Posts by Henry Garcia13

Scott Nguyen5 said:Man, if those insults were actually that heavy, you’d probably be calling the cops on him.

Check if you're being ironic here; it isn't exactly riveting. He's talking about "so-called Mexicans"—as if they're some fiction—claiming these supposed people don't even have a home state of their own...

Bagatur said:Every nation has a core people, but North Mexico doesn't claim one specific ethnic group by constitution; it's a state for all its citizens.

To me, this looks like a fascist slur and a total denial of an entire nationality. I've even laid out the official documents from the US government and the UN, which clearly state that North Mexico is the state of the Mexicans and other citizens, and the language is Mexican...

That’s why I’m asking: if the moderators are going to tolerate this kind of rhetoric, we should at least know where we stand. After all, the US recognizes North Mexico under its constitutional name and acknowledges Mexicans as a distinct nation...

Bagatur said:Albanians, Turks, Mexicans... those groups have mother countries, and they have diasporas just like they have ethnic presence in neighboring states... that's why the suffix "DIO" exists. But these "so-called Mexicans" only have North Mexico, just as it's written in the constitution regarding the diaspora.

Is anyone actually going to look at this user's recent posts? It’s nothing but fascist denialism and straight-up insults directed at an entire nation... I’m just asking, because one insult is bound to trigger another.

A certain user keeps attacking an entire nation here. I’ve already posted links to the US government, the UN, and the latest treaty—all of which clearly state that the people living in North Mexico are Mexicans who speak the Mexican language...

There is no such thing as a "North Mexican" or "Slavic Mexican" people. Is it really acceptable to let this kind of nationalistic insult slide?

The supermod already pointed this out, yet the same user continues to repeat themselves and flagrantly break the rules...

Bagatur said:At least the Mexican and Slavic Mexican villages are kept in order...

Angela Moore4 said:Honestly, it feels like a matter of genetic selection. Nobody can say for sure why it works that way, but most people—regardless of how much schooling they've had—are just average in every sense of the word. Just because you graduated from an Ivy League school, brush your teeth every morning, wear designer labels, or drive a luxury car doesn't mean you're actually intelligent or superior. And even then, what "superior" actually means is highly debatable.

I'm with you there. And if we really want to get into it, what does "intelligent" even mean? It’s even more questionable than the idea of superiority. Those silly little Mensa pattern tests aren't everything. Sure, they're tests, but much like any other standardized school exam, they don't exactly guarantee someone won't be a total failure in the real world...🤷

Steven Murphy2 said:The whole argument that fascism is some kind of leftist idea just doesn't hold water. Seriously, go Google Ramiro Ledesma Ramos and look at what happened to him during the era of Franc. He got dealt a hand pretty similar to how the National Socialists were treated during the Night of the Long Knives. What’s the actual deal here? The working class is looking for payback, liberals start making deals with the workers to keep communism from taking over, and then—boom—fascism emerges as the "we're all one nation" solution. Why does the working class even lean toward fascism in the first place? It's because an American worker looks like a capitalist to a proletarian from Africa, right? So, in a unified proletarian state, the American worker loses everything. I was actually digging through some stuff by Friedrich Hayek recently about the supposed socialist roots of Nazism, and he basically argues that Hitler picked off those specific Nazis because they were way too left-leaning, while Hitler himself struck a deal with the big money players. All he really had to do was wipe out the leftist faction and keep the liberal capital flowing through crony capitalism. What you're seeing is this clash between internationalism—both the capitalist and socialist versions—and nationalism, which acts as the shield for those ideas. You can check out the chapter "Fascism and Bolshevism" in the horror of error where it explains how fascism rose up because liberal ideas were too weak to stand against communism. Fascism is more of a reaction to a communist revolution that recruits the struggling middle class, whereas communism goes after the people who have absolutely nothing to their name. Fascism is essentially a revolt by the American working class to scrap liberalism and force the capitalists back into the national collective.

I don't want this to come across as me criticizing without cause, but that applies to you and Ramos... Honestly, no matter which philosopher or political scientist you dig up from that era, you'll get a completely different perspective on Fascism. It's like asking why we shouldn't consult one of the greatest historical authorities on the Holocaust and the broader WWII movement—John Lukacs, a man who barely survived the camps—who argues that there is no such thing as a "generic Fascism." To demonize the movement by forcing a comparison to Nazism is absurd. The reality is that Fascists didn't operate under a single, rigid program; they were a movement driven by waves, forming their politics as they went along. Their ideology was usually distilled later through various quotes from different Duces, which shifted depending on the period. That's why there isn't one unified image of the movement. Officially, they rejected all ideologies and denied the core tenets of Nazism; in fact, until the very end, they remained convinced they were more leftist than Karl Marx.

