Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News' started by Jakebob, Feb 18, 2013.
Have you ever told a story and nobody gives a shit?
Something tells me this isn't the first time that you've done that.
I did not know that the natives had immigration laws.
Sounds like the USDA is cooking something up, to stay relevant.
Violently retarded. The territory was unincorporated and largely uninhabited. The tribes were highly nomadic and never stayed in one place for long because they never discovered the wheel. It's like saying the land was owned by monkeys before we got there. And they will STAY minorities once we cull them.
Mad Cow Disease
We do give a shit. These people are running the US Government. How would you like to wake up to a country were you can be arrested for the mere critisism of a minority group.
@Fraud Based Economy
The "Indians" were hardly some monolithic ethnicity. They killed eachother as often as Germans did the French. They just fought their wars on a much smaller scale because those retarded fuckers couldn't even invent the wheel much less basic metallurgy and gun powder.
The Europeans showed up and just played their own game with them, although they were much better. That's why everybody hates them. Europeans: the Yankees of warfare. For fuck's sake, the Puritans, the Quakers and a lot of other settlements tried to play nice. If the Indians were capable of doing the first thing required of a civilization: picking a spot and fucking staying there, they would have been free to dwell in their techno-retarded isolational bliss.
And the shit about small-pox blankets is ridiculous. The West, although lightyears ahead of the average redskin, didn't have germ theory back then. They didn't have the logical powers to deduce that fleas which lived in their blankets carried smallpox and distributing these blankets to the freezing half-naked red men would cause them to die in a hilarious fashion.
Plus I seem to recall American Indians genociding at least one civilization out of existence and the various civilizations of Central America having nice hearty wars against one another in an attempt to wipe eachother off the map. They're just pissed Cortez owned the fuck out of all of them with his magic boom-pipes. The Sioux, Crow, Blackfoots, Comanche, Apache and other assorted tribes loved killing eachother. If white people weren't here, they'd still be clubbing eachother with sticks and stones today.
TL;DR There are more "Native Americans" alive today than before the white man got here. You're welcome for vaccinations and indoor plumbing. Now fuck off.
Stupid indians drinking all the fiyah wattah
A PerpA post without accusing someone of having GOTIS or WhiteKnighting.
You're slipping, baby.
I seriously thought that they were forced to have sex on the tables for a minute.
Now that I know the truth, I no longer give a fuck.
The Truth set me free!
Actually, the nations of the world didn't have "borders" (as we know them) until the mid 1800s and there weren't "nations" (as we know them) until the mid 1600s.
Which part of that post are you having trouble comprehending?
The whole thing.
What you mean they did have "borders" as we know them? Or they were not "nations"? Please expand, How is the concept of borders and nation not the same as let's say England or France in 1600's
a) being ignored
b) being accused of being:
iii) Autistic and Homosexual
iv) A kindergarten teacher
c) having the topic changed to something about America
d) having the original post redescribed in a manner such as to render it unrecognisable
e) your will to live and/or post being ground down to powder beneath the steamroller that is The Member Formerly Known As Baya
Nations (as in all nations) didn't have standardised passports (travel permits) until early 1900s (though the process started in the mid 1800s) and people didn't have a concept of sovereignty (or any respect for it, legal or otherwise) until the mid 1600s. The system we have now where you need a passport (and probably a visa) to travel to other nations was established at the start of WW1 while the Peace of Westphalia helped legitimise nations amongst themselves but only in Europe as all the legalities established there were ignored across the Americas and the rest of the world until the mid 1900s.
OK, so it was d with e to follow.
Is it my fault when somebody's too stupid to comprehend my simplified sentences? I do my best to make all my posts readable to your average cretin.
Know your audience - so yes, it's your fault.
Our cretinosity is well above average.
Sometimes an artist has to raise the standard. -_-
Then prepare for being without honour in your own country.
And to lead others, you first must get them to follow you.
Passports and Sovereignty. That's the best you have.
Assuming arguendo that I accept your premise about "passports" and national identity, it has nothing to do with Borders or what we call a Nation.
While you may argue that borders are more stable today and under tighter control (due mostly to population) we still have areas of nations that are lawless/unguarded (parts Mexico, S. America, Africa - etc.).
There is nothing different from those nations borders from anything in the 1600's - even before that as other civilizations required official documents to travel (since many people could not read or write this was not an issue).
Yeah, I don't think you understand just what the Peace of Westphalia did. It effectively ended the medieval period. It put an end to non-governmental armies like mercenary groups, bandits and pirates. It made the various domains of Europe formerly recognise each other's claims of independence (thus requiring a declaration of war if they wish to go to war) and drastically reduced the amount of civil wars waged between rival family members looking to gain the same title. Eventually it led to the centralised nations of the Napoleonic period.
I like using parables and illistrations.
Let's take your argument at face value and pretend I was able to teleport you into England in 1600 A.D. - Fuck it, let's go to 1200's
What happens? Do you get to chug around without a passport because, as you say, nobody has a national identity?
Fuck no. You'd be captured in less than a week, probably within an hour. You would be either (1) burned at the stake for being Muslim/Homosexual or (2) Enslaved for being said Muslim/Homosexual.
Indeed, Britain used to take its immigration laws seriously. As well as it's identity. Even four hundred years earlier by telling teh Jews to GTFO:
Jewish expulsion (a fav pastime for all Nations) is evidence how Borders and National Identity was, and still is, serious business.
Also as the article state, teh Jews needed Permits to enter English lands from 1200's-1600's. There is little records of dealing with Jews after that so England's borders and identity seemed to be solid during that time period.
TL; DR - In summary the concept of Borders - and Passports have been around for thousands of years and little has changed along with the concept of Nations.
Those Jews entered England (and ended up living there for many years/decades) without a hindrance. So what you just did is reinforce what I had written.
Option e approaches...