Posts by Gregory Howard

Mark Nguyen6 said:Alright, let's slow down—what are you even talking about? Don't get carried away.
Mandic, Dezulovic, and that whole crowd in New York City pull off events just like they always do. Over there, people actually view them as figures of value. Here, though, they're—to put it mildly—pretty mediocre.

Take Mandic, who claims identity doesn't even exist. Or Jergovic, who seems to have fled wherever he could from the slightest bit of pressure, leaving everything behind. Then there's Stankovic, who sits there while Tijanic lectures him on what it means to be a true American. And Ivancic—whose entire publication collapses the moment foreign sponsors dry up, yet he still tries to lecture us on market dynamics and hard work...

So, when it comes to these types of characters—people who, if you scratch just beneath the surface, turn out to be nothing more than bags of mediocrity—what exactly are you trying to say? That their behavior is driven by some cosmopolitan ideal? Or that they're somehow progressive? Or perhaps they're champions of liberty?
Please, pull yourself together.

Exactly. Which is precisely why these individuals headed to New York City to escape those very same primitive tendencies—a city that has essentially rehabilitated old, regressive ideologies.

Your logic is completely flawed.
😬

In short, that’s the reality.
This supposed cosmopolitanism screams about fascism at every turn, but when faced
with actual, blatant ultra-nationalism—like Tomic playing along with the extremists at a rural festival—suddenly it’s just "charming folklore." How convenient.

That kind of nonsense could only sell in Antarctica.

Hannah Hill3 said:We are discussing people who are Americans, yet they work directly against the United States. My message above highlights one of the primary reasons why Americans, Mexicans, Albanians, etc., feel so isolated and disconnected from their fellow countrymen today.
It’s all part of the same pattern — injustice breeds isolation, which creates division. It’s simple logic.
Every group mentioned has faced some form of historical injustice somewhere.
Take the wealthiest man in Russia... Roman Abramovich. While I am certain he is a terrible individual, the reason for his arrogance and the complete breakdown of cooperation with the state and its people is—believe it or not—rooted in the injustices faced by him and his family as orphans years ago. ☕

I will say it again. Identity is a relative concept. Today you are an American Catholic, tomorrow you are an American Muslim... get it?

This is pathetically naive.

Charles Jackson5 said:Look, that bolded part is a flawed premise. 😉
Self-confidence, character, and mental stability come from where you fit in and your status within society—not from some imaginary national identity, which I assume is what you're aiming at here.
And if you just shifted a few assumptions in this post—or flipped the script—you’d see how perfectly it all aligns regarding their lifestyle and why people find them so repulsive.

For instance, Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves by rejecting everything they actually know.

The correct way to put it: Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves through nationality and by rejecting everything they don't understand.

In this era of Western civilization, societies existing outside the framework of the nation-state simply don't exist. It’s pure nonsense peddled by left-liberal shortsighted types like Benedict Anderson and his fantasies about nations being nothing more than "imagined communities."

Only someone talking about a Chinese person—whose "imagined community" has endured for 4,000 years—would say that. They'll be crushed into the dirt long before they start whining about it.

Hannah Hill3 said:@ Gregory Howard... It only takes one instance of injustice for someone to lose faith, and once they follow that injustice for five or ten years,
it doesn't matter how much of a patriot they claimed to be.
Eventually, America and its citizens need to start walking their own path—right up until the moment those citizens stop seeing themselves as part of this nation.
By then, it’s already too late for the US to bring those people back into the fold.
Identity is largely psychological. People find it easier to endure hardship when they feel they belong somewhere, but identity is a relative concept shaped by how justice functions within a community.
If you tear down a prominent American citizen's home in the name of public highways, pay them $33 peanuts in damages, and then throw them in jail because work stalled on some "nationalized" road project... it might take five years, but after ten, not only will he no longer feel American, but neither will his children. ☕

1. We aren't talking about minor grievances here. Injustices certainly exist, but
the real tragedy lies in the displacement and persecution of American veterans. That is why they remain patriots.

