Liberals have a boner for the word "nuanced", like, when Bill Clinton perjures himself or HRC violates the Espionage Act, that just means that we need to take a *nuanced* reading of the statute to excuse them.
So let me take a nuanced view: when a PMC yuppie hears the words "more immigrants", those words mean "Cheaper au pairs and ethnic restaurants! O Goodies!" When a working class person hears the words "more immigrants" he thinks fewer jobs, more competition for housing, longer lines for services.
I am generally *for* immigration, but let's not pretend that immigration is cost-free, or that these costs are borne equally by everyone.
Yes it falls into the same category as “controversial”. It would deserve pride of place in the badly needed and enlarging niche - the “Weasel’s Dictionary” . Ambrose Bierce has already taken the Devil’s Dictionary?
Rob Henderson cites a study indicating that "educated people are more likely to express prejudice toward immigrants who are described as highly educated, relative to less educated, and are therefore seen as job competitors." I always thought the idea that conservatives didn't like immigrants because they viewed them as job competition was a liberal canard, but apparently not, or at least not entirely: https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/the-grand-canyon-sized-chasm-between
Not only that, permitting the importation of a new underclass, mass immigration provides the regime with fresh opportunities to engineer solutions to social problems and ethnic conflicts. In this way, immigration strengthens and perpetuates liberalism’s moral legitimacy. At the expense of everyone else.
Some truth to that. Somewhat like how prisoners have remarked that the prison guards encourage racial divisions as that makes the inmates easier to control.
El. Who’s everyone else? The feckless Libertarians that want to control everyone who is not a comfortable, complacent, cowardly yuppie? Susan and Mary are right. And I say immigration will dilute the current empire infected zeitgeist we currently slog along in.
What a dumb statement. I wouldn’t put anybody in any gulag and I’ve never given you any reason to think I would. Pull your head out and come into the light.
Americans are described as “naive” about their ME foreign policy. Not amoral, not fraudulent. Not wantonly untrustworthy. Just naive in the way you are when you have CIA spies in every country, spy on all your own citizens and allies and maintain 800 military bases in 70 countries.
Liberals have a boner for the word "nuanced", like, when Bill Clinton perjures himself or HRC violates the Espionage Act, that just means that we need to take a *nuanced* reading of the statute to excuse them.
So let me take a nuanced view: when a PMC yuppie hears the words "more immigrants", those words mean "Cheaper au pairs and ethnic restaurants! O Goodies!" When a working class person hears the words "more immigrants" he thinks fewer jobs, more competition for housing, longer lines for services.
I am generally *for* immigration, but let's not pretend that immigration is cost-free, or that these costs are borne equally by everyone.
Yes it falls into the same category as “controversial”. It would deserve pride of place in the badly needed and enlarging niche - the “Weasel’s Dictionary” . Ambrose Bierce has already taken the Devil’s Dictionary?
Rob Henderson cites a study indicating that "educated people are more likely to express prejudice toward immigrants who are described as highly educated, relative to less educated, and are therefore seen as job competitors." I always thought the idea that conservatives didn't like immigrants because they viewed them as job competition was a liberal canard, but apparently not, or at least not entirely: https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/the-grand-canyon-sized-chasm-between
Not only that, permitting the importation of a new underclass, mass immigration provides the regime with fresh opportunities to engineer solutions to social problems and ethnic conflicts. In this way, immigration strengthens and perpetuates liberalism’s moral legitimacy. At the expense of everyone else.
Some truth to that. Somewhat like how prisoners have remarked that the prison guards encourage racial divisions as that makes the inmates easier to control.
El. Who’s everyone else? The feckless Libertarians that want to control everyone who is not a comfortable, complacent, cowardly yuppie? Susan and Mary are right. And I say immigration will dilute the current empire infected zeitgeist we currently slog along in.
Proletariat, deplorables—the ones you'd like to put in gulag.
What a dumb statement. I wouldn’t put anybody in any gulag and I’ve never given you any reason to think I would. Pull your head out and come into the light.
I just saw another one
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/24/israel-hamas-war-news-gaza-palestine/?commentID=82563aa6-58e2-4603-a774-1fe5a486b880
Americans are described as “naive” about their ME foreign policy. Not amoral, not fraudulent. Not wantonly untrustworthy. Just naive in the way you are when you have CIA spies in every country, spy on all your own citizens and allies and maintain 800 military bases in 70 countries.
More nuanced than that, LOL 😂😆