minus the pro life thing, i am right behind you, friend.

do you want an award bro

If by reward you mean political victory, then yes.

honestly i agree with most of your views but the whole high horse thing is really making you easy to take as a joke

first they laugh at you etc..

Can I ask why the anti immigration?

It degenerates society and culture.

Are you American then ?

no

Good. Nothing worse than white Americans complaining about immigration given that their country is kind of built on it.

So all drugs ?

You should try Switzerland. You might like it.

or Portugal, probably more humane than Switzerland.

https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.w65MBafxH

I figured they would like the Swiss immigration laws

I don't think you can immigrate to Switzerland unless you have serious money or are willing to be a servant.

You can go there if you have a job up front. We used to live there.

I’m on the fence regarding this topic but, I struggle with this reasoning. Can’t the United States change their stance on immigration, regardless of how they were founded? Times change.

You’re right of course.

I just find it a little hypocritical.

It’s only hypocritical if you ignore the main talking points of the argument and just look at the surface. The issue isn’t that black and white however, and those immigrants that built the USA came looking to form a country, and were heavily vetted before they were allowed in. If you don’t believe me then look up a place called Ellis Island, and (what was basically) forced service in the US Army during the civil war. Obviously they had a choice but again, it wasn’t that cut and dry and serving was the best option. And even then, most immigrants were still looked down upon as less than their American counterparts.

Sure the USA was technically founded, and built, on immigration but even then they weren’t letting in “just anyone” and there was still a real push for vetting immigrants (much like you would see today). Also we are living in a completely different America than when mass immigration was happening. There were literal huge stretches of land that were barren or unworked that anyone who was unskilled could work for cheap. There were miles of unsettled space that could easily be occupied by immigrants and wanted to become part of he American lifestyle and culture. Now you have people coming over who don’t want to assimilate and just want to come here so their governments don’t fuck with them any more. There’s a huge difference and I could keep going but I won’t as I’m sure this will get downvoted to shit.

You made fair points so I at least gave you an upvote

Those are talking points from conservative think tanks pushing an agenda. What do you think the ultimate goal of this current anti-immigrant propaganda is?

Its ok for white Americans to complain about immigration.

The immigrants that went to America during America’s inception had a myriad of quality employment opportunities. And then some. It seems that the job market landscape has changed quite a bit since then, would you agree? As in - NOW, what jobs are there for them? It seems that based on that stale market vs. the wide-open entry system one can technically be anti-immigration (in it’s current form) without this stance being called “complaining”.

Diversity makes us stronger IMO. America has always been a melting pot.

Same here, or at least sensible immigration through a merit based system with no loopholes

You don't choose what pussy you come out of. Immigration isn't the issue, the issue is what people are allowed in. If someone is bringing skills to the society, intergrate and they want to make their life better great thats a positive thing. Letting any fucker who you cross the boarder be a citizen well that's not the greatest of ideas.

It's hard to talk politics at all now. Policies and positions are grey areas that require far more nuisance that "this is bad" "that is good"

It's also increasingly harder to talk about tackling the route cause of issues. People say immigration is a problem where as I say economic equality is the issue because thats what causes a lot of migration. For a politician is no impossible to delve deep on an issue due to the current social media driven news cycles need for a clickbait article or tweet.

It's become a fucking minefield and all it allows is for politicians to do whateverthefucktheylike because people vote them in based on grand ambiguous policy claims

Sublime dissembling there, claiming to be anti-immigrant and pro-life in the same sentence. No wonder drugs are a necessity.

LMFAO.

They're two completely different things though.

Are you speaking for your self or OP?

And how are they different?

One is about immigration policy, and the other is about abortion. Obviously two completely different things. What do you mean, how are they different?

They are both about life.

