The Political Discussion Thread

[SoulReaver]

Lots of idiots gave away money

notice how the neocons would rather pay for a billionaire's wall than give that money as charity to americans who need it
proving once again that the GOP cares about americans......about as much as they care about immigrants

(immigration always was just an excuse for the right nationalists this was obvious back in the 1930's Germany & it's obvious now)

[Annoyed]

Lots of idiots gave away money

The comment was more in the line of "Monkey See, Monkey Do."

Both ideas are boneheaded. Even if they manage to raise the money Trump wants for the wall (and I fully support him on that) and donates it to the U.S. Govt., Congress still has to allocate the money.

Whole lot of spinning their wheels in the mud and making an unholy mess but not gonna get a lot done.

[Annoyed]

notice how the neocons would rather pay for a billionaire's wall than give that money as charity to americans who need it
proving once again that the GOP cares about americans......about as much as they care about immigrants

(immigration always was just an excuse for the right nationalists this was obvious back in the 1930's Germany & it's obvious now)

It's not a "billionaires wall". It's a badly needed defensive measure for US. Just look around the rest of the planet. Not too many countries are anxious to take in refugees, illegal immigrants and such.

Our southern border has been quite porous for a long time now. Back in 1986, we tried amnesty with increased border security. We never got the increased security. It's long past time that we take care of that problem.

What is Yurp's position on this? Do you welcome anyone who tries to break into your borders?

[Coco Pops]

People can still bypass THE WALL.

Tunnel under
Fly over
Use ladders.

Walls are vanity projects

[jelgate]

The whole wall philosophy is based on a faulty premise. The majority of the illegal immigrants aren't crossing at the Rio Grande. But you know Trump and his love of stereotype. This is the person who started the Birther movement

[SoulReaver]

It's not a "billionaires wall". It's a badly needed defensive measure for US.

you might have a point if it were at least effective

problem is it's both expensive and borderline (hoho) ineffective

unless King Don intends to make it as high as the Westeros ice wall

Our southern border has been quite porous for a long time now.

explain how hispanic immigration was at its lowest under Obama then

What is Yurp's position on this? Do you welcome anyone who tries to break into your borders?

overall more welcoming it is but like I said immigration's a detail (foreign policy) not an especially interesting topic IMO

that said immigration's useful for citizens who'd rather avoid some jobs (you know the high-work-low-pay-job-no-one-wants type). speaking of I look forward to s-loads of trumpets being forced to do those jobs in the near future

People can still bypass THE WALL.

exactamundo

but explaining this to the neocons is like talking to a brick wall :|

[Chaka-Z0]

unless King Don intends to make it as high as the Westeros ice wall

Even the Wall did not resist the Mexican Dragon's breath and melted down. Not to mention the illegal tunnels by which Samwell illegally crossed to the North.

[aretood2]

Umm, you don't need to convert to Judaism to gain Israeli citizenship, either. My wife will be a full citizen in 5 to 7 years through naturalization process. The process is a lot of bureaucratic pain, but it does not require a 100 questions language and civics test that most natural-born citizens would fail, like in the USA.

Acquisition of Israeli Nationality

Except I wasn't talking about citizenship. I was talking about assimilation, cultural assimilation. "American" isn't just answering 100 questions after living X amount of years in the US. It's also a cultural status. Once you are "American" there's no difference between you and the guy who can trace his family's origins back to the Pilgrims. That's not culturally the case in Israel, is it now? The only way to become Jewish is via religious conversion (that is go from not being Jewish to being Jewish). Jewish is the national identity of Israel, more on that later. To be Italian may work a bit differently than to be American, but in any case it doesn't truly require religious conversion. But this is extreme hair splitting that I am not sure what your point is. The fact is that the character of Israel and its Nationality and Culture is not comparable to that of the Americas at the very least and nor is it comparable to that of Europe at large, at least not in these modern times.

Yes, I know, and you are subject to American prejudices that come with it. In the USA and Western Europe, being Jewish is viewed as a religion-mostly or even religion-only due to historical quirks, but that is an outlier not a norm. In Russia and Eastern Europe, for example, being Jewish is seen as ethnicity-only with religion an entirely optional component. There are historic reasons for it that are quite recent - in Western Europe post- Enlightenment, secularization of societies led to Jews trying to fit into emerging new identities as Germans/French/Italians of Mosaic faith (prompting the new anti-Semitism that targeted the Jews by ethnic lineage in order to keep the assimilated ones in the crosshairs), thereby prompting Jews to de-emphasise the ethnic component of identity - whereas in the Russian Empire, the persecution was religion-centered (Pale of Settlements restrictions which could only be circumvented through conversion, attempts at forced conscription of all Jewish males from age 12 up into the 25 year military service where they would be forcibly converted etc. and later the USSR prohibition on practicing religions), thereby prompting Jews to de-emphasize religious component of identity in favor if the ethnic one. The inconvenience caused to Gatefan and other "critics", while enjoyable, was not intentional.

