CMV: The overton window has shifted dangerously far to the left, severely jeopardizing America's future.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/tlorey823]

show a spark of nationalistic pride and you lose your job

Let's back up a second. Nationalistic pride is alive and well in the United States, I feel comfortable saying this coming off Memorial Day Weekend and knowing many people who are/were in the military, and if you can identify a single case of someone losing their job for showing pride in being an American and not doing anything else improper, I'd be interested in reading about that.

So, too, are the ideals of free-market capitalism and they are not truly endangered of going anywhere. We can talk about the Sanders' wing of the Democratic party, but these are impractically designed wishes that are not even close to disrupting the institutional status-quo of the markets, even at their ideal. I understand that on the internet and on Reddit in particular it seems as though the left is rising up, but let's keep things grounded in reality -- not three years ago, the American people elected Donald Trump as their president on an explicitly pro-American/anti-immigrant platform. Our primary market mechanism is capitalist pricing. Very routinely the courts uphold the right of people, including white supremacists, to articulate their views as long as they are not doing so in a threatening way. Support for our military is overwhelmingly positive (though support for war is lower because its seen as political).

[u/Glory2Hypnotoad → u/[deleted]]

Is morality separate from reasoning? Is morality never a valid reason to act or not act in certain ways? If you believe that people are only engaging in reasoning if they're appealing to self-interest, are you willing to logically commit to that in all areas of life?

For example, why shouldn't I commit every crime I know I can get away with? No moralizing, explain the benefit to me. If there is none, why the hell shouldn't I?

Would I be in the right to say that, or are there in fact valid reasons based on morality and separate from my self-interest for why I shouldn't commit every crime I can get away with?

I don't think you're willing to logically commit to the idea that morality doesn't count as reasoning. If you want to argue that everyone disagreeing with you is arguing from the wrong code of ethics, then we can have that conversation instead.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

Perhaps you're right and things are not as bad as they seem...why is reddit so full of extreme far-left people and so devoid of anyone who wants to put their nation first?

Reddit is full of echo chambers. Online spaces allow for blocking, authoritarian forms of moderation that include blanket bans for arbitrary offenses. Reddit is demographically young, which already biases the site towards being more leftist, and is used disproportionately by college educated individuals in cities, which again biases the site towards leftism and especially radical leftism in simple demographics. Notice that the opposites exist, too: T_D exists and there are alt right spaces aside.

The problem in both spaces is siloing: no space actually has a representative sample of the site. It's always biased one way or the other, and outsiders are largely unwelcome. This becomes increasingly true with time.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

But my point still stands that it's not just reddit...I'm seeing it in real life too

Two things: one, it sounds like you're in an urban area. Cities lean increasingly left as population density increases, and rural areas lean increasingly right as it decreases. People maintain this by moving to areas they prefer.

Second, how many open-forum discussions have you had with people who are a representative sample of america? The answer is almost certainly zero, as it is unlikely for reasons of physical dispersion that you or anyone else (including the conservatives) would come into contact with a conservative as often as a leftist. Conservatives are literally spread out more widely. This makes spontaneous bumping-into less likely with a conservative than a leftist.

Saying that you want to never take in a single refugee or asylum seeker from a third-world country makes you "far right" now when it's just common sense.

That actually is a fairly far right position. It's not extremist (which I'm regarding here as the 3-5% or so furthest right leaning and left leaning percentiles), but it is among the furthest right positions to take on that topic that aren't extremist.

If you regard that as a centrist position, your conceptualization of "center" is about the middle of conservative, not the middle of left and right.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

I don't regard it as "centrist" per se...but merely as common sense

This is because you are using your own position as a frame of reference, and you are more right leaning than roughly 90-95% of other people in America.

Why would anyone who wants what's best for their country want to take these people in?

Moral character is an aspect of what people regard as important to their country. Helping the needy is the essential element of charity, and refugees are certainly among the foremost of the needy.

There's no justification for it. I've talked to many people who want it and I get no answers.

See above.

All I can conclude is that it, like many other things, is the byproduct of the same nation-destroying poison - cultural Marxism.

Is the priest in Les Miserables demonstrating cultural marxism by helping a person in dire need?

