Trump's Demonization of Haitian Immigrants is Reminiscent of How Native Americans Were Treated

Fairly obvious to all that deal in reality.

in the intervening centuries it went downhill with use of “doctrine of discovery” and Manifest Destiny. I expect it will be the same with the Haitians for the near future. 

I saw a movie on Prime that is called "New Worlds". It's set in the Massachusetss Bay Colony in the 17th century and Oxfordshire at the same time. I believe it showed realistically how NAs were treated.

 The bill would have hired 1,500 more border agents and "stem the flow of fentanyl" entering the United States. Then, the ex-president Donald Trump unscrupulously killed the bill because he wanted to keep the immigration issue in the forefront during the current presidential election.

despicable

I believe it showed realistically how NAs were treated.

History has kept repeating itself over the centuries.

the last time republicans did anything good for NA's was when they sold them repeating rifles out west before the troopers had any...

History has kept repeating itself over the centuries.

Yes, it has. I wonder, though, if we see what you've stated here the same way? I was banned from being able to reply to anything you posted, even though what brought about the ban was, essentially, the same thing you've said here. That is, history keeps repeating itself because human nature, left to itself, doesn't change. 

That said, I agree with the quoted statement above wholeheartedly. I do so because, regardless of genetic makeup, every human being is essentially the same in nature. If that is true, that every human being is essentially the same, this explains the generality you stated above. History does indeed repeat itself because human nature doesn't change, by itself. History, through various methods, keeps repeating itself for exactly this reason. Human nature. 

The Doctrine of Discovery and Manifest Destiny are examples of this. It should be noted, though, that these are not historically unique to the United States. They have existed in various forms throughout history. The only unique thing about them concerning the United States may be their codification of such concepts. No group of people, be they NA or any other historical group, invaded and subjugated another population because they thought it was wrong to do so. Rather, they all thought they were justified according to their various reasonings. I will mention the Commanche attempt to exterminate the Apache as an example. 

The point I am trying to make, however, is not the justification of any particular group for doing what they did or are doing. The point is that human nature makes certain things, absent other factors, will always result in the history we both recognize as repeating itself.  

I believe you were banned for bigoted and racist comments I was also banned from commenting to you but the ban has expired. 

Human nature can and does change over time due to evolutionary pressure and environmental adaptations. 

The DoD and manifest destiny are examples of this and in ways they were unique to the US. 
my comment re history repeating itself is in the context of the US and Indian nations and the treatment over the centuries. Like the Europeans slaughter of natives and later the US slaughter as stated in the DoI.

What the US did with the Marshall Trilogy SCOTUS 1830’s was to codify into US law religious dogma from the DoD to take the land (US) legally from natives.

The example of the Comanche and Apache was lame in more ways than one a better example would have been the RCC/US slaughter of natives.

MLK said it best.

Some of us evolve and unfortunately some of us devolve.

BTW the article is about how Haitians are being treated based on how Natives were and it’s been carried on by the US actually it been used against all minorities that came to the USand of course NAs.

It is very clear in the DoI. 

the treatment of NA's in america from the beginning, set the precedence for the treatment of all non-whites afterwards. haitians are just the latest victims...

Martin Luther King & Indigenous Peoples Civil Rights
Few know that Dr. Martin Luther King was a great freedom fighter for Native
Americans and the horrific mistreatment to them by the U.S. government.
King wrote in his 1963 book "Why We Can't Wait” which outlined the historic
injustices inflicted on Native people:

"Our nation was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the
original American, the Indian, was an inferior race. Even before there were
large numbers of Negroes on our shores, the scar of racial hatred had
already disfigured colonial society. From the sixteenth century forward,
blood flowed in battles of racial supremacy. We are perhaps the only nation
which tried as a matter of national policy to wipe out its Indigenous
population. Moreover, we elevated that tragic experience into a noble
crusade. Indeed, even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or
feel remorse for this shameful episode. Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it." 

King spoke out that the genocide of American Indians was "national
policy." As late as the 1890s the U.S. Congress was debating the outright
military extermination of all remaining Native Americans. The reason this
nefarious plan was not carried out was because it would be too expensive.

it seems the more things change for the future, the more things stay the same for those living in the past.