So this is how women feel when they are being mansplained things. I feel like you might be talking to another strawtood here...Otherwise I don't see your point. My point was comparing how Israel was different as a nation state. It is antiquated from my POV by at least one hundred years. Any value judgement you add on to that POV is yours entirely and exclusively. Let's look at what you quoted...

Being an ancient tribe puts Israel into that situation, it is a unique situation and I think it is a mistake trying to deny the uniqueness of the situation. And the reason is simple, one can not convert into being black but one can convert into being Jewish. One cannot assimilate into being Jewish without a conversion in the mix. A Jewish state cannot be like an "Italian" state where anyone could become "Italian" via assimilation. This is why I believe that Israel should also be an Israeli state and not just a Jewish state. But how that would work, I do not know.

The bolded: By "Italian" I meant Italian culture, the national culture of Italy (naturally). One needs no religious conversion to become an Italian. That is patently impossible when it comes to becoming Jewish. You proceeded to say "FALSE!!!" because one can be born Jewish without ever having anything to do with the religion. But you see, there is a very clear difference between becoming X and being born X. They are both mutually exclusive, different, and quite hard to conflate.

The Underlined: Well...there you have it. I don't know. It's just an opinion and I don't care to dwell too much into it. More on that later.

(Whether American is an ethnicity is an interesting question. Never thought about it before).

It's interesting to say the least. It's mainly people who don't even really know what their heritage is. It's like African American, it's its own thing mainly do to the loss of their heritage. There is a marked (culturally) difference between African American families and black immigrant families that often goes ignored because of their shared skin color. A few people also identify as such for...political reasons. But the English do treat "American" as a unique animal all on its own, don't they? We treat Canadians as a different breed of people here. I am somewhat confident that Australians are similar in this regard. Which is part of a point that I feel you missed big time.

I've tried before.

Really? You mean by saying "You know nothing Jon Snow"? The only time you "tried" was when you answered my question as to why the Druze were not amused. You also tried some whataboutism with Pakistan (A shining beacon of respect for human rights...not the best way to defend Israel if you ask me) of which really didn't make sense, instead of just explaining Israel. You also made a weird analogy to Spain even though Spanish isn't really a culture in the way you were trying to make it out to be (but I guess I could be nice and not cop out by saying that a non-Hispanophone can never understand this...).

The full English translation of the law is freely available. This is ALL of it, and it's been Googlable since July. Most of it is restatement of stuff that's been on the books forever, in the Declaration of Independence and in previous basic laws, and the new law itself is little more than populistic tautology. Feel free to explain which part it is that gets your goat - or, for that matter, which part it is that's new and worthy of controversy - because my impression so far is that you are criticizing something you've never read.

It's problematic that it does more harm than good. The PR blow it gives Israel only adds on to Hamas' credentials. And for what gain? None. No real gain whatsoever. Then it also provides a slippery slope if you ask me. And it's also an opinion, not a declaration of war. So, as we say here, simmer down a bit. I had to use another source for the text (Link). Yours is 404'ed.

1C: Slippery slope, can lead to second class citizenship status for non-Jewish Israelis (Precedent has already been established with Arab Israelis)

3: Talk about writing yourself into a corner diplomatically. Also horrible PR.

4B: Removing Arabic from Official Status to Special Status also feeds into the concerns I mentioned about 1C (and you could simply correct this, but in good faith too. Don't just give me the party line, but the opposition line too).

6: No reassurance of equality thus slippery slope(Though if the Declaration of Independence was considered a Basic Law I wouldn't mind too much. And yes, I am familiar with another Basica law that does guarantee this but it's not as secure as I would like. Feel free to educate but not just the party line as previously mentioned)

7: Settlements. I know the reasoning behind them, I just find the reasoning lacking and short sighted. It's also writing yourself into a diplomatic corner.

There's also another saying, No amares la gorda, don't make a big fuss over simple criticism. I think it's problematic and a waste. That's my opinion. What's the big deal? You act as if I suddenly want to proclaim "From the Jordan to the Sea".

Edit: I forgot to conclude here

So yeah, I think it is foolish to fabricate a situation that lends itself to criticism where it is not needed. I also think that Israel needs to find a way to reconcile the need for being an Israeli state and a Jewish state (Which I am confused because before the basic law was an issue I thought it already did that...Every time a law is passed, one must realize that there is a reason for it. If the reason is nothing more than to boost votes or status of a party, then it is by its very nature problematic regardless of what it says. You're using the democratic process in an autocratic way that is all too familiar to Latin America and in a bad way.

