How Donald Trump made me proud to be Hispanic

[Derpist]

The rush of Americans to identify as anything except American is an embarrassing denouement to end what was once at least a plausibly great (aka passably acceptable) nation.

[Derpist]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-fight-against-ms-13/

http://oag.ca.gov/transnational-organized-crime

Transnational Gangs do what they do because of our porous borders.  Trump isn't the problem.

MS-13 was formed in the United States!!!!

By illegals. Funny how these porous borders have a way of damaging all countries involved. But who cares as long as those evil whiteys can suffer.

[Derpist]

Why do you guys always assume someone is trying to "remain separate". No one complained when there was a little Italy in every major city. No one complains when Russians or Poles had a separate district in cities. If anything, they were less quick to assimilate than immigrants are today! Come on now.

I for one have no problem with immigrants that don't want to assimilate. I have nothing against Little Mexicos or Little Italys or Koreatowns. That's because national identity is something much more important than what festivals you have or what foods you eat (American food is also terrible) or in this country, even who/what you worship. There is something greater about loyalty and identity that binds people together as a community.

People only complain about disloyalty. Italian-Americans don't burn American flags and foist Italian flags in protests. Russian-Americans don't do this. Armenian-Americans don't do this. Polish-Americans don't do this. Greek-Americans don't do this. FrenchCanadian-Americans don't do this. Most Arab-Americans don't either. I certainly don't do this. There's no nothing that Poles, Italians, Armenians, Russians, French Canadians, or whatever engage in like the Aztlán movement. Hyphenated Americans can be great. But the modern cohort of aggrieved immigrants are barely hyphenated Americans.

When these people protesting Trump talk about their country, they usually aren't talking about America.

[Derpist]

Derpist, last time I checked, America was a MULTICULTURAL nation...so if I want to identify as ARAB-AMERICAN, PALESTINIAN-AMERICAN or MUSLIM-AMERICAN I can and will.

Multi-cultural can mean different things. It can mean countries like Brazil, Peru, and (yes!) Mexico. America is actually surrounded by nations of immigrants. America should obviously be in this category. They have all integrated newcomers while retaining their basic character.

Multi-cultural can also include places like Belgium or Yugoslavia (before it collapsed) or Lebanon (before jihadis started expelling Christians) or Nigeria. Their inability to integrate Muslims is leading many European nations into this group. America should not be in this group.

[Derpist]

If you went through the countryside of the Midwest, Great Plains or Central Texas in the year 1900, you could find towns where the local newspaper was printed in German, there was a local Bund, and people spoke German at home as often as English.

That didn't noticeably stop until World War I and wasn't fully extinguished until World War II, when people stopped feeling "proud" to be German for obvious reasons.

As for the Irish, ever been to South Boston? You also had Irish-Americans supporting the IRA in its terror campaign against longtime US ally Britain in the 1980s.

Or does "assimilating" just mean "not being dark skinned" to you?

One of the many terrible ideas pushed  by the Progressive Movement was restricting German language education on that basis.

As I'm sure you know, the fear that German-Americans would be loyal to Germany in WW1 was totally false - as was the fear that Japanese-Americans would be loyal to Japan in WW2. Even stuff as intimate as language wasn't relevant in that question.

I simply cannot the same about some modern immigrants, especially a great number of those from Mexico. The author points out  how welded he is to American identity - how much he cheers for the US normally - because those things are NOT taken as a given anymore.

It is utterly unthinkable that masses of German-American or Japanese-American youth would burn American flags and foist German/Japanese flags.

[Derpist]

I have faith that the US will integrate all immigrants, because it traditionally does. The countries of Europe are a different story- except perhaps Great Britain, they have not had many immigrants until the late 1900s.

I simply cannot see the United States as uniquely accepting, because that's just honestly not fair to a lot of other nations that have also been historically very accepting.

France has actually been historically been great at integrating non-French immigrants. Probably around 10% of France is actually of immigrant Italian descent - and that's not even counting famous Corsicans (like Napoleon). IIRC, Sarkozy has tons of immigrants in his family tree.

The newest generation of Muslim immigrants however, have integrated into French society very poorly. "because it traditionally does" first failed in France.

Obviously, Hispanics aren't Muslims so I think we'll be in a better position. A lot are integrating. But many are still not going to integrate. The fact that it's mostly the children of illegal immigrants who are committing the crimes and burning American flags is really scary.

[Derpist]

The irony is the article this that started the thread is even proof of this. The writer's was that he was so assimilated he barely even identified as Hispanic before Trump.

The typical Jihadist in Western Europe doesn't speak a lick of Arabic and is extremely casual/non-devout about their Islam.

Which is why I think we're looking at a generation of people who are highly assimilated but have chosen not to integrate. Which is why the problem isn't one of culture - but a simpler, less justifiable one of SJW-driven disloyalty.

[Derpist]

Because you in your infinite wisdom and knowledge knows exactly what goes in that part of the world.

Ah yes, I missed the part in my history book where peaceful members of the religion of peace politely asked millions of Christian Lebanese to GTFO of a majority-Christian country, as the Paris of the Middle East just spontaneously started erupting in inexplicable explosions.

[Derpist]

OMG, we're not nationalists! We're disloyal scum!

In all fairness, native-born Americans do it to some regrettable extent too. Crass tribalism is a rising force - which is horrifying in an immigrant nation.

[Derpist]

LOL please crawl back into that pathetic hole you crawled out of. That is why the Lebanese must have a Christian President, Head of Army, and head of Banks.

The Lebanese civil war was fought between EVERY group, the Phalanges versus the Druze, PLO, Muslim groups and left wing groups, then Israel naturally came in and ed it up also.

I kindly advise you to re-learn history you twat.

1. Yes. That's because the Muslim chauvinists didn't actually win the war.

2. The Lebanese civil war started because Lebanon let in hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees (sound familiar?) and in their peaceful refugee JUST LOOKING FOR A BETTER LIFE YOU BIGOT ways, they started seizing power and flaring sectarian tension.

Crass tribalism at its worst.

[Derpist]

Once again you're showing your ignorance on the subject, the problems existed BEFORE my people (Palestinians) fled to Lebanon once Israel started expelling us.

Go back and check the 1860 when the Druze and Maronites fought countless battles against each other for control over Mount Lebanon. The French in WWII sided with the Christian Lebanese over the Druze and the Muslims and gave them substantial power and carved out Mount Lebanon out of Syria to keep them in a separate state (once again proving my point that Sykes-Picot was a sh**tty agreement)

Plus there was a huge conflict in Lebanon going on as to whether it should be an ARAB nation or a WESTERN nation and many nation states shadow funded different groups in Lebanon.

EVERY group and I mean EVERY group fought in Lebanon, the whole issue here is that Lebanon WAS NEVER STABLE if you understood the history of the region, which apparently you don't.

I've always disliked it when people explain conflicts with "old ethnic hatred! they're just like that!" A lot of people dismiss the Middle East as "oh people have been killing and hating each other for 2000 years " - when that's not really true.

Disagreement is not conflict, no matter how tense and fraught. Nor is terrorism. The Troubles sucked, but it didn't end up in total civil war with tens of thousand dead.

There was absolutely no conflict comparable to what the PLO instigated. They came in hundreds of thousands of refugees, started seizing actual control all over South Lebanon, and then openly conspired with radical groups to violently change the sectarian status quo of Lebanese government.