Remember your Homeland’s Heritage.

The Homeland Security twitter page is filled with anti-immigration posts, which is maybe a topic in itself, but what does this image mean?  I mean you are seeing a young white family claiming its future in America.  With the caption -Remember your homeland's heritage. 

I think the racists are trying to say that America was founded by white men for white men. Don't look over there! Keep your eyes focused on the White Heritage

I think so too, but they are trying to be fairly subtle.  Only white immigrants completely belong. 

This was posted on a Trump administration social media page. 

If I can see what they are getting at it's not that subtle

Maybe they will augment the painting with an image of Kristi Noem shooting a dog in the background. 

lol

White Christians (families). And MAGA supporters are the ones trying to convince "people of color" that the GOP majority is COLORBLIND. The truth is in what they do, not what they 'mouth.'

" Read my lips "

Immigrants from Italy, Sweden, Germany and Ireland.

None of them got along.

Hell, Philadelphia was segregated by nationality up until the end of the Second World War when all of the men came home and most learned that that stuff was unimportant in a foxhole.  After the war Germantown was still Germantown, same with Little italy and Chinatown, but when the great housing "build out" of the "far North East" happened, people bought what they could afford and stopped worrying about everyone being the same.  The importance of nationality was greatly diminished, to a lesser extent religion.

In the coal mining towns around where I grew up each nationality had its own street. I thought it was kind of funny but I understand why persons of a nationality would all tend to congregate in the same neighborhood

It is either gravitation, familiarity, or protection which directs people living in (their) 'tribes.'

The Homeland Security twitter page is filled with anti-immigration posts,

I think you mean anti-ILLEGAL immigration.

What??

Is there any legal immigration, these days?? Oh! Right! White South Africans... 

White South Africans... 

You mean the 59 South Africans who had their refugee applications fast-tracked as opposed to the open border that allowed untold millions into the country?  Is that your argument?  That allowing 59 South Africans refuge constitutes "racism?" 

Is there any legal immigration, these days??

Yes, about a million of them per year.    Mostly folks of color.

Yes, about a million of them per year.    Mostly folks of color.

Correct!

Funny how they leave that bolded part our al the time.

It's also strange that all those minorities have flocked to such a "racist" country 

That is hilarious.  It's such a bad place that they risk their lives to get in.  And they are helped by others who hate the country as well.

You mean the 59 South Africans who had their refugee applications fast-tracked...

Exactly.

Expelling nieblank would-be immigrants, while sending airplanes to collect would-be White immigrants.

Exactly.

Yes, about a million of them per year.    Mostly folks of color.

Correct!

Oh, wow... 

The local Ministry of Truth confirms a foot-soldier's number... but neither cites a source... 

Oh, wow...    

Circle-jerk??

This country itself ain't bad relative to the world and its problems. But life is curious in any number of ways, isn't it. Maybe we have a great many JERKS (in the millions) that occasionally get a hold of power, influence, and power centers and make the rest of us want to vomit.  'Things that make you go hmmmm.'

But like the blacks residents  in Mississippi . . . it's 'home' even in the sucky places. (Their 'feet' are apparently nailed to the ground in the state; or maybe they live in the 'gaps' where they can 'breathe,' nevertheless.

[✘]

[✘]

The issue is not the painting in itself. The issue is the captions. 

[✘]

There may be a painting of hispanic settlers for all I know. I know its not on the DHS page, and never would be. 

What does "your homeland's heritage" mean in this post? 

You are free to think this post on an anti immigration web page is meaningless. I disagree. 

What does "your homeland's heritage" mean in this post? 

I was born in Ohio, so perhaps...

The Indigenous People who inhabited the region of Ohio meeting with early European traders.

Here's a link to Morgan Weistling's official web page.  Morgan Weistling  And a biography is provided here Morgan Weistling: ABOUT

Weistling's title for the highlighted painting is " A Prayer for a New Life".

It's difficult to comment on the X post since a link was not provided.

(1) Homeland Security on X: "Remember your Homeland’s Heritage. New Life in a New Land - Morgan Weistling https://t.co/nFL61Nljbw" / X

Thanks for the link.  That does provide a little more clarity.  I admit I don't do X so finding things is a PITA.  I'm more of a Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz guy.

The painting has been relabeled without explanation.  But the mission statement for the Homeland Security account provides the context.  "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values."

The post is consistent with the posted DHS mission statement.  There's a lot of whiny, griping comments about stealing land from indigenous people.  That may be factual history but the bottom line is indigenous people did not build America.  

The American people really do have a right to celebrate the homesteaders and farmers who fought nature, hardship, and, yes, Indians to build the America we have today.  The only thing that factual history proves, beyond doubt, is that our America wasn't given to us.  That is the heritage of our homeland.  And there's nothing wrong with being proud of that heritage.

Nice, but does not explain why "remember your homeland's heritage" with a portrait of two white pioneers is on that web page. What does an image of a young white family in a covered wagon have to do with homeland security ? 

