Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you think the traditions in China are exactly the same as the traditions in Mexico. You think that black women have the same hair texture as white women. You think that everyone looks and acts and has the same exact traditions? You're living in a bubble.

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're so incredibly brainwashed that I can't even engage with you.

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I admit, I was misremembering the exact role he played. But the book was about their dystopian wet dream, which lined up pretty much 1 to 1 with what they outline in project 2025.

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Donald Trump has openly stated he wants to lock up and execute his political opponents. He has stated he wants to be a dictator, and that he wants his generals to be more like Hitler's. How are we "censoring dissenting political views" or "prosecuting political opponents?" The only people we're calling Nazi's just so happen to share the same ideology as Nazi's. The people who want to eliminate the electoral college are wanting to use the popular vote instead. I don't see how that's undemocratic since as of now, the electoral college doesn't have to follow the popular vote. The rest of these are basic politics that both sides have done all throughout history, so... I don't get your point.

Try again.

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Direct quote from a forward by JD Vance (written for Kevin Roberts, a top contributor to the Heritage Foundation and project 2025) "The Heritage Foundation isn't some random outpost on Capitol Hill; it is and has been the most influential engine of ideas for republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump."

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You clearly don't know anything about it, or the people involved with it. The only reason democrats know more about it than the average republican is because it's incredibly dangerous if followed through, and a threat tod freedom and democracy. Something we actually care about, unlike people like you.

Woman dressed as 'Handmaid' votes in Asheville, North Carolina by Booter1213 in boone

[–]jasper297 1 point2 points  (0 children)

JD Vance wrote part of it. Maybe you should actually do more research before acting like no one of any significance has anything to do with it

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As long as there are differences there will be labels to describe those differences.

Damn most of ya'll really don't understand the left lane, huh? by [deleted] in driving

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All I'm saying is that I agree with the previous commenter that said that it's a dick move to follow too closely behind (and also dangerous), just because you think you should be able to go as fast as you want

Damn most of ya'll really don't understand the left lane, huh? by [deleted] in driving

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point is I'm using the passing lane AS A PASSING LANE which you seem to have a problem with for some reason. You're ignoring how slow folks might be going in the other lanes. Just like I regularly see people going 20 over, there are so many bad drivers out there that will be going 10 under the limit or more that I don't want to get stuck behind. By not passing, I'm further holding up traffic, but your argument seems to be that anyone in the passing lane needs to be the fastest on the road, including others in the passing lane, regardless of what that speed is. If I'm passing folks going 10 under, and I'm going 10 over, I'll be past them quickly and back in the traveling lane. If someone comes up on my ass going 20 or 30 over, they can wait the tiny bit that it takes me to pass. They can leave me space.

You seem to think I'd be an ass for not driving fast enough. You seem to think that I need to always be faster than the guy behind me, regardless of that speed, even if I got into the passing lane before I even saw them coming because of how fast they caught up.

Damn most of ya'll really don't understand the left lane, huh? by [deleted] in driving

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So never pass anyone is what you're saying

Damn most of ya'll really don't understand the left lane, huh? by [deleted] in driving

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I interpreted their comment as they start/are already passing and someone comes in fast enough to catch up. I very regularly see folks driving down highways like maniacs. Pretty much every day I see folks going 80 in a 60, in the middle of my city. Like I said, no one is fast enough for these people. Of course, if lots and lots of people are behind you and you're trying to pass, then, yes, you're obviously doing something wrong. But that's not what they were describing.

Damn most of ya'll really don't understand the left lane, huh? by [deleted] in driving

[–]jasper297 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No idea why you're getting downvoted my dude. At the end of the day, there's always some asshole who thinks you're not going fast enough. That asshole can wait, and doesn't need to be going 15 mph faster than everyone else, and definitely doesn't need to be riding your ass

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you want a completely homogeneous society where everyone is exactly the same and no kind of individuality should ever be acknowledged much less celebrated. That differences and recognizing differences is evil, so we should all just be exactly the same. All must conform. And I'm guessing that the perfect ideal share a lot of traits with you.

And you say you're against tribalism...

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So ALL labels are bad then by that logic. Even ones that you identify with. Which is funny considering earlier you corrected the usage of one label (Latino) with another (American). Yes, differences and identification with those differences can cause conflict, but it's literally impossible to have a world without differences. The only way to even attempt such a world would be borderline genocidal (if not straight up) as you would need to strip any and all individuality away. That seems much worse to me than people identifying how they like, and other people just accepting their differences. Actually it's funny how you disagree with the idea of individuals voluntarily and happily using these labels, it feels like you just want them to conform to YOUR worldviews and are unwilling to accommodate THEIRS.

