237 years later - Has government dependency hurt Whites in America?

[bripat9643]

Wrong. Welfare is income taken from others at gunpoint and given to those who didn't earn it.

Sort of like the whites stole the Native Americans land.

They cant call it stealing because they either believe it was theirs to begin with or all actions taken by white are inherently right

Since your so righteous about stealing, why don't you donate your house to the nearest Indian tribe? After all, they own it, don't they?

 

[Freemason9]

There was no "system." There was simply stone-age savages living parasitically off of whatever land they happened to find themselves in.

So I get it now. The old "savage" rationale. There was a system. Whites didnt respect it and needed a handout. Not only did they give themselves a handout but committed genocide to do it in some cases.

There was no "system." Do the savages living in the jungles of Brasil have a "system?"

Yes, they have a "system." It's not yours, so you probably cannot understand it or acknowledge it.

As a test, though, we can see who survives when shit hits the fan and we have utter and complete catastrophic failure of our economic "systems."

I'm betting the "savages" will survive long after you've died fighting for your "property rights."

 

[Asclepias]

Really?

American Indians have the exact same kind of government you folks advocate for, small.

They did, as the indigenous people in this country, have the "inalienable" right to determine how best to run their own lands.

But it didn't work out that way. A "bigger government" came in and took their land.

That's generally how it works.

So are you saying they did own their land or that they didn't own their land?

Anyone who has ever done any serious reading about the Indians knows your claim is utter horseshit. The Indians didn't have any government at all. They were hunter gatherers. They also had no official territory boundaries to "their land." The areas where they wandered were much different only a few short years before the white-man appeared. That's because diseases wiped most of them out. The boundaries between the various tribes were in a constant state of flux because they were constantly warring against one another. The idea that they were the "owners" of the land where they happened to be hunting buffalo in any given year is utterly specious.

Libturds like to promote this idea that Indians owned the land before we did because it makes it easier to justify expropriating it.

Well no, Indians had government. And this is where your ethnocentricity..comes in. Because it wasn't "your" type of government. And they had a different idea of "ownership". And the "disease" that wiped them out was a form of biological warfare that Europeans used against Indians. Along with starving them out by killing (and almost wiping out) the buffalo. And if they didn't believe they had claim to the land, then they wouldn't have fought for it.

What happened to the American Indian was genocide. Pure and simple.

And by the very same government that enslaved black folks.

And that white folks were dependent on for 237 years.

Anyone that believes the same historians that said Christopher Columbus discovered America is not very bright.

 

[bripat9643]

They cant call it stealing because they either believe it was theirs to begin with or all actions taken by white are inherently right

So you were lying in your other post as well when you denied that you claimed a business expense was a form of welfare.

I said a business expense is s form of welfare. Get your facts straight. You are too stupid for words though.

Truly stupid is thinking that a business expense is welfare.

You lost me with the Dum Diversas rationale for taking the native Americans land.

Not surprising. You're easily lost. Almost everything you believe is total fiction. You have to be really stupid to think wandering around chasing buffalo means you own the land were the herds roam.

 

[bripat9643]

So I get it now. The old "savage" rationale. There was a system. Whites didnt respect it and needed a handout. Not only did they give themselves a handout but committed genocide to do it in some cases.

There was no "system." Do the savages living in the jungles of Brasil have a "system?"

Yes, they have a "system." It's not yours, so you probably cannot understand it or acknowledge it.

As a test, though, we can see who survives when shit hits the fan and we have utter and complete catastrophic failure of our economic "systems."

I'm betting the "savages" will survive long after you've died fighting for your "property rights."

I'm sure you'll be gloating about how you were proven to be right when all of civilization is wiped out.

What a moron.

 

[Asclepias]

So you were lying in your other post as well when you denied that you claimed a business expense was a form of welfare.

I said a business expense is s form of welfare. Get your facts straight. You are too stupid for words though.

Truly stupid is thinking that a business expense is welfare.

You lost me with the Dum Diversas rationale for taking the native Americans land.

Not surprising. You're easily lost. Almost everything you believe is total fiction. You have to be really stupid to think wandering around chasing buffalo means you own the land were the herds roam.

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it means they are not the rightful owners.

 

[bripat9643]

I said a business expense is s form of welfare. Get your facts straight. You are too stupid for words though.

Truly stupid is thinking that a business expense is welfare.

You lost me with the Dum Diversas rationale for taking the native Americans land.

Not surprising. You're easily lost. Almost everything you believe is total fiction. You have to be really stupid to think wandering around chasing buffalo means you own the land were the herds roam.

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

Since they are the rightful "owners," when are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

 

[Asclepias]

Truly stupid is thinking that a business expense is welfare.



Not surprising. You're easily lost. Almost everything you believe is total fiction. You have to be really stupid to think wandering around chasing buffalo means you own the land were the herds roam.

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

The white meaning or everyone elses?

 

[bripat9643]

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

The white meaning or everyone elses?

What is the black meaning of "own?" We're all dying to know.

When are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

 

[Freemason9]

Truly stupid is thinking that a business expense is welfare.



Not surprising. You're easily lost. Almost everything you believe is total fiction. You have to be really stupid to think wandering around chasing buffalo means you own the land were the herds roam.

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

Since they are the rightful "owners," when are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

To "own" something is simply to control it. That's all ownership is about--control. Some people are driven by the need to control other people.