Nice, but does not explain why "remember your homeland's heritage" with a portrait of two white pioneers is on that web page. What does an image of a young white family in a covered wagon have to do with homeland security ?

The American heritage of the frontier and building of America really is Eurocentric.  That, too, is factual history.  

White Europeans immigrated to the American continent, enslaved Black people, killed indigenous people, and built the America we have today.  Those are the facts of history.  That is the American heritage.

The history of colonization, opening the frontier, homesteading, and building America is not diverse.  A painting of a young white couple in a Conestoga wagon preparing for an arduous journey west to build a new life is historically correct. 

Again, you are missing the point. Homeland Security is not celebrating a renewal of frontier-life (for it has ended in the continental United States)! Homeland Security under this administration is MESSAGING whom it considers as 'belonging' and 'ideal' and 'essential' in the country. BTW, you are doing similar when you support the MESSAGING as celebratory. There is now and was then minorities among the arrivals in this country and those spreading out across the country. 

This image put forward for discussion is part of a celebration of immigrants (for which it come across as 'neutral') but we know that homeland security is heavily-laden with dog-whistling individuals who love to shade their hatreds of the Other with nostalgia symbols.

That may be factual history but the bottom line is indigenous people did not build America.  

Yeah, /s, they only provided the basis for The Constitution.

 That is the heritage of our homeland.  And there's nothing wrong with being proud of that heritage.

Yeah, /s, to the victors go the spoils and how history is written and preserved.

This image put forward for discussion is part of a celebration of immigrants (for which it come across as 'neutral') but we know that homeland security is heavily-laden with dog-whistling individuals who love to shade their hatreds of the Other with nostalgia symbols.

Are we a nation of immigrants?

Indigenous people are not immigrants.  They celebrate their heritage as First People.  

We are frequently lectured that Black people were trafficked to North America as slaves beginning in 1619.  The purpose of the 1619 Project was to educate the country that Black people were traded as livestock, they did not immigrate to North America or the American colonies.

So who is left in the Nation of Immigrants heritage?  How can we be a Nation of Immigrants while ignoring the white European immigrants who built a new world and new life for themselves and their descendants.  Our America heritage really is a celebration of white European immigration.  That is the real history of America.

[✘]

Yeah, /s, they only provided the basis for The Constitution.

European Greeks provided a model for democracy.  European Romans provided a model for a republican form of government.  European Protestants provided a model of self-government.

Was the tribal history of Europe really different than the tribal history of North America?  

Yeah, /s, to the victors go the spoils and how history is written and preserved.

That has been human nature since pre-history.  Are you suggesting the tribal history of North America wasn't recorded the same way?  Are you suggesting the victors in North America didn't skew oral history to embellish their history?  Are you suggesting that the victors among the African tribes did not record history to justify their participation in the slave trade?

In many ways, the American revolution can be seen as the continuation of the glorious revolution of 1688 (no taxation without representation= ship money) and applying it to the colonies.  It certainly was top of mind to the founders.

many contemporary Americans assume the founders shared their total ignorance of classical and English history and philosophy when in fact the founders education was focused on it. The city states of Ancient Greece and their combinations would have been familiar to them as the travails of spider man are to most Americans 

IMNAAHO, the Founders were at least as deeply influenced by the Enlightenment... but no MAGA could ever recognize that. 

France may never be seen as instrumental to the birth of the United States. Dogma über alles.

In many ways, the American revolution can be seen as the continuation of the glorious revolution of 1688 (no taxation without representation= ship money) and applying it to the colonies.  It certainly was top of mind to the founders.

A celebration of greed to compete with a celebration of immigration?  The indigenous demands for repatriation and Black population demands for reparation does provide common ground, even if less than virtuous.

Yes, the United States is a nation of greed.  Everyone has a place at the table with that narrative.  Money is the American God.  But it looks like that God is on life support.  Too bad the TEA Party stuck that greedy pea shooter in their waistband and shot their dicks off. 

The United States may go bankrupt because of that TEA Party greed.  But the American heritage will continue even if only in history books.  White European immigration opened a continent almost two centuries before the United States.  The United States needs the American heritage but that American heritage doesn't need the United States.

how do you fall for such childish propaganda? I guess believing in  such silly stereotypes makes it easier to continue in blissful ignorance. 

of course the founders were influenced by writers like Montesquieu. No one has ever claimed differently,  except possibly in far left fever swamps.

I have no idea what that has to do with the glorious revolution.  

Real history of America? 

When have white European garnered a (superior) history in this country without the Others that assisted? Or, do you wish us to just assume every good thing that has occurred (the past) and will occur (the future) is an accomplishment of white people? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds and is?

I have no idea what that has to do with the glorious revolution.  

The glorious revolution was about self government -- not taxes.

James II's failure to get parliamentary consent in raising money (among other abuses and his being Catholic)  definitely contributed to his overthrow. It's why taxation without parliamentary consent was included in the 1689 Bill of Rights (another constitutional concept  borrowed from the british)  

When have white European garnered a (superior) history in this country without the Others that assisted? Or, do you wish us to just assume every good thing that has occurred (the past) and will occur (the future) is an accomplishment of white people? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds and is?

