The Twin Pillars that Trump's presidency relies on

You've taken this a bit out of context. The post I responded to claimed that Trump could accomplish more if he had control of the house, which I pointed out that he did. And the only major piece of legislation passed under his two years of holding this majority in both the House and Senate was a tax act projected to increase the national debt. Hence, my assertion that it is all a bunch of RINO BS coming from Team T.

You are incorrect on your assertion that the most important legislation requires a 60% vote in the senate. All legislation/bills from the House pass on a simple majority vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act_of_2017#House_of_Representatives_2

 

Twin pillars of the Trump Administration.. are, in my opinion, no new wars and a booming economy.

 

It does appear we are regressing to a more "normal" segregation and separation of unique cultural groups and identities, doesn't it. Separation and crude tribalism is a core focus of the "Progressive" platform, while the right wing has continued to focus on building jobs and "opportunities for all", regardless who you are or what you look like, to achieve independent success as an American individual.

 

All Great nations are great because they encourage individuals to do Great things. Only individual people can do anything at all. The idea that people are nothing but members of races is the greatest absurdity possible.

 

Increased diversity reduces social cohesion. At least that's what the scientists say:

------------
But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.
-------------
http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/

 

Maybe we'd be even greater is we were less diverse. I think having a whole continent to exploit (once we got rid of the pesky natives) may be a good reason we became a super power.

 

The only success China has is in making people who live in poverty. Soviet Russia collapsed entirely in 1989 after less than a 100 years of economic struggle and returned to being possibly the most oppressive nation on Earth, an unenviable position it had held for close to a millennium. Neither one are any more than regional powers now, Chinese pretensions notwithstanding, and, given their size and population, I would hardly call them terribly successful nations.

 

Sadly, we see clearly that many of our Team T members here are exceptionally motivated by number 2. It wouldn't even take a University of Houston sociology junior a day or two to mine this site and prove the correlation between Trump supporters and, what even is the term? Anti-blacks?

 

How do you measure "success"?

 

I don’t necessarily disagree with your premise but I absolutely disagree with your conclusion.

Great nations DO encourage individuals to do great things. And the individual is the entity who does those great things. However, if you have a group of 100 people and ONE of them consistently does great things. Is it worth it to drag the other 99 (who are a drain on society) along with you in order to get the benefits from the one? Of course not. The detrimental behaviors and consequences from the 99 will usually FAR outweigh the one.

Now that goes along with my other point. That races ARE meaningful, we ARE objectively different in many different facets and we CONSISTENTLY perform and contribute at far different levels as groups. That is undeniable, irrefutable and while it may be an inconvenient truth it is a truth nonetheless.

Now, it IS true that the individual acts individually and not as a group. Therefore it is impossible to say what any one specific individual will do faced with a given scenario. However, in the aggregate, we can tell you what the average person will do within that group with an extremely high degree of precision.

Therein lies the problem because we cannot make laws and structure society based upon the individual. We must make laws and structure society based upon the aggregate. In other words you cannot base your outlook on reality upon the EXCEPTION, you must base it upon the RULE.

 

Unfortunately the RULE is that caucasoids and mongoloids perform at a much higher level intellectually and contribute far more to society than their negroid counterparts. Furthermore the rule is that negroids engage in a grossly disproportionate level of violence and antisocial behaviors compared to their caucasoid or mongoloid peers. There are exceptions to both of these rules obviously but as I just noted you cannot structure society based upon the exception. You must base it on the rule.

That’s not popular but it is a fact.

 

It would make sense for whatever smattering of white racists who still exist to be Nationalists, and therefore Trump supporters. It similarly makes sense for black and Hispanic racists/isolationists to be progressive left supporters.

There is a difference, however, in "supremacists" who think their race is somehow superior to others, and non-racist "segregationists" of all cultures who simply have a preference and higher comfort level with living among people who are homogenous and share the same background and culture. People who "look like them".

