Is the Aztlan theory an irrational justification for illegals to stay in the USA?
The Hidalgo Treaty (from a Hispanic website!) More proof that Mexico WAS PAID for the land they "claimed" was theirs. http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/ghtreaty/ Why when faced with the reality that all illegals in the US are LAWBREAKERS they scurry to find evidence of their right to be here? Like the entire propaganda that is the Aztlan story. Last time I checked, there were NO Aztec monuments or architecture ANYWHERE in the USA. The next scamper tactic whEn faced with the truth is to cry "racism". Why am I a racist because I love my country, it's laws and deman that they be obeyed? I don't care what country you come from - if you are here illegally, you are a criminal breaking the law and should be dealt with accordingly. I like it when patriotism is spun into "racism". And also ludicrous is the half-assed theory that all "anti-illegals" are all white/anglo, thus proving that you will believe ANYTHING you are told. AMERICANS of all races and creeds are anti-illegal!
Why is it called reverse racism; isn't racism, racism?
I personally like the idea of calling racism—racism no matter the color of the person perpetuating it.But, for historical reasons I can see why “reverse racism” is a rather silly notion. You have to understand that American slavery ended barely 200 years ago (not really a long time in the grand scheme of things). What made American slavery different from the rest was the fact that it evolved into a science (Willie Lynch Theory). It became straight up psychological warfare, upon which its affects still lingers.So while, say—a day without white people is racism or “reverse racism” —it's not the same kind of racism that is normally associated with whites/blacks.If you read my answers, I am critical of certain events and happenings being labeled “racist”. But, make no mistake racism is for sure alive and well and it is often expressed indirectly, other times not so much. But, I disagree with the tactics involved to combat such things.There are some things that the average white person just won't experience, that unfortunately some black folks do. And because of that, there lies the distinction between racism and reverse racism.EDIT: I want to add bonus content-Now all of this isn't to say that racism — no matter who perpetuates it — shouldn't be called out. I think because of the historical distinction one makes when describing racism, this linguistical occurence makes sense. But I opt to call a spade a spade. Drop the ‘reverse’ and let's finally move on to better parts of the collective and illustrious ‘conversation’ that I hear so much about.
Is Holocaust denial irrational?
Yes, it is irrational.Why?Because the perpetrators of the Holocaust who were hanged or imprisoned after Nuremberg, the Doctors' trials and the various camp trials themselves admitted that they did the things of which they were accused. To a man (or to a woman) none of them tried to convince anyone that the Holocaust didn’t occur.If the people who committed the atrocities don’t claim that it didn’t happen, when their life is on the line, that they committed them, then denying their actions almost 70 years later is indeed, irrational.
Why is cannabis still illegal in most parts of the world even though it has been proved to have medicinal benefits?
The whole "illegal cannabis" thing started in the USA for the same reason that EVERYTHING starts in the USA. Powerful lumber companies saw that hemp was much more efficient at making paper so they lobbied the government to somehow hurt the hemp industry. The US government decided to make cannabis illegal by demonising it to the American public and hemp was also banned because it looked too much like cannabis. The USA was corrupt even back then. American pressure forced other countries to follow suit. Now that the world sees the USA for what it is instead of how it presents itself, cannabis is becoming legal in other places (including within the American state of Colorado). Cannabis is about to be legalised in Canada, this should be fun. ;)
Is discrimination against nationality considered racism?
to answer your question: is discrimination based on your nationality considered racism? Technically, no. Racism is a discrimination on you (or someone else) because of the color of your skin. there is some gray area there of course, but i think that is the general idea. i have a question though, have you CONFIRMED this? I can't say with authority of course, but i can't imagine that JK Rowling would even get involved with the casting of the extras. look at the end of the movies, there is probably a listing for casting director or some agency listed that handled the hiring of extras. contact them and see what needs to be sumbitted for their consideration. a video of you in some play or something might be a plus, but as a minimum, you will probably need some photos (not necessarily professionals) - head shot, body shot, 'normal' wear, and a bio of yourself. you can find more information here: http://www.ehow.com/how_2173674_be-extra... now maybe JK has a PREFERENCE for only British or Irish stars - but look some of the people in the movie already: Emma Watson grew up in England and may consider herself British, but she was born in France, thus, her nationality is French. Verne Troyer (Griphook the Goblin) was born in Michigan, Julianne Hough (uncredited in the first movie) hails from Salt Lake City, Kathryn Hunter (Mrs. Arabella Figg) is from New York, Chris Rankin (Percy Weasley) is from New Zealand, etc. so although the list may be small - there are exceptions! And there are many, many other 'townspeople' in the background that aren't listed anywhere. your best start is the casting agencies. they are looking for faces to go in places - and who will fit where. consider this: the casting agency is quite likely in Britain - so that is what they have to work with. Don't get discouraged. if you want to get into that line of work, send your resume or pictures out to every agency you can find! good luck!