You want the sarcastic response?  All the unnamed, unsung bat boys made Willie Mays possible.  Michael Jordan owes everything to the uncredited people who aired up the basketballs.

Are you disputing the facts that indigenous people are not immigrants?  Are you disputing the facts that Black people were trafficked as slaves and not immigrants?  Indigenous people and the Black population claim they are victims in the immigration story; they are victims of the American heritage.  That self proclaimed, self adopted victimhood deliberately excludes indigenous people and the Black population from celebrating the American heritage of immigration.  

James II's failure to get parliamentary consent in raising money (among other abuses and his being Catholic)  definitely contributed to his overthrow. It's why taxation without parliamentary consent was included in the 1689 Bill of Rights (another constitutional concept  borrowed from the british)  

Wasn't that a dispute over authority to tax?  Taxes are generally unpopular but that unpopularity shouldn't cloud the importance of limiting autocratic authority and promoting self government.

I have no idea what it is you are going on about. As is the 'norm' (pun intended) you are oblique and dodgy in your analysis. 

Furthermore, we understand the relationships of unsung heroes to the success of many varying positions and statuses in this life.  You would do wise to not attempt to trivialize the professionals that put in the time and energy to see others succeed. That is not what is at issue here: White people, specifically conservatives are not the only INPUTTERS to our national history and its successes. It has been and continues to be an "all hands" effort by everybody (liberals, Independents, and Non-affiliateds) which drives this country forward even when it is not properly noted or swept under the proverbial rub or hidden in silence. 

I have no idea what it is you are going on about. As is the 'norm' (pun intended) you are oblique and dodgy in your analysis. 

I'm going on about the seeded post from the X account of Homeland Security.  Up there. ^^^^^^ At the top of the page.

Furthermore, we understand the relationships of unsung heroes to the success of many varying positions and statuses in this life.  You would do wise to not attempt to trivialize the professionals that put in the time and energy to see others succeed. That is not what is at issue here: White people, specifically conservatives are not the only INPUTTERS to our national history and its successes. It has been and continues to be an "all hands" effort by everybody (liberals, Independents, and Non-affiliateds) which drives this country forward even when it is not properly noted or swept under the proverbial rub or hidden in silence. 

White Europeans really are the only people responsible for opening the North American continent for settlement, establishing European values as the foundation of North American society, and building America.  That American heritage is not diverse, it is not multi-racial, is only multi-ethnic within the limits of European ethnicities, is primarily Christian, and overwhelmingly Protestant.  The factual history of Canada, the United States, and Mexico share much of that common history.

For those who demand an unvarnished telling of history, white European immigration created the American heritage.  Indigenous people were pushed aside and driven out.  And the Black population was whipped, dragged, and forced to go where they were told to.  Those are the facts, that is the truth.  That is the real history of the American heritage.  There would not be an America if not for those white European immigrants.

There would not be an America if not for those white European immigrants.

You can't prove that assertion, you will yourself to make. As we (all here) know, life is a course that has many on and off ramps throughout history. This country would be here-even another 'version' of it. And, who is to say that another version would be lack-luster, nevertheless?

I have already explained to you that as a whole the people of this country have added-value to it even throughout a history of oppression (as you surely know or can perceive). Others, contribute to the history, diversity, and solutions for this country even when it was attributed to the majority on record. We have cases known to us and continue to learn of other cases where what was 'captured' by the majority in law was done so because minorities lacked a voice and effective ways to retain ownership of their ideas and 'solutions' to age old problems.

[✘]

[✘]

I was asked a few weeks ago if I would post some seeds in a couple different groups other than my own. So I do a few.  I have nothing to do with the moderation. 

[✘]

you can always request we go easy we aim to please

well we aim to please you

[✘]

I was going to just make a single-word Comment: "Mythology"...[✘]

I was going to agree!

It really is how MAGA supporters see this country. There is "great" anxiety amongst "the supporters" that if they do not do what they are doing about immigration that eventually they will lose the country to "monsters, demons, hedons, and unwashed savages." That this country will fail, because conservatives (i.e., MAGAs) are not in-charge.

The prediction is 2043 is estimated that the "hordes" of minorities will have equal political power as MAGAs themselves. Thus, the drive is on to drive the country back into its past ("Make America Great Again) like early 20 century—before civil rights and the government ministering (where it sees fit) to its citizens.

To be honest, I can understand their fear. . . largely, I like our country and its values as they (largely) are. I like our national culture, especially when it leaves citizens alone to do relatively right for themselves and theirs. I would not like it for the United States to be taken over by "hordes" and unsavory types of people. . . coming in from the badlands or wastelands of this world. But.

You can not hold back process or stunt the growth of a nation in order to PREVENT it from achieving its true nature: Diversity.

We must learn to live and let live. . . or else this time we may truly have outdone ourselves with hindrances and meddling.

American Indians are the true native Americans. The drivel and propaganda has gone off the rails.

American Indians are the true native Americans. The drivel and propaganda has gone off the rails.