Segregationists among all races are probably the majority and represent the norm, while people who enjoy and see the benefits in a multicultural mixing are the minority. In that case, there is no longer a partisan nature or "political pillar", as much as there is an overriding natural human preference for birds of a feather to flock together.

 

Social cohesion is a bunch of malarkey , just like your other measures, basically, they're just measures of conformity and conformist societies are death on innovation

Most of what would become the USA was The Great American Desert. Jefferson thought it would take at least a thousand years to populate just the Louisiana Purchase Territory. We did it in less than a century and that was entirely due to a policy of Open Borders. (Jefferson was also quite disappointed that Lewis and Clark didn't find Mammoths)

 

Nonsense. The people that rule society ARE the exceptions. It doesn't matter what race a genius is, he is still a genius, and geniuses are what advance us.

 

So how many people would make up for our not having one Einstein?

Your opinions on races are undeniably and irrefutably WRONG. Not ONE reputable ethnographer or geneticist agrees with them. From a genetic standpoint races simply do not exist. and it wouldn't matter even if they did because Intragoup variations ALWAYS exceed Intergroup variations and that is a fundamental property of large numbers. Races are meaningless constructs, abstractions like Hollywood and Rock stars.

(Also, what are you proposing anyway? You want to roll out the cattle cars and Zyklon B for all the blacks, or what?)

 

Not RINOs...they CINOs

Conservatives in name only. The Republican Party has ALWAYS been like this

 

At long last you got "something " right...but it's not a smattering

 

Either way

 

Balderpoop, there is good evidence that the ancients did not recognize racial distinction at all, at least they don't mention them. To the Romans a man having black skin was like a man having green or gray eyes. It was a distinction which could be seen but it meant nothing to them.

 

Yes...we might be a super duper power..amiright???

 

Rephrase, because I have no clue what you mean by "truth", let alone what subject you want to broach.

 

I’ll address my proposal in a minute but your claims are simply false.

The races ARE different. That’s why an anthropologist can pick your skull up or look at your skeleton and determine what race you are with precise accuracy. This is not debatable.

Blumenfeld: Racial Identification in the Skull and Teeth

mongoloid
Caucasoid
Negroid

Cranial form
broad
medium
Long


Sagittal outline
high, globular
high, rounded
highly variable, post-bregmatic depression

Nose form
medium
narrow
Broad


Nasal bone size
small
large
medium/small


Nasal profile
concave
straight
straight! concave


Nasal spine
medium
prominent, straight
Reduced


Nasal sill
medium
sharp
dull/absent

Incisorform
shoveled
blade
Blade


Facial projtnathism
moderate
reduced
Extreme



Alveolar proj!nathism
moderate
reduced
Extreme


Malar form
projecting
reduced
Reduced


Palatal form
parabolic/ elliptic
parabolic
Hyperbolic


Orbital form
round
rhomboid
Round


Mandible
robust
medium
gracile, oblique gonial angle


Chin pro;ection
moderate
prominent
Reduced

Chin form
median
bilateral
Median
Table 1. Craniofacial trait variations.

Those are just in the face. There are literally hundreds of distinctions between the races physical and mental attributes.

https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=totem

 

As for this question I would suggest we begin a change in immigration practices and subsidies for child birth for a start along with removal of the welfare state in the minority communities. The answer is a legal one, not annihilation.

 

Why only remove welfare state for legal citizens who are minorities? Why not remove welfare state for whites too?

 

That’s not true. Most great empires grew by being accepting of cultural differences, it is much easier to control a region by accepting its culture than to get caught up in wars of attrition by trying to reconstruct them.

The period where empires become homogenous by force is when they are already in a state of decay, and become totalitarian in an attempt to preserve themselves. The most recent examples of homogenous empires are the Nazi empire, and the Empire of Japan, both collapsed rather quickly. Enforcing homogeneity requires a totalitarian state, which has only shown to accelerate decay.