As is tradition, the "downfall of the American Mafia" was the result of the US government choosing to no longer actively support them as a mechanism of political enforcement. When the government chose to stop looking the other way, and decided to stop using the mob as a way of maintaining security, manipulating identarian political blocs, and bringing in money for politicians; all of the sudden the mob collapsed.
Instead of the Democrats using the mafia to enforce the power of the Union, they've now just gone to supporting MS-13.
Don't think for a second that one of the heads of MS-13 that the FBI just arrested was a "Rich Man North of Richmond". And don't for a second think that every single Democrat in Congress didn't know how to get in touch with him.
I gave grok the first paragraph, and it's interesting that it says integration of Italians into America was promoted via English education. (This is given as a reason for the decline of the mob; grok doesnt' like your explanation). Whereas, in order to integrate the invaders, we have to educate in Spanish. Some public school ninny hasn't their stories straight.
Asking Grok for a historical lesson is literally not different from asking r/History a topic. AI pulls data from general consensus.
Thus, we can assume it to know absolutely nothing of note, though it can tell you what people believe.
That all being said, it is true that integration through a one language policy is integration. It is not true to say that the mob existed because of a lack of integration, and that integration ended the mob. It's conflating the fact that immigrant populations formed party-boss systems within cities, and that these would be ruled by the mob. The mob's continued presence the US should have entirely ceased by 40's, and the fact that the entire Sicilian mob spoke English in the 70's makes this explanation comical.
No, organized crime is allowed to exist by the government because it is an effective way of controlling crime and establishing political blocs based on identitarianism. The Democrats aren't actually doing anything they didn't already try in the 1880's.
And yes, you are correct to point out that teaching immigrant kids in their native language is anti-integration.
The Left like to avoid a cognitive dissonance of opposing integration by saying that they oppose assimilation. They run around saying they support integration, and oppose assimilation (or oppose segregation and support multi-culturalism). If you oppose immigration, you oppose assimilation. If you support multi-culturalism, you support segregation.
So yeah if I mock grok, I'm probably mocking the mainstream consensus and not some strawmen then.
And yes, you are correct to point out that teaching immigrant kids in their native language is anti-integration.
This mainstream, to the extent that grok represents it, doesn't have their story straight. English-language public school education is judged beneficial, or sufficient, for Italian integration, but Spanish (and other) speakers require ESL.
It can't get the story straight, it's just incompatible. Same thing with Transgenderism and Non-Binary Queer Theory. Why do you need surgery if gender is a social construct?
I don't fully support the attempt to decouple gender and sex, but I have a broad enough perspective to realize that being a (wo)man means different things all over the place. So, sex is the stuff that doesn't depend on your culture. Gender is the stuff that does. Individuals who are transgender would live as the opposite gender without requiring sexual modification. It just means taking on the ephemeral characteristics of woman (eg). Plenty of examples of this. There is also precedent for castration and other attempts to transition sex. Here's where body dysmorphia comes in. The disease happens to people with respect to more than their genitals, but genitals are a popular area of focus.
TG/TS seem to be related concepts that get lumped together. A majority of transsexuals would be transgender, but a majority of transgenders need not be transsexual.
I'm more along the lines of gender abolition. It was created as a concept to intentionally remove the influence of biology on manliness & womanliness, making the argument you just did. Truth is, most cultures don't vary all that much regarding men and women. It's not perfectly homogenous, but it's similar enough to point out that many of the out-growths of gender identity are exclusively the result of biological sex.
Even when it comes to the concept of womanliness as a deep concept, the concept of womanliness and manliness is still, mostly, cross cultural.
And sure I get why castration follows an attempt to treat dysphoria, but you don't treat a disease by enabling it. You don't tell a schizophrenic that the voices are real, that's actually abuse.
The TG/TS difference has been intentionally eroded because both were Leftist rhetorical warfare strategies. They don't really care what happens to the people attached to those labels.
There are times to do the dual role gimmick and this is not one of those times. It's not like Tom Hardy in Legend, where he played twin brothers who should obviously share a family resemblance despite their different personalities, De Niro playing the heads of two crime families just comes off as an ego play.
Discrimination against I-talians is in the past, and we shouldn't worry about it. Discrimination against niggers is like last year, and we should pay reparations.