Except they aren't any more native than anyone else. That is, they came here from somewhere else, just like everyone else. They just happened to be first. 

And the ONLY non-native anywhere was Lucy.

Sorry Drak - ridiculous/really, really bad comparison.  Yeah, the tribes/nations were only here 23,000 years before the Euro groups could even cross the Atlantic (and that includes Erik and his crew).

Now isn't that 'cute.' The modern-century revisionist perspective. Deny the 'first people' their historical due as a form of 'equalizing' and making them 'discountable.' Shameful. But, here we are in the shameless United States once again just like it was when. . . and apparently always will be in the hearts and minds of the usual folks and their offsping at-large after them. The 'saga' of the United States irreverence for its true history continues. 

Sorry Drak - ridiculous/really, really bad comparison.

I understand why you think so. Perhaps it would help if you understood where I'm coming from, though. 

I don't give a tinkers damn about heritage. Mine is German/Irish but I couldn't care less. I find nothing valuable or invaluable in being white. I'm just a human being, flaws and all. I am no more going to treat you differently as a human being than I would expect you to treat me. Your heritage has no more meaning to me than it should have for you concerning mine. I afford respect to human beings based on their actions, not their heritage. For instance, because you have Native American blood doesn't somehow imbue some obligation on my part to give you respect because of it. No more than my heritage demands respect from you. Simply being human should be the basis for respect, assuming that human's actions warrant it. If heritage should be the metric, who gets to decide which heritage ranks where? That sort of thinking has caused so much pain and suffering throughout history. 

So, yeah, Native American's were here first. And? Sucks that Europeans did what they did, but that's human nature for you. I'm not excusing it. It's just a fact. One that Native Americans on both continents were doing themselves before we ever showed up, so they aren't innocent, either. What I don't understand is why I get so much flack for pointing this out. 

So. Here's my idea. What if we do what Morgan Freeman said?

I am going to stop calling you a white man and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man.

In other words, he was simply saying, "Why don't we just both recognize each other as persons rather than colors/cultures/sex?"

So, to get back to what you objected to. What I said was true. Native American's aren't really native to either continent. They really did come here from somewhere else. They didn't evolve here or something. And what happened to them was just humanity being humanity. My Irish ancestors were no more "native" to Irland than American Indians are to this place. They came there from somewhere else. And they, too, were invaded by others. It is literally world history since before we started keeping records. And it's still going on. It sucks, but we can't change the past. Apparently, we can't change our nature, either. 

So, the best I can do, personally, is treat you with the respect any human being deserves simply because you're a person. Not because of your heritage. Just as I would expect of you. History, in my opinion, has shown us if we get wrapped up in heritage, people kill other people over it. I don't want to play that game. 

That is why I said what I said. Yeah, Native Americans were here first. Yeah, it is wrong for one group to take that from another group. That doesn't change anything, though. It still happened and it happened because that's human nature everywhere and everywhen. So, the way I see it, is it more right to carry the terrible load that is history on our collective backs or do we just get on with treating each other as human beings? 

P.S. I don't mean to sound indifferent to what happened to your ancestors. I'm not. When I think about all the death and destruction your people suffered I have sorrow as much as I have for those families that lost loved ones in that Texas flood. I hate what we do to each other, especially when we have so much potential to be so much more. I, of course, believe Jesus is the answer to all of it, but even if I didn't believe that, I'd still hold the view on this that I do because to progress we need to understand what we really are. But I want you to know that the painting of what I assume is the Trail of Tears affects me deeply. I didn't experience, but I can place myself in their shoes and, in some small measure, imagine what they must have felt. 

Some people think I'm a complete asshole for saying things like I have in this post but to my mind I'm simply going all in concerning recognizing what humans really are. We are not basically good, as some think we are. We're actually basically bad and have to fight to overcome it. That seems far more honest than denying it. 

Lastly, I apologize if I've offended you. Not my intent. I wouldn't change what I said, but I didn't say it to be offensive. 

If conquering someone else's land is not right or wrong, but just human nature, then how can murder be right or wrong ? Isnt that also just human nature? 

And in the westward expansion of the US east to west a lot of people were murdered. 

Yeah, Native Americans were here first. Yeah, it is wrong for one group to take that from another group. That doesn't change anything, though.

Actually, it does change things. Example: Ask Israel and the Palestinians. . . . 

Some people think I'm a complete asshole for saying things like I have in this post but to my mind I'm simply going all in concerning recognizing what humans really are. We are not basically good, as some think we are. We're actually basically bad and have to fight to overcome it. That seems far more honest than denying it. 

Speak for yourself with that blanket statement. There are people who have never known any God that are more righteous (and friendly) than some that imply and state that they do 'know' a God.

And for the record, Native Americans, to my understanding, have never set out on imperialism and "manifest destiny" (expansionism) ventures around the world. Unless you can prove otherwise.

Well said

I find nothing valuable or invaluable in being white. I'm just a human being, flaws and all.

