- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Let’s talk about how America first actually hurts America
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:54 pm to hawgfaninc
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:54 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
The confusion might be in the moniker ‘America first’
That implies we should only focus on ourselves
Only a cuck mentality thinks this way. It's clear that you take care of yourself first, and then help others.
Ie ..a father takes care of his family's needs first then helps out others with the excess, but doesn't screw he's family over while doing so.
Really ain't that hard, unless you are just wanting to make it so.
1
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:55 pm to hawgfaninc
My apologies for that remark about the music video. Each of us have our own tastes. I lean more toward Pink Floyd, Marillion, and Porcupine Tree.
We're good, man. I got hot-headed and hit return without waiting five minutes and considering whether the enter button should have been hit.
We're good, man. I got hot-headed and hit return without waiting five minutes and considering whether the enter button should have been hit.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:56 pm to hawgfaninc
MAGAOGI
Make
America
Great
After
Other
Global
Interests
Make
America
Great
After
Other
Global
Interests
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:57 pm to HagaDaga
Listen bud, I agree with you.
But there are people that think we shouldn’t help the world at all.
But there are people that think we shouldn’t help the world at all.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 9:21 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
America first before everyone else is great in theory, but at what point should we help other countries.
Helping others is thinking of someone else’s needs.
This isn't nearly as difficult as people have made it (not necessarily talking about you, just people in general.). The US has no obligation as a sovereign nation to consider anyone else's needs. Our leader's job is to do what benefits American citizens. That's the easy part. The hard part is...
What benefits American citizens often intersects with benefitting other countries. Certain foreign policy events and circumstances affect America. If not today, tomorrow, next week, next year, or next decade.
Sometimes we have to give in order to get.
Sometimes what we get is not readily apparent to those with little knowledge of foreign entanglements (which is pretty much everybody outside of the state department to some degree).
Sometimes what we get or why we really do something is classified and it's something you or I will never know about.
So the really hard part seems to be:
1. Understanding that knowing what benefits America can be very complex, which is why not even the leaders who make decisions about our foreign affairs always get it right. It's not as simple as a linear, obvious relationship or transaction. When Huckster makes people think it is, he's (IMO deliberately) sowing discord by appealing to ignorance and low IQs.
2. Accepting that yes, politicians often take advantage of the fact that foreign policy is too complicated to assess easily, but completely disappearing inside a turtle shell would be far worse for the country.
Now, some low IQs around here like to claim that's "boomer bullshite," which should be an indication on its face that they are either ignorant or cowardly or both, as the boomers were the ones initiating mass protests against the Vietnam War for a decade, for the love of Mike...they were the OG "'Muh 'Merca 'Fust" crowd, at least in so far as we're talking about anybody still alive. And they were doing it when they were in their teens and twenties, which means they can't also the generation in charge of perpetuating it.
If people say that because of the Bush "invasions" in the Middle East, those were not full scale wars such as the US has weathered in the past. Those were all-volunteer operations and casualties were orders of magnitude less. But more importantly, acting as though it is self-evident that those operations were mistakes is foolish. No one knows what would have happened had the US not intervened. We only know what happened in the context of our intervention. If we hadn't, Saddam Hussein might have already nuked someone for all anyone knows.
In any case, I don't know how much more obvious it could be that America cannot simply pull up the moat ramp and shut the drawbridge. Skirmishes would occur that would disrupt shipping lanes in weeks or months. Conflicts would develop in months or short years that could lead to serious global disruption, possibly involving nuclear weapons wielded by such unstable loose canons as Iran or N. Korea.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 9:22 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
But there are people that think we shouldn’t help the world at all.
I think we should help to the exact extent it helps us.
Which is a lot IMO.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 9:27 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
I don't think this is right I think we're good with legal immigration
We need to put some serious guardrails on our immigration process. First, young people only. Couples of child-bearing age or who already have children. Second, end chain migration. Make it clear that they're not going to be able to send for their parents and grandparents. We need workers and consumers, not a bunch of retirees to sponge off of our already overburdened social services. Third, IQ tests and educational requirements. I'm tired of being inundated with low-IQ slapdicks with no education who do nothing for our society but provide job security for cops and correctional officers. Fourth, if the country that they're coming from can't provide documentation that they're not criminals, then frick 'em....no entry. Finally, tax the shite out of remittances. We're a nation, not an economic zone for them to earn money, then remove half of it from our economy by sending it back to the shitholes that they came from.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 10:09 pm to hawgfaninc
fricking idiot.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 10:11 pm to hawgfaninc
Op just wants to help one particular country let's be real
Posted on 11/19/25 at 5:56 am to hawgfaninc
quote:Who told you that?
The definition of America first as I’ve been told is to only care about America.
"America first" is not "America only."
America first speaks to national investment. If that investment is overseas, America first demands maximizing ROI as opposed to curing international wants, albeit at our expense.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 6:00 am to hawgfaninc
The problem with America First is that it costs a premium to effectively purchase whatever halcyon version of America being conceptualized, which is going to make our economy less efficient/productive, which will devolve our economy and SOL
The "blood and soil" types are the only ones who admit this, which is why they call us an "economic zone" today and admit they'd prefer to be more white and Christian and they'll accept those costs and economic devolution for a more "pure" culture (in their eyes) and racial breakdown.
