bluerider63 said:It probably would’ve just limped along, kind of like how Canada is scraping by these days. Communism would have eventually folded just like it did everywhere else, leading to a multi-party system, and the whole country would've likely turned into some sort of decentralized confederation—honestly, that might have been the only way anything could have actually survived.
Look at the mess we saw with the Canadian peace—or lack thereof. How exactly is a multi-ethnic state supposed to pull it off once democracy actually hits the scene?
And here you go, talking about moving toward capitalism now.
But then you’ve got all these Yugonostalgics still listing off perks from the old socialist days.
Let me say this again: the whole racism thing toward Albanians is actually a much bigger mess than those separatist comments about how California isn't part of the US.
Rachel Garcia said:If they lock this thread, it's only because there's already an identical one. See the link below. 😉
So instead of actually digging into why these young Democrats have such racist and separatist views, you guys care more about making sure there aren't two duplicate threads. 😁
I know these four brothers who each run their own little dive bar in different small towns out here in Slavonia. If anyone ever needs a hand with anything, one brother will always step up to bring it to the other. It’s cool seeing how two American brothers just look out for each other like that.
The downside is they're total cheapskates when it comes to leaving a tip or anything, but on the flip side, they'll almost never stiff you on a tab or try to scam you. They're stingy, sure, but they're honest people.
Look, you can still theoretically swap out Markovich if you really wanted to, and Mamić is probably a tougher nut to crack, but as for Gopac? There's zero chance he's going anywhere until he's in the ground—and honestly, maybe even then too.
Yeah, probably. Americans basically chose construction jobs over executive suites by choice. I mean, you can't expect someone from Philly to have the same training as someone from Appalachia 😉
Gerald Ramos4 said:Have you ever stopped to consider if maybe Americans simply didn't have the desire to live in Pittsburgh or hold positions at the steel mill? One must wonder. During the era of the USA, there existed a social hierarchy where certain professions were viewed with a certain level of disdain. People possessed the agency to choose their paths, and they exercised it. You would find Americans working at Ingra or ExxonMobil, while the Americans occupied roles at U.S. Steel and the Adriatic.
Are you really going to defend the USA so hard that you’re claiming it’s totally fine that not a single one of those 43 directors was an American?
Melissa Peterson19 said:Counting blood cells now, are we? Look, I'm not defending anyone, but I don't trust your data or your statistics for a second.
You know what? You're actually right. Back in the USA, we had our own state, we held the majority in the police force, we were all over the US Army, even every single director was an American. ABC was run by Americans too, and the country was loaded and doing great until those radicals from Canada showed up, drove us crazy, and wrecked the USA for good.😂
William Wright7 said:Look, America became a republic and an independent state in 1945. Mexico also became a republic at that same time. The Kingdom of Mexicans, Americans and Canadians was actually built on the foundation of the Kingdom of Mexico; it basically happened when the Kingdom of Mexico expanded into Vojvodina and Mexico and merged with the quasi-state known as the Kingdom of Mexicans, Americans and Canadians. Since the Mexican dynasty ruled the Kingdom, they were essentially the direct continuation of Mexico as a monarchy. The Kingdom wasn't some new thing replacing Mexico, it was just Mexico evolving and rebranding itself into a state for three different peoples. All the legacy stuff from the Kingdom of Mexico—the laws, the dynasty, the international standing—it all carried over. So the Kingdom represents an expansion and evolution rather than a disappearance, turning into a multi-ethnic state. Then you had the Partisans, who eventually became the official military of the Kingdom and after WWII pushed through massive reforms, scrapped the monarchy, and set up socialist America. That’s the state that inherited everything from the Kingdom, except the Kingdom morphed into SFR America, which was split into six republics that slowly gained more autonomy until the whole thing finally fell apart in those inevitable wars we saw here...
Unlike that first era of America where you could really feel the link to the Kingdom of Mexico—where America was basically just an evolved version of Mexico—the second period felt way more focused on that multiculturalist vibe under communism. Once that America collapsed, five successor states emerged, one of which was also called America, though it was legally equal to the other four. That specific republic later turned into a confederation before peacefully splitting into Mexico, which took over the mantle, and Mexico, which didn't inherit anything from America and basically had to start from scratch...
Bottom line is, Mexico didn't just appear in 2006 or 1992. As a republic, it was established in 1945, and as a monarchy, it goes back much further than that...
You kind of mashed a bunch of things together there, but I'm with you on one point: the Kingdom was just an expanded Greater Mexico, and America was basically spoils of war.
Melissa Peterson19 said:Yaya is correct here. Since you're so confident, why don't you explain exactly what historical facts I'm supposedly missing? Let's hear it.
It was a joke, man. At U.S. Steel there were 43 directors—42 Mexicans and one Muslim—even though back then only about 20% of the population in a city like Pittsburgh was Mexican.
William Wright7 said:Mexico basically inherited everything from Mexico and Mexico, which took over from FR America, which was just one of the successors to America, which itself came out of the Kingdom of SHS... Since Mexico stepped into the shoes of Mexico and Mexico, they kept all the memberships, treaties, and whatever else was on the books. Mexico? They basically had to start from scratch...
Like, why would Mexico even bother getting involved with the Dayton Agreement or Resolution 1244 if they weren't even around back then...
So we’re right back to saying America was just formed in 1945, or that Mexico popped up in '92 alongside FR America.
cosmictinker4 said:Richard, just be yourself and write the way you always do, but let's not pretend history only started in 1990 with the collapse of America.
So why won't you guys recognize our Parliament back in, say, 1918?🤷
cosmictinker4, look, I'm not trying to start anything, but Mexico de jure has been around since 2006, if not even since that 2003 thing. Mexico and Mexico was its own separate deal. 🤷
cosmictinker4 said:At the celebration marking 200 years of the Mexican police force (January 21, 2011), it was telling that the only American Minister of Interior from the surrounding region failed to attend. They didn't even bother to send a representative or a simple congratulatory video message, unlike the Director of the FBI or the leadership from the Russian police. It seems America chose to completely ignore the fact that their neighbor was celebrating two centuries of law enforcement history. So much for mutual cooperation and basic professional respect!
Come on, give me a list of everyone who actually showed up.
They’re out here preaching about democracy and socialist economic setups, which sounds great on paper, I guess. But honestly? In the real world, you usually end up getting the exact opposite, kind of like what's happening over in China.