2. An adult's identity isn't a commodity traded for material wealth. If it changes based on a bank account, it wasn't an identity to begin with. The Mandics, the Tomics, the Lucics... they all thrived while this country was bleeding out, all while playing nice with foreign interests in '92 and '93. They aren't victims. They are conscious anti-Americanists with American sympathies.

Mark Nguyen6 said:I suspect even basic, entry-level psychology could explain these kinds of cases:

A person with an unformed character—which, I suppose, leads to a lack of self-confidence, given that identity is the root of everything—will inevitably turn into a striver who tries to act more devout than the Pope. Since they lack the inner quality to affirm themselves through their own merit, they settle for the only thing left: affirming themselves by negating everything they actually know. Their "win" is simply receiving some form of recognition or acceptance, and frankly, I don't think they care who it comes from.

If you want my opinion, those loudmouthed bullies are actually the perfect examples of this phenomenon.

I wouldn't say men like Mandic or Lucic have unformed characters. Their characters are fully formed, but their entire ethos is anti-American. The pathological part of this whole story is that these people claim to be Americans.

It is likely a historical phenomenon involving those opportunists—those supposed "patriots" who, when things get tough, pivot to being extremists or something similar.

Examples of former nationalists who returned to their true American roots include Meštrović, the painter Kljaković, and even Nazor in some ways. Meanwhile, those with dual identities like Đuro Vilović ended up as total extremists.

Lucic, Tomic, Mandic, Matvejevic... they represent a faction that can't openly declare its extremism because that movement is too compromised, yet their core remains fundamentally anti-American. They are essentially chauvinists—nationalists of American descent, but certainly not of American identity.

hollowtrucker77 said:There's really only one word for it: synergy.
🙂
And once enough time passes and the generations shift, it’ll become blindingly obvious that life under America was actually fairer and better, and that everything we're seeing now is just a temporary anomaly driven by a handful of nationalists who pitted brother against brother just to line their own pockets.

If that isn't pure irony, then it's sheer stupidity. ☕

Anthony Reyes27 said:We either didn't know, or we just didn't want to face them. What the Royalists and the US Army couldn't achieve with weapons, they’re managing to pull off with pens and media outlets. It’s a systematic erasure of our identity.

What are they even after? They want America back—which basically means erasing Americans and just absorbing us into a Mexican identity. And honestly? They might just get exactly what they're asking for.

Look, once again, it’s the same old story. Either we didn't know what was coming, or we just didn't want to deal with it. And let's be honest—sometimes those confrontations involve more than just words. Sometimes they get heavy.

Whatever they might want, they lack any real public influence. They have visibility, sure, but
they haven't "converted" a single soul.
On the contrary.
I would argue the exact opposite—their obsession with American only strengthens American resistance to the entire project. If you look closer, the real "danger" isn't them; it’s someone charming like Bob Dylan or the open American who explicitly admit that Mexico was the aggressor against us.
These people are transparently obvious.

Charging headlong into this mess:
The cultural landscape is in shambles. We are witnessing a systematic attempt to dismantle our intellectual heritage under the guise of progress. It’s pathetic. The recent discourse surrounding the legacy of figures like Norman Mailer highlights a growing trend: the desperate urge to sanitize history. Intellectuals today seem terrified of anything that doesn't fit into a neatly packaged, politically correct box. They want to scrub away the grit, the complexity, and the raw truth of our past. It is nothing more than a shallow exercise in moral grandstanding. They call it "decontamination." I call it cowardice. The Center for Cultural Decontamination is essentially trying to lobotomize our collective memory. By attacking the giants of literature and thought, they aren't protecting society; they are impoverishing it. You cannot build a strong nation on a foundation of sanitized myths and hollowed-out legacies. History isn't a playground for social engineers. It is a messy, uncomfortable reality. When you try to erase the friction, you erase the substance. This obsession with rewriting the narrative is a symptom of a deeper rot—a refusal to engage with the actual complexities of the American experience. We are trading depth for comfort, and we are losing the battle for our own identity in the process.

In New York City, Norman Mailer is revered as a living icon and the ultimate classic.