[Chaka-Z0]

Except I wasn't talking about citizenship. I was talking about assimilation, cultural assimilation. "American" isn't just answering 100 questions after living X amount of years in the US. It's also a cultural status. Once you are "American" there's no difference between you and the guy who can trace his family's origins back to the Pilgrims.

I always thought being American isn't a cultural status since its supposed to be all about respecting everybody's different ways and choices. It's about respect of individual choices, not coming together as a whole, in one culture.

Bolded: Why then is the US one of the country with the most disparate separations between economic classes and ethnicity (ghettos and such). How about the isolationists? Theoretically that's how it should be, but in reality I cannot agree with this, not by a long shot. The US is one of the worst place to live as a non-white ''liberal'' and there is clearly a difference between you (Assuming we're talking about a stranger here) and the guy who was born there.

[Annoyed]

I always thought being American isn't a cultural status since its supposed to be all about respecting everybody's different ways and choices. It's about respect of individual choices, not coming together as a whole, in one culture.

Bolded: Why then is the US one of the country with the most disparate separations between economic classes and ethnicity (ghettos and such). How about the isolationists? Theoretically that's how it should be, but in reality I cannot agree with this, not by a long shot. The US is one of the worst place to live as a non-white ''liberal'' and there is clearly a difference between you (Assuming we're talking about a stranger here) and the guy who was born there.

One of the other things about the US is that in theory, everyone has equal right to make whatever you can of yourself. And what you can make of yourself is tied to choices you and to a lesser extent your parents make.

Take two individuals, born to two different mothers.

Individual A is born to a low income female, who chose to become pregnant in an untenable set of circumstances; No stable family environment; a sperm donor rather than a father, insufficient financial resources to raise a child, with the mother possibly also still a child, unable to raise a child as she is still a child herself.

Individual B is born to a married couple, the child was planned & the parents are financially & mentally prepared to raise a child.

Obviously Individual B is going to start out with an advantage due to choices his or her parent(s) made.

Now, take either individual, and consider their own choices. One of them goes to a public school (which is available to all children) with the intent of learning what is being taught, graduating with a decent record and going on to college in order to learn a profession with which to earn a living with.

The other one goes the the same public school, but has the approach of skipping class, hanging with their friends on the street, eschewing the free education offered because it's "uncool" with the gang on the street they hang with, and eventually is pumped out of the public school system, unable to properly read or write, no marketable skills whatsoever and in no way prepared for college.

Now, due to his or her own choices, which is going to go farther in life?

Economic status, not race seems to be the factor with more influence here, because there are more than sufficient number of examples of all of these situations and various combinations. With good choices, people of any race can become highly successful, and at the same time, with poor choices, it doesn't matter what race you are, a person can end up being unable or barely able to support themselves.

Initial economic status and the choices of the parents certainly can give a person a leg up, but if a person makes bad choices, they can self destruct no matter what their starting point.

US society is based on the freedom to do as you see fit with yourself and your life, but with that freedom comes the responsibility to exercise that freedom wisely, and the failure to do so is the basic cause of many people's difficulties.

[Chaka-Z0]

I'm Canadian by nationality, but my culture is Quebecer. Indigenous ppl identify to native culture and the west mostly is conservative/European to the exception of BC. A Texan might see his mud driving and Coors light a cultural thing, and would be reluctant to be included in the NewYorker's. Annoyed's.

Culture is defined by its people and history, not by a nationality.

[Annoyed]

I'm Canadian by nationality, but my culture is Quebecer. Indigenous ppl identify to native culture and the west mostly is conservative/European to the exception of BC. A Texan might see his mud driving and Coors light a cultural thing, and would be reluctant to be included in the NewYorker's. Annoyed's.

Culture is defined by its people and history, not by a nationality.

Damn, I knew you were a smart lizard.

A country has it's culture, just as any subgroup of humans do. There are a great many things in common among the members of that group. There may not be so much difference between a Texan and a New Yorker from where I live. I used to love tearing up the back roads back when you could have real fun with cars. Have also driven and raced a lot of off-road hardware. (Motocross racing when I was young) But I digress. That common culture is a subconscious part of how we communicate.

We humans want to ignore that these days, even though it's stupid to do so.

How many times have you tried to contact the manufacturer of a product or service and found you can't talk to anyone you can understand? Try as you might, half the time you can't understand half of what they say, even though they are technically speaking English, or Lizardese in your case.

You don't come from the same culture, so how can you expect to understand each other?

[aretood2]

I always thought being American isn't a cultural status since its supposed to be all about respecting everybody's different ways and choices. It's about respect of individual choices, not coming together as a whole, in one culture.