I believe you were banned for bigoted and racist comments I was also banned from commenting to you but the ban has expired. 

I don't know. You'd have to ask Perrie why she placed that particular ban on us. I don't think it was for "bigoted and racist comments" though. Had I done that I would have been banned from all posting, not simply banned from commenting on your posts. In my opinion, the ban was placed because the conversation was stalled and just endlessly repeating itself. But that's my opinion. 

I also believe that you characterize my position as "bigoted and racist" not because they were but, rather, because I refuse to see you and your people as something unique. You are just people with the same potential and the same weaknesses as any other. The same sins that plague all people everywhere also plague your people. In my view, my words are the opposite of racist and bigoted precisely because I see all people as people, not as black or white, not NA or European, not male and female.  I don't intend to say those things aren't relevant, but when you strip away what is ingrained by culture, we're all the same. History shows us this. 

Human nature can and does change over time due to evolutionary pressure and environmental adaptations.

I disagree. Concerning human nature, we are not one bit different than anyone in recorded history. If a CME great enough to take down the planet's power grid occurred, what do you think would happen? We'd all just pull together and things would just work out? Nope. We would see our real nature, the one our first world tech allows us to keep at bay, mostly.

The example of the Comanche and Apache was lame in more ways than one a better example would have been the RCC/US slaughter of natives.

For your argument, maybe. Not for mine, which is that NA hands are just as dirty as anyone else's. I suppose that is an example of what you might consider a racist and bigoted remark, but I think I'm just pointing out the truth. That human nature is the same wherever they are. Were it otherwise, would we still be dealing with wars and crime? 

You can disagree all you want about human nature, but it still stands it has been proven time and time again. 

I know that it is very important to you as it is with many in US that you must make us (NAs) guilty with whataboutisims and ''they did it to''. Which in some way makes you feel OK with the treatment of Natives. 

 My comment still stands as is.

I know that it is very important to you as it is with many in US that you must make us (NAs) guilty with whataboutisims and ''they did it to''. Which in some way makes you feel OK with the treatment of Natives.

I considered whether to reply further. What you say here makes it clear that you do not understand either myself or what I am trying to tell you. But I think the idea is important enough to make one more attempt. Do with it what you will. 

I am not proud to be an American. I'm not ashamed of it, either. It is something I simply consider a matter of having been born here. That wasn't always true. I was once proud to be American. Then, once I saw the dark side of our history, I felt shame. Then, I saw the truth and I no longer felt either. 

Then, once I came to know God, I simply realized that everything we've suffered as human beings is because of human nature. It doesn't matter what nation or tribe one is a part of. What time period. All of them express the same failures, weaknesses and sins through their own cultural interpretations and motives. You claim that human nature has changed, has evolved, yet even the most cursory examination of the state of the world gives the lie to that.

The world is like a group of people on a lifeboat and they're all fighting in one way or another. Most of them are convinced their way to manage the boat is the right way and the rest don't care beyond how they can get what they want out of the situation. And the line between the two is often non-existent or simply a fantasy told to soothe one's conscience. Take what the United States did to NA's or what the Commanche did to the Apache as examples. What Rome did. What the Soviet Union and the CCP did and still does. 

This is what I'm trying to get you to see, Kavika. Unless we see all of us as the same, we're just going to keep right on causing more death, more suffering, more injustice. This is why I shove NA sins in your face. Not because I take satisfaction in it. Not because I need to for my conscience's sake. But because I want everyone to see there's something very wrong with us and, unless we understand that, things will never get better. No one's hands are clean. 

The Bible says the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord. I would say that the second most important thing concerning wisdom is to be able to really see oneself for what we are. In my view, the first informs the second. I do not dislike you. I am not against the NA people. I have always acknowledged that NA's were treated horribly. But that doesn't excuse your people's own behaviors and actions. You are in the same boat as the rest of the world and have done the same things. That is a fact. You cannot ask for one group of people to own up to their sins unless you are willing to own up to your own. And, just maybe, if we all do that, something good can come from it. 

