| Author |
Topic:
The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 4:58am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Princess_Tina posted:
Your second comment isn't only condescending, but is obviously meant as nothing more than a personal attack, since it has nothing to do with the issues at hand. Your inability to understand that there was obviously a pretty major misunderstanding going on doesn't seem to me like a good excuse to start calling others ignorant.
Give it a rest.
Speaking as a former Senate moderator, board Administrator, and as the person who wrote the Senate rules and trained both of the current mods in how to apply them, that was nowhere near a personal attack.
He called you ignorant and provided a very solid support for his claim. "Ignorant" isn't an insult, it's a description. (All insults are descriptions, but not all descriptions are insults.) You made quite a few comments about the various topics being discussed that demonstrated ignorance (either willful or unintentional) of several facts of the matter. Calling you on that is not a personal attack, especially when he gives evidence to support his claims.
If anything, your constant responses are closer to a violation of the rules. Constantly accusing someone of attacking you had been considered a form of trolling in the past, and has gotten people banned for the continual disruptions it causes.
Now, grow a thicker skin and stop complaining about people attacking you. If you think that they are making inappropriate comments about you or anyone else, the way to handle it is to PM a mod, as it says in the rules:Senate Rule A-1 posted:
Users are completely responsible for their behavior and not anyone else's. All users are expected to abide by the rules regardless of whatever provocation they may face. If you are being provoked, report it to a moderator. Do not use it as an excuse to violate the rules yourself.
So, why don't you either report the alleged personal attacks to the moderators and let them deal with it, or simply learn to ignore them.
As a final note, in the Senate it isn't sufficient to claim that you understand something in order to support your argument. We have a wide variety of people who post here, from doctors to historians, to programmers, to police officers, to high school/college students, and so forth. However, because this is the Internet, anyone can claim to be anything here, and we have no way to disprove it.
Because of that, it isn't sufficient to claim to understand a topic for people to listen to your views. You are expected to back up what you say. If you make a claim, then you are expected to at least be able to provide a documentable source to back it up. You don't necessarily have to post the source with the claim (fact, statement, etc), but if someone challenges you on the claim, you are expected to be able to either back it up or admit that you can't document it. If you can't document it, people simply aren't going to trust it as much (unless you've already established yourself very well as a clear expert in the subject, as in the case of Ender_Sai and immigration, for example). The main philosophy of the Senate really is PPOR: Post Proof or Retract.
The thing is that you haven't established that sort of reputation in the Senate yet. You've only been posting here with the current batch of users for less than a month (with your most recent post before that being three years earlier). You haven't demonstrated that you have a thorough and complete understanding of the subject, and you are a relative newcomer, and so you bear a greater burden of proof to support your claims. Links, quotes, and citations are your best tool in doing that. I strongly encourage you to use them as much as possible.
You have great potential as a Senator, but you need to make the effort to realize that potential, and that involves building the reputation I described. Otherwise, you will regularly face people questioning your position on the basis of lack of evidence or support, like they are now. It's your job to provide that support.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 5:18am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Kimball,
I appreciate the clarification and hope you will understand that it was a sincere misunderstanding on my part that made me feel that the other party was possibly doing something that they weren't supposed to do.
Now, as for the assertion by the other poster that I am "ignorant" about the immigrant marches that have been taking place recently... I have just explained in one of my most recent posts that not only am I not ignorant about them, I have written about them and spoken extensively with some of the people who participated in these marches that sought to support immigrants' rights. I know from first-hand accounts how some of the participants faced retaliation (including being fired from their jobs) simply because it was known they had participated in either a related march or boycott.