Bolded: Why then is the US one of the country with the most disparate separations between economic classes and ethnicity (ghettos and such). How about the isolationists? Theoretically that's how it should be, but in reality I cannot agree with this, not by a long shot. The US is one of the worst place to live as a non-white ''liberal'' and there is clearly a difference between you (Assuming we're talking about a stranger here) and the guy who was born there.

Culture is an interesting beast. There's no such thing as a unified "British" culture either. Are we talking Scottish? Welsh? N. Irish? English? And even in English, we could divide that further. Same thing with Mexico. Everyone says "Mexican Culture" but are we talking indigenous? If so, which ones? There are so many with different languages, foods, fashions, traditions. Non Indigenous? They are impacted by the indigenous cultures too. Rural vs Urban has a huge difference. If you think segregating in the US due to economic class is bad? Mexico makes the US look like a communist paradise, it's so bad that it is common to say that there are two Mexicos (And that's ignoring the indigenous because everyone always does ignore them, sadly).

Then there's the even more problematic "Hispanic Culture"...ironically Spanish culture is just Castilian. You can't really find Paella outside of Catalonia in Spain, and the Basque speak a language that is not indo-european, let alone Romance. But that doesn't stop us from using the term "Spanish Culture" to speak of Spain.

I think there is this massive misconception that the US has no base culture, but it does. It's very similar to Canadian and British culture, I would just simply call it "Anglo Culture" and give it the same treatment that "Spanish Culture" gets. So American culture is Anglo Culture, but with a large German and Italian influence that is simply absent in the UK (Although American media has done a banged up job in changing that, hurray for Hollywood!). So Canadian culture and American culture are more alike to each other than American to British culture.

There are also native influences in the US as well as that from African Americans that make American Culture bit different (though not too different) than British culture.

But that brings me back to my original point given to GF awhile ago. One cannot become part of the Jewish Culture in Israel the way an asian family can become part of the American/Anglo Culture in the US...unless they abandon their religious views and convert to Judaism. That's what sets Israel apart from other countries and causes issues when comparing Israel to say, Italy, when discussing it as a Jewish State.

[Chaka-Z0]

Culture is an interesting beast. There's no such thing as a unified "British" culture either. Are we talking Scottish? Welsh? N. Irish? English? And even in English, we could divide that further. Same thing with Mexico. Everyone says "Mexican Culture" but are we talking indigenous? If so, which ones? There are so many with different languages, foods, fashions, traditions. Non Indigenous? They are impacted by the indigenous cultures too. Rural vs Urban has a huge difference. If you think segregating in the US due to economic class is bad? Mexico makes the US look like a communist paradise, it's so bad that it is common to say that there are two Mexicos (And that's ignoring the indigenous because everyone always does ignore them, sadly).

Then there's the even more problematic "Hispanic Culture"...ironically Spanish culture is just Castilian. You can't really find Paella outside of Catalonia in Spain, and the Basque speak a language that is not indo-european, let alone Romance. But that doesn't stop us from using the term "Spanish Culture" to speak of Spain.

I think there is this massive misconception that the US has no base culture, but it does. It's very similar to Canadian and British culture, I would just simply call it "Anglo Culture" and give it the same treatment that "Spanish Culture" gets. So American culture is Anglo Culture, but with a large German and Italian influence that is simply absent in the UK (Although American media has done a banged up job in changing that, hurray for Hollywood!). So Canadian culture and American culture are more alike to each other than American to British culture.

There are also native influences in the US as well as that from African Americans that make American Culture bit different (though not too different) than British culture.

But that brings me back to my original point given to GF awhile ago. One cannot become part of the Jewish Culture in Israel the way an asian family can become part of the American/Anglo Culture in the US...unless they abandon their religious views and convert to Judaism. That's what sets Israel apart from other countries and causes issues when comparing Israel to say, Italy, when discussing it as a Jewish State.

I actually had a talk yesterday at a party with a friend of mine regarding Israel and it seems that you are right, you need to "convert" but not to the religion itself. She told me her ex-bf was not actually practicing Judaism but lived the Jewish culture. Supposedly Judaism being so ancient kind of merged with the culture in some aspects. Also she says the different religions are clearly separated in districts with Muslims and Christians having an important coverage.

To be honest I am really confused about that conversion thing, not sure what to believe. I guess by "converting" it means convert to the Jewish culture, which is I think the distinction Womble tried to make. Any country expect an immigrant to do just that, adapt to local culture, is it not?

I guess it would be difficult for the religious type, say you a Christian, to adhere to that in clarity of mind?

[Coco Pops]

And the baby is gonna hold his breath waaaaaa waaaaaa waaaaaa Where's my wall?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/29/p...eze/index.html


So much winning