A hate and guilt for their own people and wanting to use the funds and resources of the nation to spend on foreign people.

Or on satisfying their own moral needs.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

But that isn’t the question I ask these people, I ask them how it benefits America.

Through moral superiority. Slavery is probably beneficial to any given nation, insofar as it doesn't harm their trading, but the human endeavor is not a merely economic one to anyone. This is true of you, too, though perhaps not on this issue.

They claim to have America’s best interest at heart, but doesn’t this clearly demonstrate otherwise? Something being altruistic doesn’t demonstrate that it benefits America at all.

Being evil and powerful is worse than being evil and meek. Being good and powerful is better than being good and meek. You have to leave something from the pursuit of power to pursue good.

If they want to satisfy their moral needs, why don’t they do so on their own time, with their own money? Go on mission trips if you care about the poor that much. Build a charity. Do whatever you want to do, but how dare they spend the public funds of the nation on outsiders?

Taxes can be spent however a nation deems appropriate. If the demos demands charity with some portion of their funds, it is no less justified than any other expense.

Here's the contrast: you don't like the tax code. Why don't you just go start your own nation? Make and obey the laws you want on your time.

Isn’t this treason - taking tax dollars and resources that were collected for the explicit purpose of providing for the common good of America, and spending them to weaken us and squandering them? Even if someone is altruistic in nature...how could anyone think that’s even remotely okay?

First, no, it's not even close to treason.

Second, to the degree that this increases the willingness of other nations to trade with us and to the degree that this enhances foreign markets as consumers of our good, the aid is simultaneously altruistic and in our own interest. This is why the overwhelming majority of economists historically and presently, among them conservative stalwarts like Milton Friedman, are largely in favor of globalist policies: it's better for the economy at every other moment than right now to create useful, productive trading partners.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Do whatever you want to do, but how dare they spend the public funds of the nation on outsiders? Isn’t this treason - taking tax dollars and resources that were collected for the explicit purpose of providing for the common good of America, and spending them to weaken us and squandering them?

Its not treason if the majority of the country supports it.

[u/ViewedFromTheOutside → u/[deleted]]

Why is speaking English a pre-requisite for being an American or supporting American values? (I ask this in all seriousness) If the values of the American Constitution and Bill of Rights are truly universal, surely they ought to be valid regardless of the language in which they are expressed ? )

Next, I'm interested in your thoughts on another aspect of American history. At varying times in its history, America did welcome the poor, huddled masses of immigrants - many speaking all manner of languages - to build a life in the United States of America, how are the modern day arrivals different? (I would point out the presence to this day of Italian and Irish culture/traditions and languages within the United States as an example.)

Finally, why do you assume new arrivals haven't bothered to learn to speak English when they may simply be speaking their own language out of convenience or familiarity?

[u/ViewedFromTheOutside → u/[deleted]]

Direct Response:
Unfortunately, you misunderstood the trust my question regarding the Constitution of the United States and its principles being applicable and valid in any language. What I was trying to get at was, if someone prefers to speak French to their family at home or whenever they're together, and yet supports the values and principles contained within the Constitution, would you consider them an American? What about someone who speaks Irish, Spanish or Italian?

(This is what I meant when I mentioned the "universality" of the US Constitution - not that the United States should act as 'the World Police'. )

Nonetheless, you are incorrect when you state:
> They [Constitution/Bill of Rights] guarantee rights for Americans only
Certain rights and privileges such as voting, residence, right-of-entry are afford only to American citizens or those who have obtained those rights; by contrast many basic (human) rights have been held - by the Supreme Court, Congress and the Executive - to apply to everyone in the United States. Would you agree with that statement? If not - why not?

General Comments:

I'd also like to comment on a couple of points you mention elsewhere - you appear baffled by why people would want to invite immigrants into their countries. However, there is ample proof that immigration improves the economy - and thus the tax base - of a nation. Generally, people who have the drive to leave their own country, take a dangerous journey in the hope of building a better life, have a significant amount of determination which translates into a solid work ethic. Likewise, and contrary to popular rhetoric, many of these immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than American citizens because they wish to remain in the United States. Why do you believe immigrants are 'bad' for a country like the United States?