I realize that LGBTQ+ rights and the concept of new gender identities aren't inherently political orientations. It feels more like modern leftists are attempting to weaponize them into a primary political ideology—a convenient distraction from their failed economic policies. Personally, I have nothing against these rights or any individual liberties, but this should be an intimate, private matter focused on protecting personal integrity. Instead, we’re being subjected to this relentless, irritating bombardment from NGOs, political parties, and the mainstream media. Regarding how this ideological divide plays out, I'll start by pointing out the hypocrisy within the left, which isn't actually about ideology at all, and then move on...

And for the record, fascism has absolutely nothing to do with the populism seen in the modern right, let alone conservatism. Nor is fascism some synonym for a Satanic ideology, at least not in its original sense...

Steven Fox37 said:What "traditional breakdown" are we even talking about here? Economic? Because there's no such thing as "gay rights" on an economic scale—it's not left, right, or center. You're just slapping the label of gay rights onto the centrists and neoliberals because they use social issues as a shield for their unpopular economic agendas. They use anti-racism as a cover too, so does that mean everyone has to be a racist? Every political platform has to provide answers to both social and economic questions. That's not just politics; it's the reality of the world we live in.
As for the legacy of Marxism-Leninism, Lenin actually decriminalized homosexual acts. Then Stalin came along and banned them again. So, it seems to me you're more interested in the legacy of Stalinism.

Fine, now even Koba isn't good enough—and I actually thought he was the best...

I was under the naive impression that centrism was tied first to liberalism—the classic kind, at least—before evolving into this modern product that started gaining traction before WWII. No one should be banning homosexual relations, but for liberals, individual liberties are supposedly the primary focus. That’s where the whole mantra comes from: freedom of speech, freedom of thought, free media, individual and religious rights, freedom of assembly, gender identity, and so on and so forth... though since liberalism literally means liberty, there's really no need to list it all out. Then come the failed economic theories and political thoughts with much later roots. Honestly, the entire ideology is an extreme, parasitic, and inert thing. It shouldn't be surprising then, given how they bombard us with gender issues and constant innovations in human rights terminology just to justify their own unwarranted existence as the mainstream. Their role is essentially to act as vanguard NGO groups, nothing more.

And regarding the way people point fingers at the right today, accusing them of fascism—not just here in this thread, but everywhere—I think it's all completely arbitrary and baseless...

Amanda Allen4 said:They say space is curved—that every direction within it is actually an arc where the two ends, left and right, eventually meet at a single point. For totalitarians, the greatest enemy is always the totalitarian of the opposite side, because they see one another as dangerous competitors for absolute power.

In that light, the deepest hatred is reserved for those who deviate from the orthodoxy (think St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre style)—be it Communism or Fascism. It’s no wonder that the "far-left" hates a former communist like Harmon even more than they hate some hardened "clerical fascist."

Original Italian Fascism isn't strictly a right-wing ideology; many political science experts argue it was an ultra-left movement, a direct descendant of the Jacobins... There's plenty of debate there, but it’s clear how the left hijacked the term after WWII to use it as a convenient label for all nationalist movements. Their goal was a massive, supranational state modeled after ancient Rome... This constant playing with semantics isn't just harmless wordplay. It's a tactic. They want to poison the well of nationalism, which is foolish, because without nationalism, you can't have patriotism—they are two sides of the same coin. By preemptively condemning any emotion tied to one's nation, they serve the globalist agenda, rebranding patriotism as something synonymous with mundialism, pushed by the same central powers....

I find myself repeating this often, so here is another chance to lay it out. There are plenty of decent American scholars who explain this manufactured shift in terminology quite well...

Steven Fox37 said:Then which side is it? The right? 🤦

It’s a fair point, really. They aren't right-wing, nor have they ever been... but you can't exactly call them Marxists either. In any standard political breakdown, those views sit squarely in the center. I mentioned how Bill Clinton and Tony Blair essentially gutted the old social-democratic parties, pivoting them toward a more liberal-democratic stance—which is exactly what we're seeing now. Meanwhile, the populist vacuum left behind by the left was filled by conservative parties, which transformed into true people's parties. Politics doesn't tolerate empty space, and since the left stopped speaking to the working class, someone else had to step up.

Even the label itself is meaningless if you look at the history. Take the original fascists under Mussolini in Italy; their style of governance was relatively benign in the early stages, much like how certain communist regimes operated in Eastern Europe back in the day. The term "fascism" originally evoked the power of the Roman Empire. Before they were tainted by Nazi influence, these movements didn't push ethno-racial agendas or anti-Semitic policies. Mussolini himself started as a leftist union leader and even established a socialist republic after his initial coup. He used to claim he was a bigger socialist than Marx ever was.

