Liberals like me would have to succeed and not be undercut by active racialism of the progressive movement.
We can't control Indians' in-group bias or any of their other politics. The solution is to exclude them.
Weird, because it seems like white Leftists were propagandized into being voluntary sonderkommandos. All you have to do is lay out the values of the American nation, and demand people accept that. If they can't, they can go.
I disagree with even calling it "progressive." Having an in-group bias is normal and was correctly seen as such until the 1960s
It's not 'in-group preference' it's racialism. It's an in-group preference when you want to marry someone from your ethnic group. Purging an entire ethnic group is not that, and you need to stop confusing the two.
Beyond that, it was absolutely progressive, and was founded under the progressive nationalist movements going all the way back to the mid 19th century. The progressives changed position on it only when it became unpopular. First it was the height of Progressiveism in order to destroy the Hapsburg Order for Europe under monarchical or imperial control, then it became un-progressive in the west because they decided to adopt internationalism. Meanwhile in eastern Europe, nationalism was not only progressive, but was declared to be explicitly communist. Internationalists in the West even went to Africa and pushed nationalism there to destroy the remnants of European empires, leading to the introduction of nationalist socialism all throughout the Arab and African world through Pan Arabism and Pan Africanism, leading to dozens of wars, including the bloodiest conflict in African history in the 2nd Congolese War, all while claiming Progresivism and Nationalism were incompatible in just Western Europe. Then again today, we are seeing Supra-Nationalism for the EU, and Ukrainian Nationalism embraced as noble Progressive causes, while the US gets attacked with "New Nationalism" from the Democrats, as it appears that nationalism is being re-defined as necessary for the most current Progressive talking point.
Liberals like me would have to succeed and not be undercut by active racialism of the progressive movement.
"We would have succeeded if no one opposed us!" - The absolute state of liberals
All you have to do is lay out the values of the American nation, and demand people accept that. If they can't, they can go.
That sounds like supporters of the racialist state of Israel need to get expelled from the country. I'm sure liberals are putting some real energy behind such a political project and are going to succeed in the very near future.
You were presenting "American values" as an alternative to political ethnocentrism. Zionists are the most powerful politically ethnocentrists so surely they are first on your list of people needing expulsion from America. Then again, maybe you're just being full of shit, as is tradition.
I don't agree that "Zionists" are the most powerful ethnocentrists, there's a lot of other countries out there, and China certainly has it's own forms of ethnocentrism.
In any case, if you're a Zionist in America, yeah, you can leave.
Frankly, it doesn't even make sense to be an ethnocentrist in a place that isn't even your homeland. If you're an Irish ethnocentrist living in Indonesia, maybe you should leave?
The point of a Liberal state is that it's supposed to be a consistent kind of instability.
A Bicycle is not inherently stable. It is designed to consistently unstable so that it becomes stable only in motion. A football's spiral rotation does the same. Liberalism is supposed to keep power perpetually localized and shifting so that it's not possible to have a massive concentration of power.
The point of Liberalism is to keep the power of the state limited and conflicting, such that the state can't dominate society and cause a massive structural collapse. It just requires people to take responsibility for themselves and away from other public structures.
Liberals like me would have to succeed and not be undercut by active racialism of the progressive movement.
Weird, because it seems like white Leftists were propagandized into being voluntary sonderkommandos. All you have to do is lay out the values of the American nation, and demand people accept that. If they can't, they can go.
It's not 'in-group preference' it's racialism. It's an in-group preference when you want to marry someone from your ethnic group. Purging an entire ethnic group is not that, and you need to stop confusing the two.
Beyond that, it was absolutely progressive, and was founded under the progressive nationalist movements going all the way back to the mid 19th century. The progressives changed position on it only when it became unpopular. First it was the height of Progressiveism in order to destroy the Hapsburg Order for Europe under monarchical or imperial control, then it became un-progressive in the west because they decided to adopt internationalism. Meanwhile in eastern Europe, nationalism was not only progressive, but was declared to be explicitly communist. Internationalists in the West even went to Africa and pushed nationalism there to destroy the remnants of European empires, leading to the introduction of nationalist socialism all throughout the Arab and African world through Pan Arabism and Pan Africanism, leading to dozens of wars, including the bloodiest conflict in African history in the 2nd Congolese War, all while claiming Progresivism and Nationalism were incompatible in just Western Europe. Then again today, we are seeing Supra-Nationalism for the EU, and Ukrainian Nationalism embraced as noble Progressive causes, while the US gets attacked with "New Nationalism" from the Democrats, as it appears that nationalism is being re-defined as necessary for the most current Progressive talking point.
"We would have succeeded if no one opposed us!" - The absolute state of liberals
That sounds like supporters of the racialist state of Israel need to get expelled from the country. I'm sure liberals are putting some real energy behind such a political project and are going to succeed in the very near future.
Getting shot in the back by Leftists who pretend to be Liberals is an unfortunate trend in Liberalism.
I said American nation. Israel's not my problem.
You were presenting "American values" as an alternative to political ethnocentrism. Zionists are the most powerful politically ethnocentrists so surely they are first on your list of people needing expulsion from America. Then again, maybe you're just being full of shit, as is tradition.
I don't agree that "Zionists" are the most powerful ethnocentrists, there's a lot of other countries out there, and China certainly has it's own forms of ethnocentrism.
In any case, if you're a Zionist in America, yeah, you can leave.
Frankly, it doesn't even make sense to be an ethnocentrist in a place that isn't even your homeland. If you're an Irish ethnocentrist living in Indonesia, maybe you should leave?
And this seems to be unavoidable, everywhere humans exist.
I'm tired of being involved in an experiment that we already know the results of, and being blamed for all of the past results.
I'd love to live in a liberal society. I just don't think they can exist in any sort of stable state for longer than a few decades at best.
The point of a Liberal state is that it's supposed to be a consistent kind of instability.
A Bicycle is not inherently stable. It is designed to consistently unstable so that it becomes stable only in motion. A football's spiral rotation does the same. Liberalism is supposed to keep power perpetually localized and shifting so that it's not possible to have a massive concentration of power.
The point of Liberalism is to keep the power of the state limited and conflicting, such that the state can't dominate society and cause a massive structural collapse. It just requires people to take responsibility for themselves and away from other public structures.