I can't let that just fly by: You don't have "find" value or lack their of in being white: You are IMMERSED in "whiteness" as a developed culture in our country with all its trappings—which support and lift you rather you acknowledge it or not! Indeed, it is why conservatives STRIVE with others  to see that this (whiteness) culture does not change. . . fear that something conservatives (you) value is passing away . . . and conservatives (y'all) are 'up in arms' about it. 

So yes, there is value in the United States of being in the majority and that majority to this day is classified as WHITE.

Don't just throw out platitudes. . . that are easily debunked, but take up valuable time in doing so.

You must understand that some people think there's no difference between right and wrong, and some people think it's cool to express that idea, whether they really believe it or not.

Don't just throw out platitudes.

One persons platitude is another persons profound.    That said, pushing white guilt?    There’s your platitude.

You might want to be "profound" and explain why you are writing to me about 'white guilt.'

And you might want to work on not being in denial.

If conquering someone else's land is not right or wrong, but just human nature, then how can murder be right or wrong ? Isnt that also just human nature? 

Dunno, JR. Perhaps you should ask someone who's actually making that argument? 

And, here's what I see looking over my shoulders - 309 tribes/nations physically forced to vacate their lands/homes/heritage between 1822 to 1870 - thousands upon thousands whose homelands had been there for thousands of years - kicked out of their lands because dominant society believed they could handle the lands more properly.  Yeah, right.

Where did the Indian tribes/nations go and why?

(Trail of Tears)

That's my "Homeland Heritage" - genocide - pure genocide because of greed.

Hasn't changed much.

Sad.

Yep. The same old story of humanity, repeated over and over again. Aren't we just great? 

Not quite the description I'd use - but - hey.

Once again: Shameless. Discounting Others for 'mileage.' Humanity is old and it is tired in a lot of ways, but when we can pretend that any condition/state in and of itself can explain away the history of the world - we lie to ourselves. We are better when we want to be better. Those of us that are selfishly evil are like drug-addicts who can't quit dope and the stealing and thuggish behavior that comes along with being so.

It not a description. It's a narrative. A 'ready' response that has been prepared for use to explain away the abuse of others for personal interests and selfishness. That is, we are being fed a line that takes away (dismisses) the shame that should be felt (by those whom now wish to be shameless and not faulted) for what happened through their predecessors to some very good tribes who were here first!

Once again: Shameless. Discounting Others for 'mileage.' Humanity is old and it is tired in a lot of ways, but when we can pretend that any condition/state in and of itself can explain away the history of the world - we lie to ourselves.

How does recognizing human nature "explain away" anything? How does recognizing that everyone, everywhere and everywhen has done exactly the same shit as everyone else constitute a lie? Aren't you the one "pretending" by not recognizing this? Are you not simply virtue signaling? 

Using your argument , non American citizens have every right to be in America, for as long as they like. Of course that right is suppressed by US law and law enforcement , but they do have that right, because rights are a permission to do whatever one is able to do.  The US had the right to confine the American Indians on reservations because..... they said so. We had the right to own the Philippines , even though at the time no Americans had Filipino heritage, because we said so. 

Down at the border if you are standing on one side you are "legal", but if you go forward five steps to the north you are "illegal", based on an arbitrary decision to draw a line at those geographical co-ordinates.  I think we all understand without rules there is no nation, but in terms of human "nature", there is no basis for restricting movement. Migrants have a right to be here in America. Period.  The time to prevent that is before they cross the border. 

A lot of conservatives believe might makes right, period. Ok, then accept that illegal migration is a demonstration of a form of might.  They got into an area where they have a right to be. Its too late to close the barn door to keep the ones out who are already here, the closed barn door can keep future immigrants out if that is the chosen course. 

When the pioneers like the people depicted in the seeded painting went west and they found a spot they liked and they cleared a field and built a small cabin that became "their" land , based on what?  The European model of property devised by the Englishman John Locke.  Locke didnt care a darn about the Indian model of property. Did the Indians have the right to come and set fire to that cabin and drive the settlers off?  If not why not? 

Yeah when you have the biggest usable brute force you can impose your will, but it does not erase the rights of others. 

Human beings create rules that are completely arbitrary and then declare them ordained by God. 

Where is your record of Native American "manifest destiny"? Where is the record of 'globe-trotting' Native American spiritualists "evangelizing"  the world that surrounds them. — Present it. 

Using your argument , non American citizens have every right to be in America, for as long as they like.

If you think that is what my argument is saying you're not getting it. You are not actually using my argument. Not one single word I've said about this justifies anyone's actions. Nothing I've said indicates that what Europeans did to Native Americans were justified because, hey! Human nature! That's simply you creating a self-serving narrative. 

My argument is that humanity as a whole are a right bunch of self-serving bastards and to make any progress away from that we need to stop thinking we're all just basically good at heart. We're not, and all I have to do to prove it is to appeal to history. Everywhere and everywhen. No one is arguing from a position of innocence. 

When the pioneers like the people depicted in the seeded painting went west and they found a spot they liked and they cleared a field and built a small cabin that became "their" land , based on what?  The European model of property devised by the Englishman John Locke.  Locke didnt care a darn about the Indian model of property. Did the Indians have the right to come and set fire to that cabin and drive the settlers off?  If not why not?