The non blood and soil types typically have to hid behind vague political rhetoric to avoid admitting (understanding, in some cases) this point. That's why you see NPC responses like "those countries have been ripping us off" or "we have been paying for these countries to advance to our detriment" or the really stupid ones pretending we aren't a manufacturing power house or that our economy is bad. THEN you get the conflation between trade deficits and public deficits as a cherry on top.
The "blood and soil" types are the only ones who admit this, which is why they call us an "economic zone" today and admit they'd prefer to be more white and Christian and they'll accept those costs and economic devolution for a more "pure" culture (in their eyes) and racial breakdown.
The non blood and soil types typically have to hid behind vague political rhetoric to avoid admitting (understanding, in some cases) this point. That's why you see NPC responses like "those countries have been ripping us off" or "we have been paying for these countries to advance to our detriment" or the really stupid ones pretending we aren't a manufacturing power house or that our economy is bad. THEN you get the conflation between trade deficits and public deficits as a cherry on top.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 6:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The "blood and soil" types are the only ones who admit this, which is why they call us an "economic zone" today and admit they'd prefer to be more white and Christian and they'll accept those costs and economic devolution for a more "pure" culture (in their eyes) and racial breakdown.
Short term pain long term gain. The disconnect is we blood and soil types look through the lens of our offspring and feel confident we, as the greatest nation state building race the world has ever known, will innovate and rebuild this nation the way our forefathers did, factoring in the unforeseen wrinkles technology has created.
The “pure” culture is dishonest. We simply want a demographic makeup this country had prior to the garbage 1965 INA that opened the floodgates to the plague that is multiculturalism. Just like if Japanese became a minority in Japan, Brazilians become a minority in Brazil, and so on, whites becoming a minority in America will only lead to destabilization and a less prosperous country, both economically and culturally.
Many like you don’t care because when you’re gone, you’re gone. You have no legacy. Your lineage ends with you.
This post was edited on 11/19/25 at 7:00 am
Posted on 11/19/25 at 7:01 am to hawgfaninc
Neo-mercantilism and nationalist rhetoric is an easy sell. It is all about votes.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 7:10 am to SlayTime
quote:
Short term pain long term gain.
The gain is only in perceived cultural and racial areas.
The economics won't work.
If that's a trade off you're willing to make, it's fine, and I gave your type credit for promoting that as the trade off.
quote:
The disconnect is we blood and soil types look through the lens of our offspring and feel confident we, as the greatest nation state building race the world has ever known, will innovate and rebuild this nation the way our forefathers did, factoring in the unforeseen wrinkles technology has created.
The math doesn't work on that.
Hence why that racial and cultural purity has a price, and that cost will inhibit money flowing elsewhere economically.
quote:
We simply want a demographic makeup this country had prior to the garbage 1965 INA t
Which ignores that was a much more modern view of "Demographics", specifically the concept of being white.
Why not choose the 1860s or even 1890s, when Mediterraneans and slavs weren't considered white? And asians were excluded? Show some balls.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 7:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The gain is only in perceived cultural and racial areas. The economics won't work. If that's a trade off you're willing to make, it's fine, and I gave your type credit for promoting that as the trade off.
What other nation state in modern times perished when it became more majority white European than it was historically? The economic despair is absolute, the cultural benefits are “perceived”. I wouldn’t expect anything less.
quote:
Why not choose the 1860s or even 1890s, when Mediterraneans and slavs weren't considered white? And asians were excluded? Show some balls.
My post history is very consistent on Eastern Europeans as well as overall minority makeup of the USA. A quota system like 1921 IQS is the best option for returning America to its most desirable demographic status.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 7:58 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
America first speaks to national investment. If that investment is overseas, America first demands maximizing ROI as opposed to curing international wants, albeit at our expense.
So, globalism is cool as long as we think we're getting the better deal.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 8:08 am to hawgfaninc
quote:
By helping others countries in a responsible manner we’re able to make America great. See: countries investing in America. We need good relations with those countries to facilitate those investments. Those other countries help make America great again.
This is insanely illogical.
One way to look at your point is to ask:
Do you make personal donations to various causes? If yes, do you donate to the point that you donate money that you do not have? Actually borrowing money to donate it? Of course not. That would be dumb. But that is what the federal government has done for decades.
The other point to make:
In order for countries to "invest in America and thus help those countries make America great again", America must first "invest" in those countries? That makes no sense at all.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 8:12 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
So, globalism is cool as long as we think we're getting the better deal.
As long as the demographics are in order, globalism can become capitalistic nationalism immediately.
Multiculturalism always leads to globalism.
This post was edited on 11/19/25 at 8:13 am
Posted on 11/19/25 at 8:14 am to SlayTime
quote:
What other nation state in modern times perished when it became more majority white European than it was historically?
Perished? That's a pivot.
I said our economy and SOL would devolve, and nothing close to "perish"
quote:
My post history is very consistent on Eastern Europeans as well as overall minority makeup of the USA.
I didn't say you were inconsistent with yourself.
You're just being inconsistent with other "blood and soil" eras of US history.
You're cherry picking a modern definition of white.
Posted on 11/19/25 at 8:15 am to SlayTime
quote:
As long as the demographics are in order, globalism can become capitalistic nationalism immediately.
Multiculturalism always leads to globalism.
More expansion of the term "globalism"
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News