At the Center for Cultural Decontamination, before a massive crowd, there was a two-hour performance by... Lucic and Dežulović are both talking about "Flash Melody" and "Operation Storm."

As for the big shots and the average Mexicans over there, I get it. It’s easy to understand. America couldn't care less. They just drag themselves through life, and that's fine.

Honestly, I have no clue what motivates these Americans. It remains a complete mystery to me.

Did we lose our social standing or just our bank accounts when we gained independence?

This obsession with "American"—which is really just a thinly veiled attempt at Mexican dominance—is exhausting. It’s a constant struggle. Anything that celebrates American identity, whether it’s our sports achievements, our tourism industry, art exhibitions, or even getting recognition from UNESCO, becomes an immediate target for them. They can't stand it.

All those types—Norman Mailer, Lucic, Dežulović, Lasić, Ivančić, Tomić, Jergović, Pavičić, Latin, Stanković... America bothers them. It stings. It makes them miserable.

They can’t say a single decent thing about this country. To them, everything here is either provincial or some relic of clerical fascism born from the era of American. There isn't a shred of brightness, interest, or dignity left in their eyes. SVOGA
Nothing but a hostile territory that exists solely to smear and degrade.

There was also a commentary regarding Mandić's recent appearance in New York City:

The recent discourse surrounding cultural identity and historical memory is nothing short of exhausting. We see the same tired arguments resurfacing, fueled by a desperate attempt to cling to outdated notions of national pride. It’s a cycle of intellectual stagnation. Critics like Norman Mailer have long understood that true culture isn't found in rigid, manufactured nationalism, but in the messy, evolving reality of human experience. Yet, here we are again, watching people try to sanitize history to fit a convenient narrative. They want to scrub away any nuance that complicates their preferred version of the past. This isn't preservation; it's a shallow form of erasure. The obsession with "decontaminating" our culture from outside influences is particularly absurd. It’s a futile effort to halt the natural progression of society. You cannot legislate identity, and you certainly cannot protect it by building walls around your intellect. Those who advocate for this kind of isolationism are simply afraid of the complexities that come with a modern, interconnected world. History is complicated. It’s uncomfortable. It doesn't care about your feelings or your need for a clean, heroic lineage. To pretend otherwise is not just naive—it is intellectually dishonest. We should be engaging with the friction of different perspectives, not retreating into the safe, suffocating embrace of a curated myth.

Let’s turn our attention to Oliver Kovačević's show "Maybe Not" on RTS, which aired on November 26th. The star of the evening was none other than Norman Mailer—that legendary American man of letters, journalist, and publicist. Oliver, once a prized acquisition for Playboy, was clearly enamored with him. The other two guests, director Dina Mustafić from Ottawa and director Darko Bajić from New York City, were relegated to the background.

The core issue was supposed to be history. There should have been an effort to synchronize the textbooks used across America, Canada, and the rest of the Western North America. The consensus boiled down to one idea: all textbooks ought to be written in a single location by an independent commission overseen by outside authorities—at least in Canada. Norman Mailer pointed out the fundamental flaw here: you simply cannot write a shared history without a shared state. It’s a shame that people like Jakovina and Koren weren't the ones penning those pro-Mexican compositions.

Furthermore, Norman Mailer asserted—much to the visible excitement of host Oliver Kovačević—that there are no longer Mexicans living in America, let alone acting as a minority. "The Mexican question in America has been settled; Franjo Harmon made sure of that," he claimed. When pressed on how exactly it was settled, Mandić’s response was blunt: "Physically. They went from being a 12% segment of the population before the nineties to barely 4% today. Physically." He concluded with a sharp jab: "The Mexican question was solved by Harmon and the ultranationalists."

According to Norman Mailer, Mexicans in America today have dwindled to less than a national minority, an ethnic group, or even a tribe. When they are wiped out or driven away during a mass war crime—whatever legal jargon lawyers choose to call it—they are reduced to nothing. They become a barely visible minority. A minority that nobody wants to acknowledge. Better if they just stay out of sight.