You're just not getting it. You're attempting to define what I've said with specifics when I'm talking about human nature as a whole. History shows that the specifics are just excuses a group tells themselves to justify what they're doing. What doesn't change is that, regardless of the specifics, humanity always acts the same way. 

For instance, I think Avatar, the first one, is one of the greatest films ever, for a bunch of reasons, but for the purposes of this discussion it recognizes what humanity is actually like, collectively. I think it depicts what we'd actually do as a species if such a thing ever came to pass. Sure, we all want to be Jake, but the danger is not recognizing that Jake started off as part of the human problem. The details don't really matter as long as one recognizes that they stem from and are representative of what's wrong with us as a species.

Or if Avatar doesn't work for you, Dances with Wolves serves the same purpose. People make the mistake it's all about how whites oppress the Native American. Sure, they did that, no argument. But they miss the fact that the Native American's were no different. This is evident in the attack by the Pawnee scene. Create whatever specifics you want to, but in the end, those Pawnee were simply doing exactly the same thing as the whites. 

"But that was just a movie!" you might say. Okay. Let's talk about Columbus. Total bad guy, right? I think you'd have a hard time convincing those the Aztecs were brutalizing in ways that make Hitler look like a novice of that. 

Down at the border if you are standing on one side you are "legal", but if you go forward five steps to the north you are "illegal", based on an arbitrary decision to draw a line at those geographical co-ordinates.

Again, you're trying to make my argument about specific examples. What that does is dismiss my argument, not challenge it. My argument is why what you say here is even an issue in the first place. Answer? Because it is the nature of humans. Make up whatever specifics you want and, in the end, the answer will still be human nature. 

Where is your record of Native American "manifest destiny"?

Do some research on the Aztec. The Commanche. 

You say human nature explains certain historical activities such as colonialism and exploitation and therefore we cant fairly judge these activities. Would that include murder?  

A lot of conservatives believe might makes right, period.

Who?  Cite them.

Ask your fellow right wingers on this forum. 

“Migrants have a right to be here in America. Period.”

What a fucked up way of thinking. Foreigners have no right to be in the USA. It’s a PRIVILEGE, not a right.

You say human nature explains certain historical activities such as colonialism and exploitation and therefore we cant fairly judge these activities.

Not what I said at all. In my opinion, only an idiot would equate what I've said with justification of anything. That, or they are deliberately forcing context to suit their own ends. 

Recognizing that what Hitler did was a perfectly human thing to do doesn't therefore argue that he was right in doing it. 

Then what the hell is your point, in the context of the seeded article?  It seems like your main intention here is to explain yourself. 

I think the painting being presented on the DHS web page creates the context where the meaning is this is a white country.  What do you think? 

Ask your fellow right wingers on this forum. 

You're the one making the accusation.  It's up to you to provide evidence.

I think the painting being presented on the DHS web page creates the context where the meaning is this is a white country. 

Statistically speaking, it is currently.  Probably won't be indefinitely. 

What do you think? 

That it's about the pioneer spirit, where Americans have historically been a people willing to make long, arduous journeys to create a better life for themselves and their families.

That should create an obvious irony that you should see quite quickly.  Do you?  You haven't said anything about it yet, while I thought it would be your first, most obvious and certainly most legitimate point.

That it's about the pioneer spirit, where Americans have historically been a people willing to make long, arduous journeys to create a better life for themselves and their families.

The DHS webpage is seriously anti-migrant.  So the painting is not some ode to long arduous journeys.  Why is the DHS twitter page talking about "homeland heritage" at all?  They are not an editorial board. 

This is not complicated at all. 

As far as America currently being a white country,  36 1/2 %  of the population is non white.  The United States is a multi-racial country beyond a doubt. 

I think the painting being presented on the DHS web page creates the context where the meaning is this is a white country.  What do you think? 

Honestly? Hard for me to say, since I don't think in terms of color but, rather, behavior. That is, without the prompt of your question, it would never occur to me to think of the US as a white country since I don't think that way.  

That said, I suppose what you're asking is, what is the intent behind those who posted the image. Answer? I don't know, and neither do you. You'd have to know the person who posted it and why they did. But let me ask you this. What if the picture depicted people from India rather than "white" people? Would that make a difference for you? 

That should create an obvious irony that you should see quite quickly.

 He won't, though. That's because he isn't looking at people. He's only concerned with ideology. Ideology is the golden calf we must all worship. 

This is not complicated at all.

It's never complicated to find confirmation bias.

Ridiculous reply. 

Ask your fellow right wingers on this forum. 

Okay. I'm obviously a right winger. I do not believe might makes right. Right stands on its own. 

Provide a link. Discussion is a two-way exchange of ideas and experiences: Not just an opportunity to jab.  That said:

In summary:

• Manifest Destiny  justified 19th-century U.S. westward expansion, often at the expense of Indigenous and Mexican lands and peoples .