There isn't any ignorance on my part about these issues. What there clearly was is a misunderstanding in which another person spoke of a "movement" and made it sound (to me at least) as some mythical movement related to "Mexican supremacy". I obviously said I did not know of such a movement, and indeed, I do not know of any movement that could be described in such terms. What I do know is that there have been organizations and individuals which have organized immigrants' rallies in several U.S. cities. And yes, it is also true that in many of these rallies, there have been Mexican flags on display. Nonetheless, there are obviously people from other nationalities who have also lent their support. So what it all amounts to is, someone made reference to these rallies in terms so different from my own experience that I couldn't possibly have known they referred to the same thing. Then another person says that this shows I am somehow ignorant, when in fact I am not -- but I have witnessed some of these rallies personally and would it would never have occurred to me to somehow equate them with a "Mexican supremacy" movement of some sort (which, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't exist).
Again, if people misunderstand each other simply because they interpret the same events in very different ways, it doesn't show in any way "ignorance" about these events on the part of one of them. It just means that the two people have very different ways of interpreting the same events, which leads to an obvious miscommunication.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 5:19am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
|
I would have thought that saying, "The 'rah rah Mexicans' movement," would have been a clue.
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 5:26am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
- Date Edited:
8/15/07 5:56am (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Princess_Tina
|
Fire_Ice_Death posted:
I would have thought that saying, "The 'rah rah Mexicans' movement," would have been a clue.
No, because I don't believe the events to which you (apparently) referred to were in any way a "rah rah Mexicans' movement". Yes, there have been marches for the rights of immigrants, of that I am perfectly well aware of. But I don't think it's a "rah rah Mexicans" thing, although of course if you choose to see it that way, you've every right to, I suppose.
But, again, undocumented immigration is a relatively small part of the reasons behind demographic changes in U.S. society. The birth rates of U.S. Latinos as well as the levels of legal immigration will probably play a much greater role in making Latinos a majority of the population.
Anyway, entering into a lengthy discussion about undocumented immigration would derail the thread from its intended topic, and there is already a thread that is solely focused on undocumented immigration.
**Edited to add: even though the aspect dealing with undocumented immigration isn't central to this thread topic, here are some links that show that the immigrants' rights marches have been described as such by media, and observers, and not as a "rah rah Mexicans movement" --
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/01/immigrant.day/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11442705/
http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/newsletter_10/story4.html
There are obviously many more links that are easy to find by googling "immigrants' right marches". And for what it's worth, googling "rah rah Mexicans movement" brings up 0 results.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 6:01am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
|
You haven't really focused this discussion on anything else, though, that's the thing. Yeah, the changing face of America which has been pointed out so thoroughly will not change a thing. Is there any thing else to discuss in this thread?
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 6:03am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
- Date Edited:
8/15/07 6:14am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Princess_Tina
|
Fire_Ice_Death posted:
You haven't really focused this discussion on anything else, though, that's the thing. Yeah, the changing face of America which has been pointed out so thoroughly will not change a thing. Is there any thing else to discuss in this thread?
On which basis do you claim that changing demographic patters will not change a thing?
In all honesty I don't think anyone can look into the future and tell with any kind of certainty what American society will be like 2-3 generations from now.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 6:14am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
|
Because America will still be America no matter who is in charge. The only difference that racial makeup will make is who is in power. I seriously do not think that once Latinos become a majority we're going a significant change in our culture. It's not as if we'll all start eating differently, interacting differently, or talking any differently. I know, that's a scary thought, but hey, life just simply continues to go on. It's not going to affect things one way or another as far as I'm concerned. It seems the only people who think this will matter are blithely ignorant of how life works even though they claim to know-it-all.
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 6:19am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Fire_Ice_Death posted:
Because America will still be America no matter who is in charge. The only difference that racial makeup will make is who is in power. I seriously do not think that once Latinos become a majority we're going a significant change in our culture. It's not as if we'll all start eating differently, interacting differently, or talking any differently. I know, that's a scary thought, but hey, life just simply continues to go on. It's not going to affect things one way or another as far as I'm concerned. It seems the only people who think this will matter are blithely ignorant of how life works even though they claim to know-it-all.
Well, I disagree with that view. I think that a lot of things can change -- for the better.
