Printable View
They want to remove us the aging white population. Its funny how an illegal immagration bill can spark this sort of stupidity. These people seem hell bent on taking something that isnt theres. That they had no help building. The only thing they do is take take take and now they want our country!!!!! My head is about to explode.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIW-BZ8oLrk
Err ... I thought you'd 'retired', lah. :inquisitive:
I triedQuote:
Originally Posted by Red Peasant
:beam:
Invisiblity eh. Nice try. I don't see the arguement with this one. So the Spanish take the land from the Indians. The Mexicans take it from the Spanish. The Texans have a revolution and take Texas from the Mexicans. Then the Americans have a war with Mexico and take all the other land from them besides Mexico itself. Now were supposed to give the land back to them? If they wanna look at it like that then they should give the land back to the Spanish.
Give it back to the Mongoloids that romped there in the last great ice age.
You're part of the "aging, white population"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Well, technically, we're all aging, aren't we? :laugh4: :clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoreBag
This Aztlan movement is confusing to me. Do they claim some sort of cultural continuity with the Aztecs?
Even if that absurd notion would be true, California Texas etc are by no stretch part of the "Aztec" homeland.
Indeed you have your assumptions 100% correct. They believe that miraculously the aztec empire extended into now present day south west USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
Granted the absurdity is beyond me, by saying that your ignoring far far far to much. First there's a complete nearly impassible mountain desert seperating the aztec empire from Texas-California border. Also they are ignoring that most of the area was under the influence of other very powerful Native American tribes/empires. Most of Texas and Louisiana was under the control of the mound builder culture (sorry I forget the correct name of the tribe) which was quite powerful. At one point they even defeated a spanish expidition. There was also the peublo's and the other related cultures in the area.
What seems to be the most ubsurd thing is, there reasoning for the aztecs to even expand north. South America was far far more richer and easier to subdue then the north. Both the Inca's and Mayans were in decline and were easily conquered. There's just no reason they would have expanded north, and there would have been alot of proof also.
The claim that the land belongs to the original inhabitor is also ubsurd. That area has been ruled by to many countless tribes both big and small since the America's were colonized 20,000 years ago. The land belongs to those who hold it now irrelavent of the past.
Welcome back, brother Strike. You were sorely missed. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
That is some heady rhetoric. When was this? And where?
Discarding the inevitable fringe professor or Chicano activist, is that truly the mayor of Los Angeles speaking? I did a quick check on Antonio Villaraigosa and I believe he is a former leader (and proud of it) of the Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlán that promotes a secession of the Southwest US.
And then there was Fabian Núñez, 66th Speaker of the California Assembly...
It is hard to believe that men who are supposed to guard the interests of the entire people of their city or state would give such speeches or even take part in such demonstrations.
I try to imagine a mayor of a Dutch city, publicly saying about part of his citizenry: 'They are dying. They are not making babies, it is only a matter of time...' He would be out on his rear and his substitute sworn in before nightfall.
They are claiming such a kinship, indirectly, since such a substantial portion of the Mexican population is "mestizo," drawing genetic ancestry from both the Amerinds who preceded the Spanish as well as the conquerors. Strictly speaking, they descend from a number of tribes, many of whom hated the Aztecs and readily fought against them, engendering Cortes' success. The Aztecs were the political "top dogs" of that region at the time of the conquest and did claim to hold sway over what is now the US Southwest -- probably a pretty nominal claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
The Aztlan movement seeks to establish enough of a sense of cultural kinship among Americans of Mexican descent (and Mexicans squatting on US soil) to create a seperatism movement. It's a variant on the Sudetenland theme for acquiring territory (though in this case pushing for independency as opposed to re-acquisition by Mexico.
