Theme: Ethnoculture

  • “What was the reasoning that led to opening european and american borders to imm

    –“What was the reasoning that led to opening european and american borders to immigrants?”–

    Answer:
    Economic Exploitation, Political Manipulation, Demographic manipulation, and Ideological Globalism:

    Economic Exploitation:

    Cheap Labor: Rather than addressing labor shortages out of necessity for growth, immigration might have been encouraged to keep wages low and profits high by exploiting immigrants who were often willing to work for less under harsh conditions. This perspective sees immigration policies as a means to keep the workforce compliant and underpaid.

    Depression of Local Wages: Immigrants could also be seen as competitors for jobs, potentially driving down wages for everyone, which benefits employers more than the economy as a whole.

    Political Manipulation:

    Vote-Bank Politics: Political entities might have seen immigrants as future voters who could be swayed by parties or politicians offering them rights or support, thus using immigration as a tool for political gain rather than for humanitarian or economic integration.

    Refugee Policies as Political Statements: Accepting refugees could be interpreted as a way for countries to score political points on the global stage, demonstrating moral superiority or commitment to certain ideological battles, rather than a genuine effort to help those in need.

    Demographic Manipulation:

    Cultural Dilution: From a pessimistic viewpoint, opening borders could be seen as a strategy to dilute or change the cultural, ethnic, or racial makeup of a nation, potentially leading to social tensions or loss of national identity.

    Cultural and Ideological Conflicts:
    Selective Integration: While nations might celebrate being built by immigrants, there’s a darker side where certain groups might not be welcomed as warmly, leading to selective immigration where only those who can quickly assimilate or are from ‘preferred’ backgrounds are encouraged.

    Globalization’s Dark Side:

    Economic Dumping Ground: Countries might open their borders not out of benevolence but because they see an opportunity to offload surplus population from other countries, essentially treating immigration as a way to manage global population distribution without addressing root causes like conflict, poverty, or environmental degradation.

    Neocolonialism: Immigration could also be viewed as a new form of colonialism where labor is imported from less developed countries to serve the economic interests of developed nations, continuing a cycle of dependency and exploitation.

    This view frames immigration policies as potentially self-serving, focusing on the negatives like exploitation, cultural erosion, and political manipulation, rather than the positive aspects of cultural enrichment, economic growth, and humanitarian aid.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-12 15:49:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856363716822097920

  • “What was the reasoning that led to pening european and american borders to immi

    –“What was the reasoning that led to pening european and american borders to immigrants?”–

    Answer:
    Economic Exploitation, Political Manipulation, Demographic manipulation, and Ideological Globalism:

    Economic Exploitation:

    Cheap Labor: Rather than addressing labor shortages out of necessity for growth, immigration might have been encouraged to keep wages low and profits high by exploiting immigrants who were often willing to work for less under harsh conditions. This perspective sees immigration policies as a means to keep the workforce compliant and underpaid.

    Depression of Local Wages: Immigrants could also be seen as competitors for jobs, potentially driving down wages for everyone, which benefits employers more than the economy as a whole.

    Political Manipulation:

    Vote-Bank Politics: Political entities might have seen immigrants as future voters who could be swayed by parties or politicians offering them rights or support, thus using immigration as a tool for political gain rather than for humanitarian or economic integration.

    Refugee Policies as Political Statements: Accepting refugees could be interpreted as a way for countries to score political points on the global stage, demonstrating moral superiority or commitment to certain ideological battles, rather than a genuine effort to help those in need.

    Demographic Manipulation:

    Cultural Dilution: From a pessimistic viewpoint, opening borders could be seen as a strategy to dilute or change the cultural, ethnic, or racial makeup of a nation, potentially leading to social tensions or loss of national identity.

    Cultural and Ideological Conflicts:
    Selective Integration: While nations might celebrate being built by immigrants, there’s a darker side where certain groups might not be welcomed as warmly, leading to selective immigration where only those who can quickly assimilate or are from ‘preferred’ backgrounds are encouraged.