There are any number of quantitative measures by which Latinos and African-Americans have been at a disadvantage up to now. These include, I believe, things like average income, health-related factors, level of education, rate of home ownership, and representation in government and in the media. I would hope that in the not too distant future, all of these factors would even out, and make America an even more equitable place for every American.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 7:16am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
If you want a good example of how things won't change even with a new majority let's take a look at women. Now, women have far greater numbers in this country than men do. Yet they're still a minority in terms of social status. They do the same jobs and get lower pay. There are far fewer women in our government than there are men. And the biggest slap in the face: men fear women in charge so much that there's never even been a woman president. Even our first serious candidate as our first female president is likely not to win because she's so polarizing.
Now, translate this to race and you'll see the same thing happen. Life just simply goes on. I'm not saying any of this is ethically or morally correct, but that is the way things go. So, you can keep thinking that all of this will go away once a minority race becomes a majority, but I'll tell you, you're living in fantasy land if you think all of that stuff is going to disappear overnight or even gradually. Our system is setup to keep things a certain way and while it's deeply disturbing and unfair, that's just how this place is.
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 7:33am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Fire_Ice_Death posted:
If you want a good example of how things won't change even with a new majority let's take a look at women. Now, women have far greater numbers in this country than men do. Yet they're still a minority in terms of social status. They do the same jobs and get lower pay. There are far fewer women in our government than there are men. And the biggest slap in the face: men fear women in charge so much that there's never even been a woman president. Even our first serious candidate as our first female president is likely not to win because she's so polarizing.
Now, translate this to race and you'll see the same thing happen. Life just simply goes on. I'm not saying any of this is ethically or morally correct, but that is the way things go. So, you can keep thinking that all of this will go away once a minority race becomes a majority, but I'll tell you, you're living in fantasy land if you think all of that stuff is going to disappear overnight or even gradually. Our system is setup to keep things a certain way and while it's deeply disturbing and unfair, that's just how this place is.
Yes, well, again, I disagree with that. You can't be 100% sure of something that will happen over the next 100 years based on the past experience with a minority of a different kind. Furthermore, I would make the point that in certain areas, such as the ones I have mentioned before, things *should* change, regardless of who is a majority and who is a minority. Do you not think that the U.S. should strive to be a country that truly offers equal opportunities to all people? It's true that we still have a long way to go, but that doesn't mean you have to stop trying.
I would also like to know what you mean when you say that "our system is set up to keep things a certain way". Is this pure speculation on your part, or do you have any concrete evidence to back up your claim?
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ShaneP
Registered:
Mar '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 11:02am
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
- Date Edited:
8/15/07 11:10am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
ShaneP
|
farraday
If you want to get back to those history credentials you have feel free to respond to my point.
Why would she? She still wont answer mine because doing so relegates her arguments about the "Texas would still be a part of Mexico today if evil US hadn't stolen it in the Mex-Ameri war" to the trashbin.
When you're losing the argument, change the subject.
edit
Tina
I obviously said I did not know of such a movement, and indeed, I do not know of any movement that could be described in such terms.
If you claim to know of no movement to reclaim the southwest or what FIDo describes as the "rah-rah Mexico" movement, or what is suggested by "The Race"(as I put it) then you are either:
A) Not as educated as you claim to be on the subject
or
B) Highly disingenuous and merely trolling
-----signature-----
It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 12:23pm
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
Shane,
I don't think it's any secret today, nor was it any secret in the 19th century, that the U.S. was looking to expand west. If this is really a point on which there is any doubt, fine, I think it wouldn't take very long to find some evidence to this effect. If you really think it is necessary to go into so much detail, we can certainly go into such details. Honestly, I think the expansionist drive of the U.S. at that point in history is well-known to everyone, but if you do not feel this is the case, I'll go into it in a little more detail.
