The Tolerant Left - Over 500 Violent Attacks on Trump Supporters

[////]

What the hell are you talking about. A country belongs to it's citizens regardless of their skin colour or ethnicity. If you want immigration to slow down go and have more children. Most Western nation's have a negative population growth. The original inhabitants of North America by the way were the indigenous people.

2 falsehoods:

There is no "rule" that if you have a low birth rate you must face population replacement or genocide. No such rule existed historically (quite the contrary lower birth rates correlated with technological dominance and the inverse is a very recent phenomenon called dysgenics). East Asia has the lowest reproductive rate in the world and countries like Japan take extremely few immigrants and those they do take are from neighboring countries that blend into their populace & differ only in culture. This is purely a very recent & radical western political ideology based in wealth redistribution with no consideration for human suffering or societal stability.

Two: The indigenous people were a centuries-long succession of mixed mongoloid & caucasoid population waves from the earliest records. The most extreme and unprecedented change to the "face" of the America's came with slavery & modern mass immigration, not with European settlement. (eg: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...eria-genetics/).

Most of these warped narratives including the TV portrayal of political & ethnic groups who are disproportionately victimized as being oppressors are all different ways for *you* to rationalize what's going on & clear your conscience. That is different from being representative of reality.

[James T. Kirk]

I don't believe in unnecessary violence. If I found out someone was a Trump supporter, I just wouldn't associate with them.

[TonyGe]

2 falsehoods:

There is no "rule" that if you have a low birth rate you must face population replacement or genocide. No such rule existed historically (quite the contrary lower birth rates correlated with technological dominance and the inverse is a very recent phenomenon called dysgenics). East Asia has the lowest reproductive rate in the world and countries like Japan take extremely few immigrants and those they do take are from neighboring countries that blend into their populace & differ only in culture. This is purely a very recent & radical western political ideology based in wealth redistribution with no consideration for human suffering or societal stability.

Two: The indigenous people were a centuries-long succession of mixed mongoloid & caucasoid population waves from the earliest records. The most extreme and unprecedented change to the "face" of the America's came with slavery & modern mass immigration, not with European settlement. (eg: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...eria-genetics/).

Most of these warped narratives including the TV portrayal of political & ethnic groups who are disproportionately victimized as being oppressors are all different ways for *you* to rationalize what's going on & clear your conscience. That is different from being representative of reality.

Yeah there is a rule about entitlement programs birthrate and the continuation of said plans. People pay for them. That is people engaged in work and paying taxes.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2014/01/...tens-finances/

From your post.

The most extreme and unprecedented change to the "face" of the America's came with slavery & modern mass immigration, not with European settlement.

That is absolute baloney. The US and Canada had a policy of genocide and ruthless land grabbing when it came to the indigenous peoples of North America. That quote or statement you posted is from the lips of the dominant culture that felt threatened at the time. It's not to say that I agree with all of the demands of indigenous people. There is no question that they were exploited, cheated and massacered if they were considered an obstacle to European dominance. To say otherwise is completely delusional. It's a complex issue because indigenous peoples engaged in intertribal warfare amoungst themselves prior to European immigration. Putting in simple terms. Prior to the European invasion indigenous people were thriving and had access to all the territory in North America. After the Europeans arrived they were living on reservations and severely depleated in terms of numbers, freedoms and quality of life. Sounds like a catastrophic change to me.

[////]

Yeah there is a rule about entitlement programs birthrate and the continuation of said plans. People pay for them. That is people engaged in work and paying taxes.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2014/01/...tens-finances/

From your post.

The most extreme and unprecedented change to the "face" of the America's came with slavery & modern mass immigration, not with European settlement.

That is absolute baloney. The US and Canada had a policy of genocide and ruthless land grabbing when it came to the indigenous peoples of North America. That quote or statement you posted is from the lips of the dominant culture that felt threatened at the time. It's not to say that I agree with all of the demands of indigenous people. There is no question that they were exploited, cheated and massacered if they were considered an obstacle to European dominance. To say otherwise is completely delusional. It's a complex issue because indigenous peoples engaged in intertribal warfare amoungst themselves prior to European immigration. Putting in simple terms. Prior to the European invasion indigenous people were thriving and had access to all the territory in North America. After the Europeans arrived they were living on reservations and severely depleated in terms of numbers, freedoms and quality of life. Sounds like a catastrophic change to me.

I just like consistency. Let's break down these arguments.