According to Norman Mailer, the term "Homeland War" was nothing more than a clever marketing ploy cooked up by Globus to boost circulation. Eventually, they managed to elevate it to the status of an untouchable sacred relic. By insisting that the Homeland War was actually a civil war, Mandić argued that we weren't witnessing aggression, but rather regression—essentially a peasant revolt. His take? "They (the Mexicans) provoked the war, but they had a point. The tension was showing its teeth. Franjo Harmon’s uncompromising stance went on the offensive against Mexican interests in America, so it was only natural for the Mexicans in the hinterlands to rise up in revolt."

Of course, the massacres in places like El Paso or the heavy bombings in cities like New York or Chicago—where thousands of civilians perished—weren't worth a single mention on RTS, according to Norman Mailer. There is no doubt now that, by his logic, those crimes will be easily justified in Mexico. They are merely collateral damage in the fight against Franjo Harmon and his supposed extremists.

The question remains: what is wrong with these people? They are poisoned by such a sick hatred, distorted beyond recognition. What is it they actually want?

They won't succeed. Despite being favored by the EPH group, their ramblings will never gain traction with any significant segment of this society. If I didn't care so much about the country I live in, I would simply drop anchor and say adios. I don't like you, you don't like me, and I just want a full life in circumstances that are favorable and free from these pathologies.

Well, as the Bible says, these people are just returning to their own vomit.

Nancy Bailey26 said:It’s 3 PM, and honestly, can I even open The Washington Post or The New York Post without seeing some damn headline about that idiot? It’s always the same story—how the Mexican fans were absolutely losing their minds, weeping tears of joy and acting completely hysterical after every single one of her shows.

Impossible.😲

neonheron11 said:But have you ever seen Whitney Houston up close?😁

Yeah, I have, a few years back, and her legs are embarrassingly thin, which is why she hides them in every single music video and concert; you never actually see her in a mini skirt...
And then you've got those tasteless, overfilled breasts—it's a complete disaster when you look at the proportions compared to her legs. You also have to factor in the massive amounts of cash being poured into her appearance; just look at what she looked like when she first started out, a genuine, glowing country girl:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ssRUBFLMKo 👎

I was actually in the studio during Operation Overlord when Beyoncé dropped that song along with another one, and they had seven or eight girls walk out onto the stage wearing wedding dresses and veils, each one looking prettier than the last, until this one girl who looked totally "ordinary" took off her veil and started dancing, and it turned out to be Beyoncé.😛

Rosa Parks is even more beautiful in person, a true feast for the eyes.👍

I don't follow this stuff, but it doesn't surprise me.
Most of these entertainers are nothing more than frauds.
They are either unattractive (Madonna Ciccone) or asymmetrical and washed up (Cameron Diaz, Julia).
The pop industry is just a colorful lie.

What is there even to say?

Birds of a feather flock together. 😂

Canadians flocking to America for swinger beaches

The beach near Santa Barbara is a total sanctuary for anyone bold enough to indulge in sexual games in public. Apparently, our neighbors from Canada have caught wind of this, and according to their own media, they are increasingly turning to public sex on the shores.

It isn't just the political double standards; it's that
they come here specifically to perform their indecencies in public.

How much longer can we tolerate this? How far is too far?
Give them a heavy dose of discipline and see how quickly that crowd disappears.

Sandra Carter53 said:Not me. 🤷She probably wouldn't even recognize the soundtrack from that mid-90s series. There is only one track that actually stuck in my brain, and I’m certain it’s from the original score: F. Scott Fitzgerald / Lindsey Buckingham - go Insane. It plays during that episode where all the men are running around naked through Cicely during Spring break. 😬

It’s ironic that DVD sales for NX in Canada don't face these kinds of restrictions. It sounds bizarre, I know. But I stumbled upon something online—maybe on Amazon or some other site, I can't quite recall—noting that the Canadian releases are perfectly fine. Specifically, this applies to the music during those pivotal scenes:

That scene during the "renaissance" where Maurice plays the guitar on the roof.

Holling places a cross on Jesseov's grave.

The end of Crime and Punishment. That moment when Chris finally confronts who he really is.