You speak of a movement to "win back the southwest" or some such thing. I have spent all of my life traveling back and forth between the United States and Mexico, I attended the American School Foundation in Mexico City, I took classes on both U.S. History and Mexican history, and yet I do not know of any such a movement. Please do enlighten me and provide some links and sources that provide further details. I think it's well-known that some Mexican families have lived in what is now the United States (but was once Mexican territory) for generations, and they are likely to continue living where their ancestors did, simply because they have every right to. I don't think this is the same as what you are arguing. Because, if I understand you correctly, you seem to imply (correct me if I am wrong) that there is some sort of devious scheme under which the southern U.S. states will some day seek to secede from America and ask to be allowed back into Mexico. Of this, I have never heard a thing, and I would have to be honest, I would find it preposterous. I think it does make sense to see that the Latino population has been growing (due to several reasons) not just in these SW states, but also, more recently, in other states in the south. Nonetheless, I think it is safe to say that these states are likely to remain a part of the United States regardless of any future changes in population. So, yeah, I still to this day have not heard anything of a movement that would like to seek the re-annexation of California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas to the country they formally belonged to. Outside of that, there are simple demographic trends that are changing the make-up of the United States population -- yet in almost every case with the first generation born in the U.S., those of Latin American ancestry become (generally speaking) mostly assimilated to the mainstream culture. To that effect, I think the concept of a "rah rah Mexicans movement" remains a highly rhetorical reference, rather than one which accurately describes the marches for immigrants' rights which, as we all know, have become much more frequent in the last few years.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 12:41pm
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
|
You are obviously not very informed. Ditto to the Reconquista attitude.
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 12:55pm
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
- Date Edited:
8/15/07 1:14pm (3 edits total)
Edited By:
Princess_Tina
|
Fire_Ice_Death posted:
You are obviously not very informed. Ditto to the Reconquista attitude.
So you are talking about a fringe group that nobody seems to take particularly seriously (if someone does take such a group seriously, I have yet to meet them)?
You mention the concept of a reconquista, and this, yes, I have heard of, but to the best of my knowledge, in is something that Fuentes and Poniatowska may have seen as happening more in cultural terms than in anything even remotely resembling the re-annexation of actual territory to the country to which it previously belonged. So, let us say that the same phenomenon which some would simply describe as the growth of a Latino population in the United States could be described by some observers as a cultural reconquista. However in my experience this is only useful as a rhetorical device. Seriously, the majority of the Latino population in the U.S. that is of Mexican origin is U.S.-born and generally very assimilated. Many don't even speak Spanish. These Mexican-Americans are sometimes even ridiculed when they venture south of the border and it becomes painfully obvious they never really learned Spanish.
I remain of the opinion that any such terms as "rah rah Mexicans movement" or reconquista serve primarily as rhetorical devices, rather than being an accurate way to objectively describe demographic changes in America.
You don't for a second believe Mexico is going to some day take back its former territories just because the majority of the U.S. population becomes Latino, do you? I know I don't.
One possible scenario that I have foreseen is one where the three countries that are already joined by NAFTA would become much more integrated in the way that the European Union has. This would not be likely to happen until wage differentials are mostly eliminated, so it may not be something we're likely to see in our lifetimes, but it could happen. However under such scenario, Canada, Mexico and the U.S. would remain sovereign nations, even if internal borders within North American became considerable more relaxed. In that scenario, citizens of any one of the three countries would be free pretty much to work anywhere within the three countries, and with wage differentials having been eliminated, it wouldn't be the cause for large-scale migrations from areas of low wages to areas of high wages.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fire_Ice_Death
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
8/15/07 3:43pm
Subject:
RE: The changing face of America - when non-whites become the majority
|
|
No, I don't believe that Mexico will reclaim territory. Did I even make a mention of sharing that belief? No. And of course these are fringe groups. However, what you said was that you've heard no mention of such groups when they do exist. As for the attitude, that is a very real thing and I'm sure a good deal believe in it even if they don't say it publicly.
-----signature-----
Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword.
The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you?
Gamertag: FIDo Almighty
Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