There's nothing natural or scientific about the concept of "ownership." It is a manmade concept.

 

[Asclepias]

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

The white meaning or everyone elses?

What is the black meaning of "own?" We're all dying to know.

When are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

No such thing. The land is there for everyone to use. Racist whites made up the concept because they enjoy stealing shit from others.

 

[bripat9643]

The white meaning or everyone elses?

What is the black meaning of "own?" We're all dying to know.

When are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

No such thing. The land is there for everyone to use. Racist whites made up the concept because they enjoy stealing shit from others.

In other words, you don't believe in ownership. You're a dyed in the wool communist. You're also contradicting yourself claiming the Indians owned the land.

When are you doing to donate your house (stolen property) to the nearest Indian tribe?

 

[chikenwing]

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

Since they are the rightful "owners," when are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

To "own" something is simply to control it. That's all ownership is about--control. Some people are driven by the need to control other people.

There's nothing natural or scientific about the concept of "ownership." It is a manmade concept.

Ya so,so are bridges and cars and computers,hot dogs and ass holes whats your point.

That somehow if a human conceived the idea its wrong and evil??

There is nothing wrong with the concept of ownership,try kicking the bear out of his cave.he has some ideas about ownership also.

 

[Unkotare]

The white meaning or everyone elses?

What is the black meaning of "own?" We're all dying to know.

When are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

No such thing. The land is there for everyone to use. Racist whites made up the concept because they enjoy stealing shit from others.

You reveal new depths to your stupidity (to say nothing of your blatant racism) with every post.

 

[Vox]

They had vast quantities of land and resources handed to them via the U.S. Government.

and? are you able to eat land or grass?

oh, you have to WORK on that land to actually make a living.

Then it is NOT a handout.

Well yeah it was.

Even moreso that the military got involved in clear cutting and building infrastructure.

no, it was not.

if you have to WORK on a land to actually survive - that is not a handout.

let's give all the welfarists of nowadays a piece of land - there are tons of land in federal ownership - so they can repeat the easy life of those receiving it decades ago.

I am all for THIS TYPE of "handout".

Are YOU?

 

[bripat9643]

You have to be a subhuman, recessive gened mutation to believe that it doesnt mean they are the rightful owners.

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

Since they are the rightful "owners," when are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

To "own" something is simply to control it. That's all ownership is about--control. Some people are driven by the need to control other people.

There's nothing natural or scientific about the concept of "ownership." It is a manmade concept.

It's not a "man made concept." It's a human term that is applied to a fact of reality. The term "rock" is invented by humans, but rocks exist in nature. Ownership is a relationship between humans and non human things.

Of course, "ownership" certainly doesn't describe the relationship between the Indians and the territory they wandered over. For one thing, they never objected to the white man wandering over the same territory.

 

[Asclepias]

Wrong. You just have to understand the meaning of the word "own."

Since they are the rightful "owners," when are you donating your house to the nearest Indian tribe?

To "own" something is simply to control it. That's all ownership is about--control. Some people are driven by the need to control other people.

There's nothing natural or scientific about the concept of "ownership." It is a manmade concept.

It's not a "man made concept." It's a human term that is applied to a fact of reality. The term "rock" is invented by humans, but rocks exist in nature. Ownership is a relationship between humans and non human things.

Of course, "ownership" certainly doesn't describe the relationship between the Indians and the territory they wandered over. For one thing, they never objected to the white man wandering over the same territory.

But they did object to the white people saying they no longer had rights to do the same. They initially shared the land with the sneaky, lying, back stabbing Europeans until they figured out what losers you were. Then it was too late. whites gave themselves a handout and killed to make sure they got to keep it.

 

[bripat9643]

and? are you able to eat land or grass?

oh, you have to WORK on that land to actually make a living.

Then it is NOT a handout.

Well yeah it was.

Even moreso that the military got involved in clear cutting and building infrastructure.

no, it was not.

if you have to WORK on a land to actually survive - that is not a handout.

let's give all the welfarists of nowadays a piece of land - there are tons of land in federal ownership - so they can repeat the easy life of those receiving it decades ago.

I am all for THIS TYPE of "handout".

Are YOU?

The government gave away land for years after the Civil War, and there was no rule that said blacks couldn't participate. Complaining that whites got welfare in the form of free land is just pure bullshit since blacks could have had a share of the same land.

 

[chikenwing]

No such thing. The land is there for everyone to use. Racist whites made up the concept because they enjoy stealing shit from others.

So how come everyone isn't making my mortgage or property tax payment??

Don't worry when you grow up and have to start paying for some of your life you will understand some of the basics................ maybe

 

[Vox]

Well yeah it was.

Even moreso that the military got involved in clear cutting and building infrastructure.

no, it was not.

if you have to WORK on a land to actually survive - that is not a handout.

let's give all the welfarists of nowadays a piece of land - there are tons of land in federal ownership - so they can repeat the easy life of those receiving it decades ago.

I am all for THIS TYPE of "handout".

Are YOU?

The government gave away land for years after the Civil War, and there was no rule that said blacks couldn't participate. Complaining that whites got welfare in the form of free land is just pure bullshit since blacks could have had a share of the same land.

I do not specify the race - anybody on a welfare/handouts should get a piece of land and make a living from it.
If it is such an easy handout, shouldn't EVERYBODY be FOR it?