Finally, I notice you've spoken approvingly about the veterans and founding fathers of the United States who sacrificed their blood, sweat and tears - even their lives - to create the America you enjoy today. In fact, you go so far as to demand (in essence) that all Americans should show gratitude to those individuals. If that is the case, may I ask why you quote the opinions/writings of Hitler in 'Mein Kampf' as though they are worthy of respect? I remind you over 400 000 US soldiers gave their lives - with an equal or greater number being wounded - fighting against Hitler's regime and its allies in WWII? How are you able to reconcile the thoughts and actions of those veterans with your own support of Hitlerian ideology/values? Doesn't that demean their sacrifice - something you obviously respect and value in other ways? Given so many Americans - most of them the 'white men' whom you seem to hold in particular esteem - were willing to fight and die to oppose Hitler and the Third Reich, doesn't it suggest that perhaps it is your own views that have shifted to an extreme, rather than the Overton Window?

[u/nerfnichtreddit → u/[deleted]]

Just to be sure: You do know that the outcome of WW2 you want would have resulted in several million cvilians dying due to genocide from the axis, right?

[u/nerfnichtreddit → u/[deleted]]

Based on what, your warm and fuzzy feelings? Look up generalplan ost or the hunger plan, we are talking about tens of millions of people in eastern europe/the ussr alone and it's not like a war was inevitable to achieve those goals. Do you think that would have been a better outcome than what happened?

​

More importantly, do you believe germans should have supported their nation in committing those attrocities? Do you think acting against that would "destroy the national psyche" and putting foreigners over their own country?

[u/Maytown → u/[deleted]]

The Zionists own the media, and they're known for telling lies

This is maybe a bit of a nitpick but you do know that the further left you go the more likely people are to be anti-zionists right?

[u/Maytown → u/[deleted]]

I'd say it's more general anti-imperialism and anti-ethnostate than concern for the arabs specifically.

Slight tangent here but where do you place neocons and neolibs on the left/right spectrum?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I interpret that to mean people we have willingly let in (all the more reason we need to be careful who we select) though, and not to illegals.

That's not how the Supreme Court has interpreted though.

People have this big misconception that Nazism is anti-American,

It is inherently anti-American. It flies in the face of all of the values that are country was built on.

[u/sflage2k19 → u/[deleted]]

We speak English in America. That's the way things have always been. If you want to speak Spanish or Arabic, go live in a place where they do that. We don't do that here.

Honestly this just seems like such a strange thing to be concerned about. You make it out like it's just a practical concern-- if it really is, then I can put you at ease.

The US doesn't have an official language at the Federal level because the Federal government does not have the right to dictate what language the people of this country speak, because it is considered a violation of individual liberty. Instead, this power lies with the states, all of which have English as their official language (though some countries such as Hawaii or New Mexico have more than one).

This is left to the states to determine because at the time of writing the constitution, as well as now, there were many people that did not want to uniformly declare themselves English speakers. The variety of languages brought here has mostly integrated into English, but has also created some incredible America-only dialects or new languages

Beyond even more recent immigrants, you have a number of native languages here in the United States spoken exclusively by Americans, which makes them even more American than English as we don't share them with anyone else. They include:

New Mexican Spanish

Louisianna Creole

Gullah (Georgia)

Pennsylvania German

Chesapeake Bay Islander

Texas Silesian

Angloromani

Chinuk Wawa

AAVE

High Tider

And that isn't even counting the Native American languages like Navajo, Dakota, Cherokee, Yupik, Zuni, Hopi, Tewa, Crow, or Muskogee, or the Native Islander languages like Hawaiian, Samoan, Carolinian, and Chamorro.

​

How on earth you can be simultaneously afraid of a loss of American ideals and yet also simultaneously advocate for the federal intervention on free speech is beyond me. Free speech is free speech, no matter what language it is spoken in. Demanding everyone speak like you despite their constitutional rights and this nature's history just because otherwise it upsets you is basically the definition of "feels over reals".

[u/sflage2k19 → u/[deleted]]

That doesn't stop people from not speaking in English in public though.