    Globalization’s Dark Side:

    Economic Dumping Ground: Countries might open their borders not out of benevolence but because they see an opportunity to offload surplus population from other countries, essentially treating immigration as a way to manage global population distribution without addressing root causes like conflict, poverty, or environmental degradation.

    Neocolonialism: Immigration could also be viewed as a new form of colonialism where labor is imported from less developed countries to serve the economic interests of developed nations, continuing a cycle of dependency and exploitation.

    This view frames immigration policies as potentially self-serving, focusing on the negatives like exploitation, cultural erosion, and political manipulation, rather than the positive aspects of cultural enrichment, economic growth, and humanitarian aid.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-12 15:49:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856362518794608640

  • The wasps are a minority. The majority of the northeast is replacement by irish

    The wasps are a minority. The majority of the northeast is replacement by irish and italians (look it up), blacks and hispanics.

    TLDR; Puritans creating protestant academic institutions. Subsequent Academic Institutions creating the progressive mission. Rapid immigration of irish and italians and displacement of anglos who moved to the cheaper land in the ohio river valleys. Institutional capture by the postwar marxists. Radical war era migration of labor and incremental postwar blue collar dominance as it turns into a rust belt region. Because of the progressive/marxist capture of the universities, the part of the country that most adopted the soviet model. Amplified by immigration.

    Question
    New england is no longer an anglo bastion, but has been dominated by irish and italian immigration, and rapid expansion of blacks and now hispanics. Is this correct? What are the ethnic percentages?

    Answer
    Yes, the statement largely aligns with historical trends and demographic shifts in New England:

    Historical Context:
    New England was initially settled predominantly by English colonists, leading to a significant Anglo-Saxon influence. However, over time, particularly from the mid-19th to early 20th centuries, large waves of Irish and Italian immigrants arrived, significantly altering the ethnic composition of the region.

    Current Ethnic Composition:
    Irish and Italian: Historically, states like Massachusetts and Rhode Island have seen substantial Irish and Italian immigration. For instance, in Massachusetts, the Irish influence has been particularly strong, while Rhode Island is noted for its Italian-American community.

    Hispanic and Black Populations: Recent data indicates a growing Hispanic presence across New England. According to posts on X, Rhode Island is approximately 16% Hispanic and 5% Black, Massachusetts is around 12% Hispanic and 8% Black, and Connecticut has about 17% Hispanic and 11% Black.

    Detailed Percentages:
    While exact current percentages might fluctuate, here’s a rough overview based on recent information:
    Rhode Island: 16% Hispanic, 5% Black.
    Massachusetts: 12% Hispanic, 8% Black.
    Connecticut: 17% Hispanic, 11% Black.
    For states like Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, while they retain a more Anglo or French-Canadian demographic, there’s still noticeable diversity, especially in urban areas or due to political and economic influences from neighboring states.

    Conclusion:
    The assertion that New England has moved away from being an “Anglo bastion” due to significant Irish, Italian, Hispanic, and Black populations holds true.

    Question:
    So what accounts for the deep progressivism (democratic vote) of new england versus the rest of the country?

    Answer
    New England’s deep progressivism and its tendency to vote Democratic can be attributed to several historical, demographic, and cultural factors:

    Historical Roots of Progressivism:
    New England was a significant center for the Progressive Era reforms in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Robert La Follette, who influenced progressive politics, either came from or were associated with the region. This historical inclination towards reform has left a lasting political legacy.

    Educational Influence:
    The region hosts numerous prestigious universities and colleges (e.g., Harvard, Yale, MIT), contributing to a culture that values education and intellectualism. This often correlates with progressive values, as higher education is associated with more liberal political orientations.

    Urbanization and Immigration:
    Cities like Boston have long been hubs for immigrants, which historically included the Irish and Italian, followed by Hispanic and other groups in more recent times. Urban areas tend to lean Democratic, and the cultural diversity brought by immigration has often aligned with progressive policies advocating for social justice, workers’ rights, and inclusivity.