That is quite an ominous comparison. In practice such movements are often more concerned with internal leverage in the host country than with actual secession. But what do you think would be the reaction in the rest of the US if push ever came to shove?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Violence, internal conflict, bloodshed, all the basic components of a bloodly civil war. There is a building of anger developing in the Southwest over the issue of illegal immigrantion that the politians of this nation seem to be ignoring hoping for it to go away. If the current crop of politians in office neglect the issue for to much longer, real far right crackpots will begin to get voted into office running only on a anti-immigrantions agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
Adrian:
Redleg's image is a little dark, but not impossible. As it stands, Aztlan are whacky fringe-types. While demographics alone demand a greater political role for Americans of Mexican descent, I don't see a mass trend toward separatism...yet. If it does materialize, however, Redleg is quite accurately predicting the vehemence of the opposition to such a move.
Illegal immigration is an issue that will not go away, and which is very much going to influence our political scene for years to come.
Yeah, but that's a pretty lousy basis for a territorial claim though. Neither is a strictly nominal claim of centuries back. The only quasi-viable claim I can see is the fact that those areas were nominally part of the Mexican republic for a couple of decades in the 19th century.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
If there would have to be an Aztec homeland, aren't there still native tribes who are both culturally and genetically way closer to the Aztecs of old?
Well I am slightly over-stating the possiblity, a lot of talk in my area is around the spanish-english language issue. Lots of anger from both groups being espoused on the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
A community not to far from where I live.
http://www.nbc5i.com/news/10312784/detail.html
The resolution itselfQuote:
Originally Posted by article
http://www.farmersbranch.info/Commun...02006-130.html
This "Aztlan" group just seem to be Mexican nationalists trying to lay claim to any former Mexican and Spanish colonial territory in the present day US. Using the old Aztec association to try to add more weight and prestige to their claim.
I don’t see the US doing much as a whole; it will be up to the individual states to take action and aggressively enforce the current laws.
edit: I wonder at what point does the US declare war on the Aztlan’s? They seem to be every bit as much a threat as Al Qaeda.
That's not the claim. The claim is the massive number of people who want the land, regardless of why.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
Well Vikings technically ruled a bit of America for a few years, and seeing as I'm British, and therefore have Viking blood, I claim America.
Anyone convinced?
Sure. Now you just have to win a war against us. :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
Not if I bring enough lawyers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
You bring some lawyers and stick to the liberal states and no one would touch you. Defending oneself with deadly force is evil, and should never be allowed.:balloon2:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
You can have my little slice (as long as you take the house payment with ya! ~D )Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
well,
The reason Mexico lost those lands was because US won a war. The reason the Mexicans have the land is because they won a war. African countries gained independence, U.S. gained independence through war, and so did Poland, Germany, Britian, Greece, Italy, France, name a country, they at one point belonged to someone else. This whole thing is bull$#!*.
Techically, every land should be long to just one place, Africa beacause that is where man began migrating from.
No one should own this or that land, but a single country of the world could never exist in any life time.
If you disagree with me on that, please say so and state your opinion, i will gladly debate with you.
Well, if we want to talk precedence, St Brendan - an Irishman - discovered it first - and then about a thousand years later (we don't do anything in a rush) most of us decided to move over to the new place.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
So really, it's a province of Ireland, except they can't play rugby.
:tongue:
If the Southwest wants independence they can take it from Cold Dead Hands of the US Military. And thats not an easy task... considering many of us in this portion of the country would much prefer to stay with the US, even if we disagree with the current administrations policies. There would be a Civil War within a Civil War, and I'm afraid the Patriotic far out-gun the non-patriotic.
I was concerned with some of the comments from the U of Houston Professor, and a few others. But that video is a bit misleading. Only one of the speakers is actually talking about the nation of Aztlan. As with any large cultural/political identity group, I imagine there's a wide breath of opinion within Chicano thinking. Yes, there are some that view the current situation as a struggle for dominance, and they probably sit at home dreaming of enslaving white people and forcing them to turn over all the riches of America to them. Not all that much crazier than the Klan or Aryan nation. There's also a large number, I believe a majority, that simply want an open border and recognition of economic/political identity when they travel back and forth. I don't agree that they should have this right, but I'm willing to demonize them by painting them with the most extremist comments made by their fringe elements, any more than I'm going to attempt to own comments made by the David Duke's of the world.