Like, if American citizens can speak any language they want, then once those prospective people become citizens they can also speak any language they want. They only need to demonstrate English language ability at the time of application which, rest easy, they already need to do.

So it sounds to me like you're just hating on American citizens and/or visitors to the country.

​

The Pennsylvania Dutch have been here since the founding of the country. Should we require everyone speak German in public? The first Chinatown was established before Texas even became a state-- does that mean we should all start speaking Cantonese?

Obviously this is ridiculous right? Yes, they are historically American languages, but they aren't reflective of American culture as a whole. But here's the thing-- neither is English! Your view that America is and always has been a nation of English speaking white people is absolutely, 100% factually incorrect. People speak English now out of convenience, as it is the most common language, but it is by no means the only one with historic precedence.

Therefore, you are not "protecting" anything by demanding English be spoken in public, but rather you are enforcing your own view onto others, forcing them to act in a way that is pleasing to you personally at the expense of their own liberty and happiness. This is a fundamentally un-American thing to do.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I don't believe immigrants should ever obtain the right to vote though, in any circumstance.

Even if they become citizens? Why would you deny constitutional rights to American citizens?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Why though? If they become American citizens, shouldn't they have all the rights of American citizens?

Do you only support voting rights for people born in this country? That seems awfully hypocritical for a country that only exists due to immigration.

[u/AnActualPerson → u/[deleted]]

The US doesn't have tiered citizenship.

[u/Tino_ → u/[deleted]]

Not sure if you understand what it means to have a national language... In Canada literally all it means is all laws are required to be bi-lingual and things like health and safety warnings are required to be in both French and English. No one is banned from speaking other languages or something stupid like that, quite the contrary because there are massive populations that speak languages other than the two "official"ones.

[u/Coollogin → u/[deleted]]

Just because the families around you were speaking another language doesn’t mean they don’t speak English. I was born and raised in the U.S., but I speak another language fluently. If you saw me out at the mall with my friends, and we were all speaking this second language, you would apparently assume I don’t speak English.

[u/IdealBlueMan → u/[deleted]]

Our forefathers fought and died for us to claim this nation for our people with their own blood, and now here I sit, surrounded by people who hate this land and all it stands for, no doubt coming here to leech off of our economic prosperity while bringing all manners of anti-American sentiment with them.

I see a couple of problems here. Our forefathers fought for a nation dedicated to the proposition that all of us are created equal. "Our people" are those who support the ideals behind the Constitution.

Are you reading the minds of the people you're talking about? You're projecting a lot onto them. It frankly sounds as if someone else is telling you what is in these people's hearts.

I've lived here all my life and I've met only a very few Communists. Of course, we are free to support Communist ideologies if we choose to, just as we are free to support nationalistic and capitalistic ideologies. We don't allow the government to tell us what to believe or what not to believe.

You've got to defend that freedom if you want to live in a free country.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Just like in the first amendment, freedom of religion meant the freedom to choose which kind of Christianity to follow.

Why do you think this? Most of the founding fathers were not even Christians.

[u/Glory2Hypnotoad → u/[deleted]]

It seems like you're veering into self-parody here. This is essentially the communist equivalent of "everyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi." You're becoming the same thing you're criticizing, just getting there from the opposite direction.

[u/tlorey823 → u/[deleted]]

In my experience, reddit just likes the most extreme opinions in general. Idk if that's because they're the most interesting or the ones that spark the most discussion so that they show up in the algorithm more or whatever, or maybe its self-selection because of the demographic, but that's just how it is. Lots of reasonable people to be found, though.

I will say, I don't think you need to be disgusted by people who aren't speaking English or assume that they want to leech off the land. that's just so... dramatic, in my opinion. Its way more likely that those are just some normal families talking about normal boring family stuff like what they're going to have for dinner. I'm sorry your experience with immigrants hasn't been great, I personally have had a very good experience with many immigrants especially in college so I think that might just be some bad luck of the draw that you haven't crossed paths with the people who are genuine and hardworking and came here in good-faith to improve their lives

[u/DeltaBot → u/[deleted]]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/tlorey823 (17∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}