As is tradition, the "downfall of the American Mafia" was the result of the US government choosing to no longer actively support them as a mechanism of political enforcement. When the government chose to stop looking the other way, and decided to stop using the mob as a way of maintaining security, manipulating identarian political blocs, and bringing in money for politicians; all of the sudden the mob collapsed.
Instead of the Democrats using the mafia to enforce the power of the Union, they've now just gone to supporting MS-13.
Don't think for a second that one of the heads of MS-13 that the FBI just arrested was a "Rich Man North of Richmond". And don't for a second think that every single Democrat in Congress didn't know how to get in touch with him.
I gave grok the first paragraph, and it's interesting that it says integration of Italians into America was promoted via English education. (This is given as a reason for the decline of the mob; grok doesnt' like your explanation). Whereas, in order to integrate the invaders, we have to educate in Spanish. Some public school ninny hasn't their stories straight.
Asking Grok for a historical lesson is literally not different from asking r/History a topic. AI pulls data from general consensus.
Thus, we can assume it to know absolutely nothing of note, though it can tell you what people believe.
That all being said, it is true that integration through a one language policy is integration. It is not true to say that the mob existed because of a lack of integration, and that integration ended the mob. It's conflating the fact that immigrant populations formed party-boss systems within cities, and that these would be ruled by the mob. The mob's continued presence the US should have entirely ceased by 40's, and the fact that the entire Sicilian mob spoke English in the 70's makes this explanation comical.
No, organized crime is allowed to exist by the government because it is an effective way of controlling crime and establishing political blocs based on identitarianism. The Democrats aren't actually doing anything they didn't already try in the 1880's.
And yes, you are correct to point out that teaching immigrant kids in their native language is anti-integration.
The Left like to avoid a cognitive dissonance of opposing integration by saying that they oppose assimilation. They run around saying they support integration, and oppose assimilation (or oppose segregation and support multi-culturalism). If you oppose immigration, you oppose assimilation. If you support multi-culturalism, you support segregation.
So yeah if I mock grok, I'm probably mocking the mainstream consensus and not some strawmen then.
This mainstream, to the extent that grok represents it, doesn't have their story straight. English-language public school education is judged beneficial, or sufficient, for Italian integration, but Spanish (and other) speakers require ESL.
It can't get the story straight, it's just incompatible. Same thing with Transgenderism and Non-Binary Queer Theory. Why do you need surgery if gender is a social construct?
I don't fully support the attempt to decouple gender and sex, but I have a broad enough perspective to realize that being a (wo)man means different things all over the place. So, sex is the stuff that doesn't depend on your culture. Gender is the stuff that does. Individuals who are transgender would live as the opposite gender without requiring sexual modification. It just means taking on the ephemeral characteristics of woman (eg). Plenty of examples of this. There is also precedent for castration and other attempts to transition sex. Here's where body dysmorphia comes in. The disease happens to people with respect to more than their genitals, but genitals are a popular area of focus.
TG/TS seem to be related concepts that get lumped together. A majority of transsexuals would be transgender, but a majority of transgenders need not be transsexual.
I'm more along the lines of gender abolition. It was created as a concept to intentionally remove the influence of biology on manliness & womanliness, making the argument you just did. Truth is, most cultures don't vary all that much regarding men and women. It's not perfectly homogenous, but it's similar enough to point out that many of the out-growths of gender identity are exclusively the result of biological sex.
Even when it comes to the concept of womanliness as a deep concept, the concept of womanliness and manliness is still, mostly, cross cultural.
And sure I get why castration follows an attempt to treat dysphoria, but you don't treat a disease by enabling it. You don't tell a schizophrenic that the voices are real, that's actually abuse.
The TG/TS difference has been intentionally eroded because both were Leftist rhetorical warfare strategies. They don't really care what happens to the people attached to those labels.
There are times to do the dual role gimmick and this is not one of those times. It's not like Tom Hardy in Legend, where he played twin brothers who should obviously share a family resemblance despite their different personalities, De Niro playing the heads of two crime families just comes off as an ego play.
They always double-down.
The cheap rubber prosthetics on his face did little to sell the movie.
Goddamn racists.
Discrimination against I-talians is in the past, and we shouldn't worry about it. Discrimination against niggers is like last year, and we should pay reparations.
But they aren't white according to this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU4n84Bc5IU The film is also called Africa Addio.
I have seen the film. It's good. I like the original Italian name better.