided
telling them "you're doing what you're doing" isn't really a strong argument because they approve of it anyway

[Kannap]

Nope, they're just wasting taxpayers money.

No, they aren't. Taxpayers would approve of this.

Would they?

A 2019 survey suggests they wouldn't. 66% of Texans support nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people while 56% of Texans support same sex marriage.

Can't find a more recent survey on Texans specifically but I would imagine its still a majority in support of both.