“And I am the future” ~ rapboi

Probably still lives with parents has no job and is possibly a virgin . Like the good people of this sub don’t know delusions of grandeur when they see it , good one guy

This exactly. Delusions of grandeur, or just general narcissism of varying degrees, are what's holding us back as a species more than anything else. Everybody is trapped in their own little bubble, and they reject anything outside of it that might cross the barrier or even pop it. Everyone is so convinced that they're important and that their worldview is THE worldview and everyone else is wrong. They can't accept that they're wrong too. With all the changes--social, political, technological, global--that are on the horizon and rapidly drawing closer, the near-future is going to be an entirely different place. Humanity is in the awkward teenager stage where it's trying to figure out what works and what its place is as a species. Anyone who boldly claims, "I AM the future!" instead of "I am PART of the future" is part of the problem. Holding on to childlike fantasies even though the body is trying to turn into an adult

Great comment , I like and appreciate your thoughts on this one .

Pro-legalization of all drugs?

I think your called a rightist-libertarian.

'pro-life', by the way, just means your making a stab in the spectrum of collective rights. It does not mean youre 'prolife', unless you support the total NON-killing of humans, all the way to old-age and criminal.

Pro-life people are eager to execute people who they perceive as criminals, by a state, that is largely criminal, the world-over.

So, so long as there is congruence in this 'pro-life' slogan, in that, you are 'actually pro-life' and not just a catchy moral-high ground phrase in action.

Anti-immigration: seems to be pro-selective life.

since ,those that exist, and those that you theory as existing some way, dont deserve equal unconditional regard. . . 'pro-life'

Legalize drugs. . .let me guess, you partake in drugs?

If you were an illegal Mexican living in the US, would you also partake to 'immigration'?

I agree on all those things, but want to ensure you have the capacity to know why with congruence.

-Anti-amnesty immigration. PRO-merit based immigration

-Pro- (early stage) abortion, Pro-vegan, Pro-adoption, Anti-death penalty, anti-war.

naturally, there will be a scale of 'when human life begins', and my conception is based on brain structuralism and neural-capacity to feel. Where's yours?

Pro-legalize drugs that lead to non-victims. Heroin leads to victimization. Meth leads to victimization. things that lead to psychological experiences that dont statistically lead to victim-based addiction = Acid, shrooms, weed, salvia, MDMA, etc.

Pro-sale of non-victimizing narcotics.

Pro-manufacturer of all substances, for individual use, but usage (being caught using in public or a home-call for trouble) leads to violation.

Why base rules off static conditions, when they can be based on the point in certain processes that make the most ethical/material benefit to ALL living things.

Anti-immigration: seems to be pro-selective life.

Really bad use of words here unless I miss understood. Anti-immigration does not mean racists or pro-selective life. It means focus on the people living in the country (homeless, sick, hungry, mentally ill) versus adding more to society.

Pro-choice is more like pro-selective life right?

The words are ill-terms for static-choices on process, that are human and governmental relationships.

In the USA, the term 'pro-choice' is a moral-high ground rhetoric. They dont care about 'life', they care about religious doctrine and dogma.

If they cared about life, that value would transcend their political application and apply to ACTUAL people who currently exist and have life.

So yes, I would say your assessment of my terms is correct. It's selective care about types of 'life'.

You cant be 'pro-life', and complete 'anti-immigration', because that means "fuck everyone else" not born, who has it hard enough to move. It's just xenophobic and not fiscal, at that point.

Being anti-immigration, with a purpose and limit, makes MUCH More sense. So, I understand it does not mean 'racist' or 'pro-selective life', although, nations are actually selecting whose lives get to join them, and often there is quotes representing racial concerns.

I would argue, that any racial reason to immigrate people is racist, if it's pro or anti some type of 'race'. Selectivity in relationships is 100% necessary. There is nothing wrong with selectively picking people to join the nation.

I think we are on the same page of agreement, if I am to explain myself like this.

Thanks for listing the conflicts reflected in the post.

Anti-immigration.

Pro-gun, and opposed to any gun control whatsoever.

Pro-drug.

Anti-corporate.

Believe the rich should be taxed at 95+%

Do not believe corporations should have rights, or that shareholders should be sheltered from liability for corporate actions.

Pro single payer health care.

Anti red team.

Anti blue team.

Sorry dude those beliefs are just literally not the future. All of them look backwards.

The future, like the past, is immigration. Lots of it.

"An enigma" lol. Dreary reactionary more like.

I don't think you can immigrate to Switzerland unless you have serious money or are willing to be a servant.