Botond173
2mo ago
Also because that's what most of them were planning to do from the start i.e. to make some money in the US in order to return and pay off their debts and buy a house etc.
Botond173
2mo ago
You know perfectly well that is not at all what cancel culture is. You also know perfectly well that freedom of association as a concept traditionally present in American civic life applies to communities and groups, not individuals and private lives.
Botond173
2mo ago
I'm pretty sure you're aware that there used to be such a thing as freedom of association.
Botond173
2mo ago
We also need to consider that white suburban liberals absolutely love cats and dogs in general.
Botond173
2mo ago
I guarantee in the late 19th century there was in fact plenty of examples of massive population changes, even in more rural parts of the country
Even if we accept the moderate estimate that we're talking about 12k immigrants in a county of 110k residents in a span of 2 yrs, I'm pretty sure we're talking about a population influx on a scale and in a timeframe that surpasses any similar example from the immigration wave between 1880-1914.
Botond173
2mo ago
Springfield's city government estimated around 12-15k immigrants "in Clark County", on the FAQ, though it hasn't been updated in a while. Clark County as a whole has closer to 110k citizens,
We're still talking about a relatively enormous influx then though.
Botond173
2mo ago
Disregarding the trope concerning penis size, I can think of a couple of things:
-
Health problems. Due to sedentary lifestyles and unhealthy living in general, many middle-aged people have painful back problems, in which case they'll prefer to use cars that are high-riding, and those are normally big.
-
Safetyism. Heavier cars are more safe if you get into an accident.
-
The middle-class suburban soccer mom / NASCAR dad lifestyle entails carrying large amounts of baggage (heh) around on a regular basis (shopping at the mall once a week or every two weeks, taking the kids to practice). Thus, bigger and heavier card are handy.
Why do you think either cars or highways are ugly, as opposed to railroad tracks and trains? Why is a parking lot uglier than a railway station? Do you want to cram a low-IQ population into mass transit?
Botond173
2mo ago
Isn't the modern equivalent a present-day Cadillac luxury sedan instead?
Botond173
2mo ago
Yeah. Whenever this subject comes up, some people will bring up smartphones and touchscreens, how they didn't even exist, how much memory they process etc. It's just a nonsensical misdirection. In 1980, I'm pretty sure you could work as some well-off bigshot lawyer with one phone nr. and two rotary phones in your fancy office. Today if you're the lowliest subcontractor / gig worker / part-time employee wagecuck, you're still expected to have a smartphone and have one or two DM apps installed because you're expected to be available anytime, any place.
Botond173
2mo ago
A Cadillac series 62 was 1.8k in 1950 dollars, which appears to be about 2/3rds of an annual salary.. I can't buy a car that crappy new, so I'll look at the car I can buy, a Nissan Versa for 17k. My salary as a freaking Gym desk worker is 40k/year, so a Nissan versa to me is cheaper than a cadilllac series 62 was for the average family in 1950.
That's apples and oranges though. Judging by the results of a Google search, the former was a rather fantastic looking, comfy luxury sedan, while the latter is just an average, plain modern sedan.
Botond173
2mo ago
I really feel like this historical perspective is seriously lacking in a country where the median age is under 40 and many folks no longer have communal contexts where they get exposed to at least a slice of history from their elders.
I think this has much to do with the proliferation of suburban environments, which are by nature very blue-pilling and have a socially isolating effect to a great extent. Back when that lame-ass, revolting, manufactured Canadian scandal around supposed unmarked mass graves of indigenous children massacred by the Church was still on the news, I posted the following observation here which is also relevant in this case:
This whole thing reminds me of the news stories about the children's mass grave in Tuam, Ireland, and of supposed mass graves in Tulsa, Oklahoma where racist mass-murdering demons buried the victims of the 1921 "race massacre", or so we're told.