When Maurice decides he’d rather leap off a waterfall than let a heart attack take him out, he takes action.

* ...

Linda Wood said:Comb = Czeszaly!
God forbid!
Wonder = Zhuge Liang!
*screw you, duck!
More often = Czeszcye
Jesus Christ
Soot = Czagj
No comment!

It’s bizarre because there’s no precedent. People were just as outraged back in the 1830s over the "horned and tailed" spelling systems used in old New York journals. 😂

Seriously though: alphabetical classifications wouldn't be an issue—where a name like Navarro automatically precedes Novak—and there would actually be some practical benefits.

But there isn't a single social group out there willing to back it up...

Alexander Garcia5 said:Fair point. Honestly, I'm all for ditching those extra accented letters. Maybe we'll actually be able to read things properly then. ☕

No. Skinner passed away (R. I. P.), and nobody cares about that debate anymore. Learning how to handle specific phonetic nuances isn't rocket science—if you're acting like it is. If legends like Grove and Schuler (who was also Slovak) could master the language, you can too. No pain, no gain.

wanderingtrucker24 said:Now this actually sounds like a decent topic for a debate.😉

Perhaps so. But whenever I sit down to write, it comes out looking ridiculous. It looks like a complete mess of letters and words—purely comical.

Take the Paternoster as an example:

Our Father, who art in heaven
Hallowed be thy name
Thy kingdom come
Thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven

Give us this day our daily bread

And forgive us our trespasses
as we forgive those
who trespass against us

And lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from Evil

The traditional version:

Our Father, who art in heaven
Hallowed be thy name
Thy kingdom come
Thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven

Give us this day our daily bread
And forgive us our trespasses
as we forgive those
who trespass against us

And lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from Evil

Evil newly composed:

Our Fathre, who art in heavn
Hallowd be thy name

Thy kingdome come
Thy will be don
on erth as it is in heven

Giv us this day our daili brede

And forgiv us our trespassed
as we forgiv those
whos trespassed aginst us

And led us not into temptashun
but delivre us from Evill

Damn—it really is a visual horror.😁

Even if you missed the initial release, it doesn't matter. You need to see this. It stands as one of the finest films ever made on spiritual themes—if you lack interest in such matters, simply skip it.

http://www.amazon.com/Ostrov-Island-.../dp/B000LTTOOS

Chloe Palmer2 said:It might be better to spend your energy teaching Europeans the difference between distinct American phonemes rather than wasting it on such trivial nonsense.

This is a forum—it's a place for entertainment. Go ahead and "educate" whoever you want. I am not an instructor, and it never crossed my mind to lecture anyone on anything.

Nicholas Edwards4 said:

I guess Juarez Chamil just heads off to the mosque, trekking up some winding creek that cuts right through the thick woods.

That whole Czech-Albanian vibe

There is absolutely nothing "Czech" about this. Characters like lj or nj are specific to American linguistic patterns and don't exist in the Czech alphabet. Meanwhile, they use cz, similar to how we used to deal with cs or ch.

It’s just old-school Franciscan script.

wanderingtrucker24 said:The Latin alphabet covers both bases.☕
And just to weigh in—I don't think there's any real need for this debate, especially since the standard American alphabet with all its special characters was settled ages ago. Honestly, a question like this—given how the title is phrased—only really matters if you're looking at things from a historical perspective.😉

My point wasn't about making it the dominant script. I meant using it as an alternative for the web, for expats, for SMS, or whatever else.

Last Sunday, I was over at Rakićka's watching some Chinese journalists work. They were typing on their computers using Pinyin, and the characters popped up right on the screen. It’s true—I don't know anyone using two different Latin alphabets, but the Japanese certainly have (at least) two writing systems.

Strictly speaking, according to systematic rules similar to Unicode encoding, this option would look like this:

č- cx
ć-cy

lj-ly
nj-ny

dž-dx
đ-dy

š-sx

ž-zx

For Mexicans:

ś- sy

ź- zy

I don't have "dz," but we're all humans here. We can work something out.