Native Americans are definitely descended from among the earliest inhabitants. The problem (for you) is that they are the product of a nearly constant stream of mixed Eurasian migration. An early primarily East European wave would be assimilated into a larger subsequent primarily East Asian wave and so on. Each wave tended to conquer & subsequently "out-breed" the other. This is relevant if you're fixated on original claims to the land on a racial level.

Slavery & modern mass immigration were the greatest genetic transformation or break in the ancient pattern. So when you make the "original inhabitants" argument you're basically just excluding Africans & native Australians due to the ancient Eurasian lineage of American humans. I'm guessing that isn't the intended effect?

Back to your first argument. You believe countries with low birth rates are to be punished with forced population replacement. Do you hold this position only toward the US & Europe due to the "racial revenge/social justice" ideology that's become common among the political left, or do you hold it also in regards to Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc? I'd like to hear more about it. Should Earth be totally Africanized since that's where nearly all population growth is taking place & projected to occur for the next 100 years?

For that matter Native Americans have among the lowest birth rates in the world and have recently plunged to the lowest in the US. What should happen to them according to your belief system?



Repopulate the reservations with more fertile groups? What would be consistent with your ideological position?

[E10Rifle]

I don't believe in unnecessary violence.

Violence is always necessary when confronting fascism. F*** appeasement.

[TonyGe]

I just like consistency. Let's break down these arguments.

Native Americans are definitely descended from among the earliest inhabitants. The problem (for you) is that they are the product of a nearly constant stream of mixed Eurasian migration. An early primarily East European wave would be assimilated into a larger subsequent primarily East Asian wave and so on. Each wave tended to conquer & subsequently "out-breed" the other. This is relevant if you're fixated on original claims to the land on a racial level.

Slavery & modern mass immigration were the greatest genetic transformation or break in the ancient pattern. So when you make the "original inhabitants" argument you're basically just excluding Africans & native Australians due to the ancient Eurasian lineage of American humans. I'm guessing that isn't the intended effect?

Back to your first argument. You believe countries with low birth rates are to be punished with forced population replacement. Do you hold this position only toward the US & Europe due to the "racial revenge/social justice" ideology that's become common among the political left, or do you hold it also in regards to Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc? I'd like to hear more about it. Should Earth be totally Africanized since that's where nearly all population growth is taking place & projected to occur for the next 100 years?

For that matter Native Americans have among the lowest birth rates in the world and have recently plunged to the lowest in the US. What should happen to them according to your belief system?



Repopulate the reservations with more fertile groups? What would be consistent with your ideological position?

I don't have a strict idealogical position. Apparently you do since you brought it up.

How the heck did you come up with this little gem.

You believe countries with low birth rates are to be punished with forced population replacement.

Believed?? Punished?? Forced?? How did you come up with that out of what I said??. LOL...

So your debating method is interject your paranoia into my post and I have to justify something I never said. I'm not going to waste my time and your time debating because it's obvious you have an agenda. I said what I wanted to say. Like it or lump it.

[The Big Dunn]

Arguing with that azzhole is an exercise in futility. He'll always play the race card when owned in any discussion. He'll gaslight you and say that you are the hostile one, that Trump supporters are the violent instigators, even in the face of daily news stories which exposes the violent and psychotic left.

I’m not going to talk tough online because it’s pointless. I’ve personally have not been attacked and would not allow it.

Did Obama supporters get attacked in those numbers when he was president?

And when did Trump supporters prove to be violent exactly? If I remember it was the Hillary supporters that rioted in the streets by the tens of thousands when she lost the election...

Yeah, in some debates he's alright, but in this one he's just playing dumb.

Your agreeing with a guy who is the perfect example of what I am talking about.

Makes racist posts, I call him on it, then he puts me on ignore abut makes comments about me only from his safe space.

Least you don't turn and run like that closeted f@g..

You guys can't have it both ways. You can't deny how angry Trump supporters were during the primaries and up to the election. You can't pretend they weren't violent first. I mean a woman got killed by a car FFS!!

Now when people strike back you guys wanna cry and ask for a safe space.

All those people you are talking about are tired of guys like you and ghostof degrading them, discriminating against them, bullying them and making them feel like they aren't Americans like you.

Sorry but don't come here and cry, fight them. And don't be *****es and get your guns. GUys like ghostof talk tough but a tranny cuck would beat his punk a$$

[man down]

[Sweet Pea 50]

Welp, next time a Challenger of Peace mows somebody down, I hope the liberal progs on here don't get their organic free range hemp thongs in a twist.

[flipbjefrox]

Cry babies. Trumpers only act tough when in their safe space rally when they outnumbered people 1000:1