• The  Aztec Empire  expanded its domain centuries earlier through military, religious, and economic means in central Mexico .

• While both involved ideologies of expansion, Manifest Destiny is not an Aztec concept and arose in a very different historical and cultural context.

If you are referencing "Aztec Manifest Destiny" as a conceptual link or modern comparison, it would mean drawing a parallel between the justifications for territorial expansion in both societies, but these are distinct historical phenomena.

perplexity.ai

Also, we would like explanation of why if all human nature is so dismal and treacherous, how come the United States with all its power, influence, and ambition across the world ceased its imperialistic ways over time. Drakk, is seeking to establish a specious NARRATIVE that nullifies NA people as the rightful holders of this land we (all) now call home. Do do that he must (vainly) undermine the proper understanding of original people found here when Europeans landed and proceeded to DISPLACE them for their own ends.

I do not have a problem with Europeans arriving in the colonies, but they did not stay put. They were helped to acclimate to this land (that was literally killing them) by Native Americans, and repaid them with not shared cooperation but aggression and displacement.

John, that up there is an attempt to redirect, instead of engage.

Ideology is the golden calf we must all worship.

And, it is clear that ideology misleads you to thinking that this nation's heritage is White and Christian (Conservative). That Jesus' message to the world was/is to ignore (and dismiss) social issues of human and civil rights and behave as if there is only time for SALVATION. Even though, it is evident to the living—even the dead if they are aware of anything at all happening here. . . that Jesus has been gone for over 2000 years. Incidentally, Jesus' whereabouts is not a problem for Jesus. . . but it is one for ideologues who think they can NEGLECT those who Jesus directed love towards. 

(But, it is not a significant matter, since Christian Conservatives will not interact with fellow believers on this site about our Lord . . . though Christian conservatives are fond of professing to be so 'set apart' and 'superior.')

First of all, you're supposed to declare your response is A.I. generated. You didn't.

Second, your sanctimonious declaration about what a discussion is is laughable, as the post I was responding to was a judgment, not a discussion.

Third, the only notable difference between the US's declaration of manifest destiny and every other nation throughout history is that we actually wrote it down on paper, as if that was even necessary. Every single power that existed throughout history that thought it had the power to do so tried to impose their own version of manifest destiny on the rest of the world. Persia, Rome, Islam, England, Germany, Communism, Capitalism and so on. And it's still going on. From protests about how the US should handle immigration to Russia trying to impose it's view on the Ukraine or Muslims slaughtering Christians in Africa. 

In summary:

• Manifest Destiny  justified 19th-century U.S. westward expansion, often at the expense of Indigenous and Mexican lands and peoples .

• The  Aztec Empire  expanded its domain centuries earlier through military, religious, and economic means in central Mexico .

• While both involved ideologies of expansion, Manifest Destiny is not an Aztec concept and arose in a very different historical and cultural context.

If you are referencing "Aztec Manifest Destiny" as a conceptual link or modern comparison, it would mean drawing a parallel between the justifications for territorial expansion in both societies, but these are distinct historical phenomena.

perplexity.ai

First, you are mistaken: Look at it again above and at 9.1.23 .

Secondly, all of what we do here is discussion/talk. The 'finer points' are nuances. 

Thirdly, we are not discussing  world expansionism, we are focused countryside on "Manifest Destiny" which happened here through Columbus. . .and the Catholic Church ( Kavika , I hear you in my mind - my friend). 

There is no direct historical connection between Aztec expansion and Manifest Destiny , as Manifest Destiny was an American ideology from the 19th century and the Aztec civilization ended by the early 16th century. Ibid.

What??? Seriously, just what??? Do you write fiction in your spare time??? I mean, how in the hell did you take what I said and arrive at this nonsense???

Okay. Now comes the deflection and the 'superiority' complex. 

Let's go slow. Do you see the citation in the original comment now? Yes or No. Can we say that 'concern' is resolved?

First, you are mistaken:

Yes, I was. 

Okay. Now comes the deflection and the 'superiority' complex.

Or, rather, you demonstrate why my responding to you at all makes me an idiot. 

Thank you.

Is this or is it not a site for online discussion ("Speak your mind") through exchanges of views and ideas about varying news, articles, by group collections, plural, of written statements and ideas placed in comments?

Is this or is it not a site for online discussion

Yes, this is a site for discussion. That isn't the issue, though. Manufacturing bullshit and then attempting to treat it as the topic is not having a discussion. It's a fantasy you seem to expect others to participate in. 

It is a discussion site. Thank you. The rest of 'that' is gratuitous and not helpful to this discussion. Have a nice day!

This was in fact my heritage! Almost every line of my ancestors came from England, Denmark, and the eastern United States to cross the plains. My 3x great-grandmother Jane Brice came over at 10, saw her mother die during the crossing, saw her father choose to return when he saw Utah, and hid in a woodpile to stay. Another 3x grandmother, Jane Batchelor, saw her husband fall severely ill on the journey and was left pulling her handcart and caring for her two kids while eight months pregnant as he clung to life in the sick wagon. I don’t come from a long line of wealth or status.