Sincerely,

Drakkonis

You cannot ask for one group of people to own up to their sins unless you are willing to own up to your own. And, just maybe, if we all do that, something good can come from it. 

We can all let bygones be bygones when some conservatives STOP trying to selectively remember the past. . . in order to make the past future (again). We will not help some conservatives relive their 'hey-day' without reckoning with that return to it!

Human nature is one thing, some conservatives being jerks that wage political warfare for an 'eternal' to everybody who is not a conservative simply because they want to be socially equal, free, and inclusive is itself a SIN.

A big sin and the Church of Jesus Christ will suffer for its hubris in thinking it can hold back justice for "all eternity."

You have made a lot of assumptions in your comment . First I fully understand what you are saying. Whether you like or dislike me or natives in general is immaterial to me nor does it have any bearing on my response to you. 

Your comment of throwing natives sins in my face is at best throwing crap at the wall hopping it will stick. Fairly familiar with the history of native tribes in the US and Canada and in the scenario that I outlined and the article covered was quite different. No one including myself tried to avoid anything that natives did over the centuries but it was no part of this discussion.

I, or other natives have never not acknowledged our history that seems to be an assumption on your part.

the comment you made of not being proud of the US any longer but more of a neutral position, I find that a sad comment. I am proud of much the US has done and also very disappointed in some of our actions and having experienced overt racism for most of my 80 plus years I tend to look at our country with a hard eye but a realistic one. One has to call out injustices and fight for equality to better our country.The “they did it to” doesn’t fly. 

You stated that once you came to know God things changed for. In my personal experience and that of most natives the various Christians religions have done enormous damage to natives over the centuries so I find that referencing  God or the church carries no weight but a room full of horrors for us. A non starter so to speak. 

There is nothing for us to own up to. We have accepted our history it would to best if the US followed Canada’s example and owning up to their past and accept the fact that many wrongs were perpetrated on native's.

This comment will end my communication on this subject.

Waanakiwin 

the comment you made of not being proud of the US any longer but more of a neutral position, I find that a sad comment.

I believe I understand. In my view, though, doing what is right isn't something one should find pride in. To my mind, it suggests something one isn't obligated to do. That is, I would not see myself as being a decent person because I did what is right, nor my country. I would see myself as simply fulfilling the basic obligations of a human being. I do not find pride in the fact that I am never late for work. That is simply a basic obligation I am expected to fulfill due to the obligations implied by my employment. Treating you with respect due any human being is the same thing. Considering the needs of another is the same thing. 

Generally, I believe the US has been a force for good, overall, when it comes to it. But I don't consider that a source of pride, especially when factors like the intentional release of radioactive gas at Hanford on an unsuspecting population for scientific study is a part of our history. I never forget that we are just human. That for every good thing that can be pointed to, so too a bad thing. I never forget that we are just human. 

You stated that once you came to know God things changed for. In my personal experience and that of most natives the various Christians religions have done enormous damage to natives over the centuries so I find that referencing  God or the church carries no weight but a room full of horrors for us. A non starter so to speak.

I understand that as well. However, the Christianity inflicted upon you isn't necessarily the Christianity intended by God. As I have repeatedly tried to illustrate, there's something wrong with humanity. Whether you realize it or not, that problem is primarily seeking to be God. That is, living life according to your own dictates. It shouldn't be too difficult to understand human history from that. It explains everything from telling a small lie to avoid responsibility to the slaughter of populations of people different than one's own. 

Do as you will, but Christianity isn't necessarily found in the actions of men, although it often is for those who understand it. What it has done to your people in your view is one way to judge it, but all you will get from that is their interpretation, through their actions, of what they thought Christianity sanctioned them to do. If you want to know the truth, you've got to read the word and decide for yourself. 

Why should you do that, though? Well, that's pretty much been the point of all that I have said that angers you so. There's something wrong with humanity. If the atheists are right, then none of this matters anyway. We "white" people may as well do whatever we want with anyone we have the power to overcome. Same with you guys, should you ever have that kind of power. What would it matter in the end? 

But if there is a God and He is actually interested in us... well, you should be able to figure out the rest. 

If the atheists are right, then none of this matters anyway.