    Economic Factors:
    While not uniformly wealthy, New England does have significant wealth in cities like Boston and suburbs like those in Connecticut. Affluent, educated voters often support progressive causes, especially in areas with a strong tradition of social welfare and community involvement.

    Cultural and Social Values:
    New England has been at the forefront of several social movements, notably in areas like women’s suffrage, civil rights, and more recently, environmentalism and LGBTQ+ rights. This reflects a cultural disposition towards social change and reform, which aligns with progressive ideologies.

    Political Infrastructure:
    The Democratic Party has had strong organizational presence and historical success in New England, partly due to the legacy of FDR’s New Deal, which had significant support in the region. This infrastructure helps in mobilizing voters and maintaining political influence.

    Demographic Changes:
    Over time, demographic shifts have included younger populations moving to urban centers for education and jobs, often bringing with them more progressive views. Additionally, the region has seen an influx of retirees, many of whom are politically engaged and lean towards progressive policies due to their life experiences.

    Environmentalism:
    New England’s landscape, with its natural beauty and historical conservation efforts, fosters an environmental consciousness that aligns with progressive environmental policies.

    Media Influence:
    The media environment in New England, particularly around major cities, tends to be more liberal, influencing public opinion and reinforcing progressive viewpoints.

    This combination of factors creates an environment where progressive politics thrive, leading New England to be consistently more Democratic in its voting patterns compared to many other regions of the United States. However, it’s worth noting that within New England, there are variations, with states like New Hampshire showing more of a swing state characteristic, sometimes leaning Republican due to its libertarian streak and less urbanized areas.

    Reply addressees: @QuetzalPhoenix


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-12 01:52:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856153048747520001

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855981713211482506

  • Personality doesn’t vary in distribution other than a minor difference in the so

    Personality doesn’t vary in distribution other than a minor difference in the sociability of africans. IQ and aggression does by race.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-11 08:01:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855883501993898329

    Reply addressees: @Tysenberg @datepsych

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855783037797097971

  • RT @ThruTheHayes: EUROPEANS ARE TRUTH SEEKING BEINGS And they’re the only. The W

    RT @ThruTheHayes: EUROPEANS ARE TRUTH SEEKING BEINGS

    And they’re the only. The Western itch to derive truth is driven by these peoples, no…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-11 07:21:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855873419843346755

  • Europeans are a race, a civilization, a set of nations, and a set of states. Eur

    Europeans are a race, a civilization, a set of nations, and a set of states. Europeans are the least diverse genetic population outside of Japan.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-09 18:54:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855323043339600339

    Reply addressees: @gorgo1149381 @ItIsHoeMath

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855320441004474525

  • The proper term for Ethnicity is “Nation”. The proper term for a government over

    The proper term for Ethnicity is “Nation”. The proper term for a government over a territory is a “State”. A Nation State consists of an Nation (ethnic group) with its own State. Or a state comprised of a nation (ethnic group).


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-09 15:42:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1855274840573559036

  • This is why race ethnicity and class are not ‘social constructs’ but optimum ben

    This is why race ethnicity and class are not ‘social constructs’ but optimum beneficial behavior for members of each group: cost reduction of ingroup cooperation given variations in abilities and loads. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1854384176981823581

  • All groups in all civilizations sort by the same criteria. Genetic differences a

    All groups in all civilizations sort by the same criteria. Genetic differences are large and meaningful. Neoteny for population group, and genetic load for class. If it had only normative foundation it would show distribution by other than those two dimensions. It doesn’t.…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-07 04:43:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1854384176981823581

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1854380757495550162

  • Not bad, although race is not a social construct – it’s a demonstrated behavior,

    Not bad, although race is not a social construct – it’s a demonstrated behavior, and with good reason. I’m not sure why despite the genetics answering the issue by 2018 the mythology persists. If you mean, instead, that in the economy it doesn’t matter, or under the law it…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-07 03:21:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1854363626456641653

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1854360838766817553