This modern, forced definition of "fascism"—the one the left uses as a convenient weapon to disqualify anyone they disagree with—is fundamentally wrong, just as I've laid out here...☕

cosmicgull52 said:If there is anything within you that drives you to support Trump, then you never belonged on the left to begin with. You belong in the trash heap alongside those gangrenous, failed ideas and the mainstream Left that you claim to despise so much.

It is as if you believe that garbage is your only alternative.

Furthermore, your suspicious stance on "destroying the family" is nothing more than code for refusing to acknowledge any family structure that doesn't fit your narrow-minded views.

Just stay under that MAGA hat and leave the issues of the left alone. 👋

And what "left" are we even talking about? The main parties claiming that label are embarrassed by social democracy, let alone anything more substantial. You can't seriously believe that LGBTQ+ rights define the entire left wing of the political spectrum. Once figures like Bill Clinton or Tony Blair stripped away the core leftist principles in favor of "Third Way" neoliberalism, the mainstream left effectively ceased to exist. They left a vacuum, and it was filled by conservative populist movements. Marx would probably take his own life if he saw what these so-called "leftist" parties have morphed into today...

Sophia Ramos5 said:Lock cutters. On six-meter poles. Where'd the poles come from? Where'd the cutters come from? Home Depot in any suburban town.😁
Why doesn't everyone realize these people are moving up? The locals know they have money, and they use it. Just remember that guy who bought a whole house just by selling tea.

He bought a house selling tea to refugees!

There's a solution for every problem. Except for predatory payday loans.

I can't speak to this specific situation, but here in North Mexico, there are definitely people profiting off these migrants—mostly the transport operators...

They head toward the border by bus or train. I know a bus ticket costs about 10 bucks, maybe a bit less if they take the train... and that only gets them to the border.

The migrants feel like they're getting a deal because crossing North Mexico only costs them 10 bucks. The transport guys are happy too, because one bus run brings in $500 or $600, while their overhead is barely $100. And I suppose their colleagues over at the border are pretty happy as they wait to welcome them... you get the idea.

Now, those looking for a smoother ride—that's a different story. That'll cost upwards of $100. The ones with actual money want comfort, so they exclusively look for private drivers...

driftingfox66 said:Maybe they'd be down to take in Turkey if Northern Kurdistan wasn't part of the deal. But since the Turks are clinging to that land like a drunk clings to a lamp post, they aren't budging...

A fundamental misunderstanding... This won't happen even if the Turks decided to hand over land to the Kurds as a gift. Uncle Joe won't allow it; he needs that leverage to keep Turkey in line if they ever start getting too unruly...

The borders drawn after WWI weren't just casual sketches on a map. They are completely artificial, leaving every single country in that region with unresolved issues that can be exploited whenever it suits someone's interests... which is exactly what we're seeing play out now... (with the slight exception of Iran)...

cosmicowl14 said:The thing is, those alleged crimes were later fabricated by the Chinese to bury their own communist atrocities—not to mention the inconvenient fact that they actually sided with Japan during WWII. The Chinese government that controlled most of the territory, including the capital, Nanjing, was led by the Kuomintang and its leader, Wang Jingwei, who acted as an ally to Japan.

Exactly. If you really sit down and think about it, the Japanese weren't even fighting in China; it was all just a setup. The Japanese didn't even participate in WWII—it was just the Chinese wearing Japanese uniforms... I mean, who could even tell the difference?

Long live our brotherly and traditionally close Manchurian people... and the Singaporeans.👍(stuck in a tight spot)

cosmicowl14 said:Manchukuo was established as an independent nation by the Manchu people and the Qing Dynasty back in 1931.
By 1945, however, Soviet communist imperialists had occupied the territory, handing it over to the occupation forces of the People's Republic of China. Since then, the Manchu people—a population of roughly 10 million—have been stripped of their rights, with the entire Manchukuo region subjected to Han Chinese colonization and forced assimilation into a massive Chinese red empire.

It is time to raise our voices for this disenfranchised and threatened people. We must offer whatever support we can in their righteous struggle to reclaim the freedom and independence of their homeland.

http://http//manchukuo.destroy-china.jp/

The reality is that Manchukuo was nothing more than a Japanese puppet state. Even the emperor, Puyi, was just a marionette held in the Japanese hand. Given how the Japanese treated the Chinese during that era, it’s hard to view anything about this as actual liberation...