I wonder how it's possible to complete that thought without setting off SOMETHING in his brain.
Like "hmm. Bunch of Indian individuals committing fraud to enter a foreign country in order to scab the population, and several extended families risking their lives to build houses and farms on their own in nthe wilderness. THESE ARE SIMILAR!"
For 2 it seems like he's doing the opposite, which I see from a lot of political keyboard warriors, in trying to keep his moral rationales internally consistent. To that end he has determined that both what the pilgrims did and what "refugee" migrants are doing are forms of colonization, and colonization = bad so he must condemn it. This can help convince others who are thinking within a liberal framework that they are being hypocritical, but sounds foreign and forced to anyone not of that mindset.
There's a difference between settling uncivilized land and taking advantage of a first world nation, you mongoloid.
I wonder how it's possible to complete that thought without setting off SOMETHING in his brain.
Like "hmm. Bunch of Indian individuals committing fraud to enter a foreign country in order to scab the population, and several extended families risking their lives to build houses and farms on their own in nthe wilderness. THESE ARE SIMILAR!"
Nobody honest would make that comparison. Ergo, he must be dishonest.
Who's wilderness was that again?
Nobody's. They settled on uninhabited land. Because they weren't idiots.
Best thing to do right after landing in new territory? Surely it's to pick a fight with the natives.
Hey, The norse raiders did nothing wrong, and we would have gotten away with it if we had logostics to support it, haha
Try again. You might take the claims of the locals seriously, but hey, neither to any of the Boat Migrants.
I see you are unaware of the Vikings, the Spanish, and again: the boat people.
Nobody's.
Indians didn't conceptualize land ownership.
Even if they did, what's your point? "Ooooo you justify your own people conquring others but don't want to be conqured yourself oooooo"
For 2 it seems like he's doing the opposite, which I see from a lot of political keyboard warriors, in trying to keep his moral rationales internally consistent. To that end he has determined that both what the pilgrims did and what "refugee" migrants are doing are forms of colonization, and colonization = bad so he must condemn it. This can help convince others who are thinking within a liberal framework that they are being hypocritical, but sounds foreign and forced to anyone not of that mindset.
Leftist garbage. Yes, all people understand ownership. That's what happens when they say "Get off my land".
Don't steal other people's shit.
No, there isn't. You don't have a right to other people's shit as they don't have a right to yours.
This is too retarded to be true. You really believe you can cast word spells to get the results you want, don't you?
You do not have the right to other people's things you fucking commie
Gizortnik cast "Commie." It was ineffective!