Why do people see Donald Trump so negatively on issues of immigration and race?
First of all, while there may be ten or eleven million undocumented immigrants in the US, many of them have children who are natural born US citizens, 100% entitled to a free public education and all the other privileges of citizenship. So if you want to talk about deporting millions of those undocumented adults, in many cases you will be breaking up families, or forcing American citizens to "return" to a country they have never been to, or in some cases where they would not be safe. Trump exhibits zero understanding of the complexities or nuances of this problem. He's overall not good with complexity or nuance of any kind. He waves his hand and says that "good management" will take care of this problem but with all due respect that's bullshit. He has no idea about the nuts and bolts of solving the immigration problem. He goes on about building a big fence and getting the Mexican government to pay for it, and his followers eat it up, but he literally has no idea how he will accomplish it. And to make matters worse, he mocks those of his opponents who do have more nuanced, specific proposals for how to deal with illegal immigration.Second, people compare him to Hitler because he sounds like Hitler. You don't have to hate Jews to sound like Hitler. When you talk about maintaining a government database of Americans based on their religion, even if the religion is Islam and not Judaism, you are proposing measures that very closely resemble the precursors to the way Hitler rounded up the Jews and shipped them off to camps to be enslaved and murdered. This is very serious stuff and he seems to have no understanding of why it is deeply un-American, unconstitutional, and even fascistic in nature. Now he is talking about excluding Muslims from the United States at the borders. All Muslims, even natural-born US citizens who might happen to have traveled internationally on business or for a vacation. This is deeply fascistic, horrifying, and 100% unconstitutional.Donald Trump may or not be a brilliant real estate developer. We know he is brilliant at self-promotion. But he is a bully and a blowhard who caters to the basest mob instincts of his followers, and it would be the single saddest day in American history if he were to become the nominee of a major political party, much less actually get elected President of the most powerful nation in the history of the world.
I racial profiling right or immoral?
Is Racial Profiling ever justifiable??? I do not think it it. It is irrational and immoral. You can't use the crime that takes place in one community to justify killing another human being. Especially he/she him self have NOTHING to do with whatever violence is going on in that community. Adam Lanza killed 20 white children in the Sandy Hook elementary. school shooting,but that in no way would justify an African american specifically targeting and killing 20 white children on his own,and then using that tragedy as an example and saying "well white people kill each other so why can't i do it" Do you see how messed up that sounds???? What do you think?
How should I qualify these Ron Paul quotes? If it's not racism then what is it?
It's a racist attitude perpetuated and pushed by a very misguided philisophical point of view. I think Ron Paul is confused by his own libertarian points of view on how to handle the disenfranchized in our country. The man is very driven by the libertarian theories and points of view. This does not mean that libertarians are racist. However, It's obvious that the market is not the cure all for all the things that are ailing in our society. So as a result, he simple tows the easiest line possible and that is to go along with the dominant racist theory thrown out their by the mainstream media and mainstream thought. If he actually had to think about the issue of blacks being vulnerable in our culture to violence in terms of being the victims of it and the perpetrators of it, would mean that he would have to abandon his libertarian point of view on these issues and actually help do something about the 13 year old black teen age boy who has already got caught up with gangs with government funds for community, social and educational programs for at risk kids and job rehabilitation and training for the adults in these neighborhoods. Rather than do that he does the easy thing and think that this 13 year old has the adult mind of a 23 year old so he can have the excuse of locking the kid up and throwing away the key. These comments, if held by Ron Paul, are just more reminders of finger pointing at problems in our society without any real efforts or possible ideas to solve them. These kind of comments hurt more than they inspire or try to solve.