My pioneer ancestors dragged everything they owned across a country and often an ocean, making sacrifices hard for us to even imagine in 2025 in order to help build the prosperous civilization I was raised in and that has attracted people from around the world. These were the stories I was raised on, the tradition I was raised within, and it absolutely means something to me. Yes, I want to remember them and their sacrifices. Yes, I think new life in difficult circumstances is worth celebrating. Yes, I think their lives and their actions meant something. And yes, I wholeheartedly reject the notion that the hope that brought my ancestors to Utah is simply part of an endless litany of crimes to be repaid.

A culture that compares that sentiment to Hitler, that sees this image as something to tear down, is rotten.

x

The people who want to erase this champion made up partisan history,

Is America a white country?  I think when you put two and two together,  the fact that a Trump government agency deliberately calls to mind the fact that white immigrants built this nation (in their opinion) , then whites have a right to call the tune. 

Why was this image on the DHS twitter page? That is the question.  And it had a clear message. 

Why do you object to any mention of white’s heritage or the suggestion they can celebrate their ancestors’ accomplishments ?  You’d be fine with a painting of Slaves, I’m sure,

I suppose being a slaveowner was preferable to being a slave, but why have either. Human nature?  Isnt the job of humanity to improve human nature? 

The painting itself is neither good or bad, but depending on perspective it could be either. But why is it on a DHS web page?  It seems pretty clear to me that they are saying our "homeland's heritage" is white and if you dont like it too damn bad. 

I am glad you are proud of your heritage. Individual pride and 'cases' are not the issue here. We speak about the homeland. . . in the whole and at moments in our history. Others,  have ancestors too and we stand on their shoulders PROUDLY too. That is what we are conveying to you as conservatives. Stop trying to tell us who you are as opposed to who we are!

Remember your Homeland’s Heritage, with perhaps a bit more perspective...

I mean, it seems as if all the conservatives want to tout their European ancestry (when it suits them of course) so we might as well go all the way back and, woah! Look at that! We're all fucking related! So perhaps we should just be proud of our human heritage and stop this pointless nitpicking over cultural celebrations.

Either we collectively don't say shit when the MAGAites want to have their "White American Pride" parade, or we say something when there is a "Mexican American pride" march or a "Gay pride" march or a "Black American pride" march. It's distasteful, yes, because those other groups have had to fight for their rights and have been historically discriminated against by white people. So, when white people want to shout about how proud they are of their European ancestry, it's a bit of a sour note since many of those European ancestors lived off the labors of ethnic minorities.

It's a bit like initially being happy for the kids who get picked on and bullied at school having their own 'Nerd Pride Parade!' standing up for themselves but then it's immediately followed by the 'Bully Pride Parade!'. You can't really say they can't have their own parade, but it just seems so fucking sad that they feel like they need to after sitting at the top of the food chain for so long.

out about how proud they are of their European ancestry, it's a bit of a sour note since many of those European ancestors lived off the labors of ethnic minorities.

I feel sad for people who have been so brainwashed that they end up so  filled with loathing and hatred that this tripe is  the only thing they can think of when European heritage comes up.  

Differences and distinctions matter. Let's move on. Nobody forced early colonists to buy slaves. They did it of their own collective volition through their legislatures. Then, when asked to end slavery, of their own freewill voted to fight a national war against their government because they deluded themselves into thinking that people make good property (and just let your imagination go free on what you can do with human property.) 

BTW, I do not guilt-trip conservative whites about the past, but I will NOT let lies revise what was 'what' back then. History has expressed itself in a narrative and in the 21st century, revisionists can not be permitted to 'remaster' the past. 

Just admit the past; grace the present; and, bless the future with facts—not mere rhetoric revisionism.

Nobody forced the African kings to  to sell their excess slaves to the Portuguese and Spanish traders either.  Slavery was a worldwide occurrence.  That somehow only Europeans get blamed for it is just another example of how distorted the progressive view of history is.

Europeans are the only people I know who created the moral justification to end slavery and fought and died to the end the slavery of others on principle.

I do not guilt-trip conservative whites about the past

That's good, because it's incredibly irrational and manipulative to blame people for the actions of others.  Collective guilt is the stuff of tyrants and psychopaths, like those who blame Jews for killing Christ. 

African kings did not supply ships for the Atlantic slave trade. Europeans and the colonies did.  Also, African kings had a problem with their captives from whatever war/s they participated: Kill them or sell them

Furthermore, the concept of RACE slavery was American colonies invention. That is, to enslave an entire class of people alone.

As I have stated BEFORE, I am not here to guilt-trip Conservative Christian whites for the past. . . but to do my part to say what history says about slavery in the colonies. 

Furthermore it was Virginia that begin this country's race-based slavery. It was followed by other colonies like dominoes falling. We can read history for the details. NOBODY FORCED VIRGINIA AND THE COLONIES to participate. But, damn those whites got rich off the free labor and sweat of institutionalize slavery. 

Europeans get blamed for it in America. 

all the conservatives want to tout their European ancestry

citation?