Fundamentally, most atheists are agnostic atheists and that means we are not making an assertion but rather simply stating that we are not convinced that there is a supreme sentient entity much less one that matches the specifics of religions.   Thus atheists, in general, cannot be 'right' (or 'wrong') in this matter.

It is the minority of gnostic atheists who make assertions of truth, and their assertions are irrational:   there is no god.   There is no logical / factual basis for anyone to make such a claim.   By the same token, there is no basis for anyone to assert that a particular god exists.   One can only believe as a matter of faith (conviction sans suitable evidence).

Fundamentally, most atheists are agnostic atheists and that means we are not making an assertion but rather simply stating that we are not convinced that there is a supreme sentient entity much less one that matches the specifics of religions.   Thus atheists, in general, cannot be 'right' (or 'wrong') in this matter.

Um, yeah. Do you really think you are fooling anyone with that crap? Do you think anyone is fooled by this nonsense? Everyone knows it's just a ploy to keep you from having to defend your position. You set up ridiculous criteria for what you consider evidence or proof and then, when it can't be met, sit back and claim a neutral position. Sell it to someone else, TiG. 

Funny how hate can unify low IQ folk.

My position is exactly as I stated.    I am not convinced that a supreme sentient entity exists.    I am also not convinced that it is impossible for a supreme sentient entity to exist.

This is an extremely sound position shared by many and it is known as agnostic atheism.

It is a position based on evidence (lack thereof) and solid logic.   Further, since we (agnostic atheists) make no claim, we are neither right nor wrong.   We are simply not convinced.

Are you convinced that Brahma exists?   No?   Likely because there is no persuasive evidence and logic that would lead you to believe he exists.   That is agnostic atheism in terms of one god.   Apply that now to all gods of lore (and that includes Yahweh) and you have agnostic atheism.

To wit, it is nonsensical to speak of agnostic atheists as being 'right' since by definition we are making no claims.

But if there is a God and He is actually interested in us... well, you should be able to figure out the rest.

... not enough burned spots on the ground and missing religious hypocrites.

Can't have a winner without a victim.

You can't argue that you're best without saying another is your enemy that's a threat.

What with hell and fury always lurking about, the lady is always the best.

You got it, the lady is always the best.

it's the maga version of the welcome wagon ...

Can't have a winner without a victim.

now I know that Trump has been at the forefront of politics far to long

[✘]

...

"They're eating the dogs, the people that came in, they're eating the cats," Trump said. "They're eating the pets of the people that live there, and this is what's happening in our country, and it's a shame.

---

Shame. Shame. Shame. Oh the irony of Donald 'knowing' how to use the word, "shame"  appropriately in a sentence. This way we can know Donald is a fraud when he pretends to not understand, "shamelessness." Donald is shameless. And now he wants to talk about: Shame. 

When will Donald 'ever' mention being a-shamed?

If you say it three times it must be true. /s

On Sunday, Trump's running mate Sen. J.D. Vance *R-OH) doubled down on the false claim. "If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do," the Republican vice president nominee said on CNN.

Vance admits it is permissible to make things up to drive home lies that vulnerable and non-intellectually curious people can embrace. The tactic is to make them afraid of dark people in order to win their votes.

---

And if we are to to presume that as 'running mate' to Donald, J. D. Vance would not make any untoward remark that would be damaging to Donald without prior understanding/assent. . . then, we can take for granted that since Donald has not denounced, renounced, or otherwise indicated he does not agree with what J. D. has 'created' in Springfield, Ohio by being a disinformation carrier. . . Donald must agree with Vance's LIE which is doing great harm to citizens and Haitian 'guest workers' in the state!

So it's 120+ IQ folk against 80- IQ folk.

Huge difference! So sad that Fox gave fools a voice. 

What I don't get is now that black and brown people want entrance to the country, the Republicans feel it is time to close down immigration into the United States.

---

What I am is thoroughly exasperated with racists and bigots. I used to think they could be over-looked, but now I have come to realize that racists and bigots are not the forgiving type, not the type to simply 'go away' on their own. . . instead such people "bide their time," and "lie in wait," - I won't be fooled again by racists and bigots hiding in our midst.

Trump and all republicans hate you and yours.