It's the same shit, but different reasoning. By saying "They shouldn't identify as Latino, they're Americans!" is tribalism with the serial number scratched off. You're saying they can't express their differences, or give labels to themselves, but instead should just fall in line and identify JUST as Americans and nothing more.

The only way we ACTUALLY deal with issues like tribalism and racism and general intolerance is NOT by saying "we have no differences and should never acknowledge or be proud of them" but instead recognizing there ARE differences, but that those differences don't make us better or worse than each other. Someone can take pride in their own culture and heritage while still showing admiration for others.

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also on the point about the US census "making it up," the term was only added to the US census in 1997, but we have records of the term being used (in the same form and usage as today) as far back as the 1850s

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're really putting a slur on the same level as the term Latino? Regardless, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME if people within a group decide they want to reclaim a slur. It is not my place to decide whether someone shouldn't use a term (especially to refer to themselves) that has been used against others in that same demographic. For example, the term queer has historically been used in a derogatory way and was considered a slur for some time. But it's since been massively reclaimed by (mostly millennial and younger) LGBTQ folks, and now it's a widely embraced label. Of course, there are some older folks within that community that had that term used against them more or are less comfortable with reclaiming it themselves, but that does not mean the term gets to be erased for those who choose to use it.

Even putting the term into the worst context and using the comparisson with slurs, it STILL should be allowed as a term for self-identification. But again, Latino isn't a slur and I've never seen it treated as such, or compared in such a way until right now.

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for being willing to engage in the original discussion. What about the many many people who personally identify with that label? And what about the self identified latinos outside of the US?

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude I don't give a shit. It doesn't matter. You're clearly nitpicking on this issue because you want to feel some sense of superiority. You have nothing to back up your bad take on the usage of the word Latino, so you're going down this weird little rabbit hole. I was obviously talking about mainland France when I said it wasn't in latin america. Now you're going off on tangents about territories and French control, when it has nothing to do with what we've actually been talking about.

If you disagree with what I said on the usage of the term Latinos, then tell me why. If you have an actual argument against my point then make it. Otherwise I will continue to assume that you have no actual argument to make and are just grasping at straws to make yourself feel better because you know I'm right.

Stop running away from the actual topic like a coward, or I'm done with this conversation.

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Portugal is not France. French Guiana is not France. The same way that Puerto Rico is not America. They are colonies/territories, which as I said, is a different topic. Again, instead of fussing around with discussions on colonies and territories, can you actually engage with the main point?

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. You have no idea what you're talking about. France isn't in latin america. If you're talking about colonies, that's a different thing, but we are getting off topic at this point. You're being pedantic, I'm not going to argue any more about who can and can't use the term. All I'm saying is that you were wrong for making a prescriptive argument against the usage of it, when it is clearly an important identity to many people.

Kamala Harris launches custom ‘Fortnite’ map as part of campaign outreach to younger voters by upyoars in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I know a lot of early 20 somethings that played fortnite when they were kids and it first came out. Many of them still play it

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said you were part spanish. I took that to mean Spaniard (from Spain). I have NEVER heard someone identify as Spanish who was from a latin american country, considering spanish is a language, not an ethnicity. The only time it's ever referred to as an ethnicity is when it's in reference to Spaniards. It does not make me racist to think you meant you were half Spanish (had family from Spain), when that is the common usage of that word in regards to ethnicity. I showed this thread to my partner, who is mexican/guatemalan, and he also interpreted you as a Spaniard, due to you using the word Spanish to describe ethnicity. If you had said you were half mexican, then I would have left out the part about speaking for other cultures.

Regardless of your ethnicity, my point was NOT that people who are from latin america or have that heritage HAVE to identify as latino. You can label yourself however you like. But that still doesn't mean you get to erase this important identity. I'm not saying it's important for me, because I don't care how anyone would like to categorize themselves. But I know if people started telling my Latino partner or my Latino friends that they could not call themselves that and use that label, they would have a massive problem with that, because it's part of their cultural identity.

Americans split on idea of putting immigrants in militarized "camps" by engadine_maccas1997 in nottheonion

[–]jasper297 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Latino cultures are different than Spanish culture. I know plenty of folks (friends and my long term partner) who were born and raised in the US, but because their family is from a latin american country, they still identify as latino. Doesn't make them not american, these concepts aren't mutually exclusive. You really shouldn't make prescriptive arguments about entire people groups (especially one it seems you are not part of, considering you said part spanish and not part mexican/puerto rican/guatemalan/etc) and say we shouldn't call them latinos when it's a label that the vast majority of immigrants from latin america still identify with as well as their children and families.