When I try looking at these affairs without bias and prejudice, I try putting myself in the shoes of the average Western middle-class suburban white normie NPC, and frankly I realize that, unless some heretic specifically makes an effort to educate me on this, I'll probably have zero understanding of the following hard facts about the bygone days of the West:
1/ It was normal to bury people in unmarked individual paupers' graves, or even in unmarked mass paupers' graves (in the case of, say, an epidemic, a fire, a mass accident or some similar catastrophe) if nobody claimed the corpse, or if the relatives were too poor to, or unwilling to, afford a proper burial. This, in fact, was not rare.
2/ Back when national economies were yet too undeveloped to produce a surplus to be spent on, frankly, luxuries, there was exactly zero public support for spending tax money* to improve the material conditions of single mothers so that they have the same prospects in life as married wives**.
*Keep in mind, please, that, unlike today, milking the impregnators for child support under the threat of imprisonment wasn't an option either in most cases, because they were either dead, or already in prison/workhouse, or too poor to be milked for money.
**Again, let's be clear about this: back in the days of benighted Papist Ireland, or in any similar patriarchal society, I can assure you there were probably zero housewives willing to tolerate the spectre of the government basically confiscating a given % of her husband's income and giving it to unwed mothers in the form of state handouts. The extent to which Christian societies in such economic conditions were willing to go to look after the downtrodden was basically to shove them onto the Church and leave them to hold the bag, in exchange for them (i.e. the Church) getting a special social status. In the same way, the Church was basically expected to sweep up a portion of single men and women that were unmarriageable for whatever reason and train them to be monks, priests, missionaries and nuns, so that they were no longer a problematic pain in the butt to their own families. This was the implicit social consensus.
3/ Also, a society that poor is also unable to pay for lavishly equipped, professional, extensive police forces. This means extrajudicial punishment, communal vigilantism and mob justice was seen as normal and necessary by most people, at least to a certain extent.
4/ Stray dogs were normally slaughtered and their cadavers/bones were used for producing animal glue and other similar products, because you could be sure absolutely nobody was going to contribute material resources to founding and running comfy dog shelters. (I know this has nothing to do with these manufactured scandals, but I included it because we know that suburban white liberals just love dogs.)
On a different note, after checking the original comment by @Outlaw83, which I don't disagree with in particular, I think something needs to be pointed out: while it's definitely true that "actually, basically everyone was just poor back then", it's also true that a traditional society of strong community bonds and social capital will not tolerate someone just not caring about one's elders. This is not permitted, and earns you social ostracism at least. Frankly I'm even sure there were some laws on the books that made it technically illegal. I'll guess that such social bonds in the USA in the Great Depression era were already frayed by the forces of modernity to such an extent that was became an issue. Also, while it's true that society was willing to tolerate an extreme level of poverty back then, this didn't equally apply to old people, among other groups (say, widows etc.)
Botond173
2mo ago
This is one of the widespread consequences of demographic implosion which people don't normally address.
Botond173
2mo ago
Among the population of mothers with 1 child and with the opportunity for a 2nd, how many of them go on to get a 2nd?
I'd add that's a very relevant question, because wherever pro-natalist policies exist, I think this is their main real goal.
Botond173
2mo ago
Even smaller change going 2-3, etc)
I'd argue the opposite is true. Do you happen to remember that child car seat study that was referenced here a couple of times? Also, your accommodation expenses double when you go on vacation with 3 kids instead of 2.
Botond173
2mo ago
My wife can't wear her old shoes.
Am I the asshole for thinking this isn't that big of a problem?
Botond173
2mo ago
I can definitely recall his observation that the manufacture of one Supermarine Spitfire fighter aircraft took on average three times as many working hours as that of a comparative Bf-109 in Germany, for example.
Botond173
2mo ago
So what would a non-cringey but anti-woke moderate Republican narrative look like in your estimation?
Botond173
2mo ago
Compared to the rest of the continent... I don't know, that's a tough question.
Compared to Italy, Spain, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Hungary? Very certainly not.
It was not, for most average people, a country of cars driving through cities the way Nazi propaganda films made it look.
Not even Nazi propaganda films portray it as a country of average people in cars.
Botond173
2mo ago
The very mundane explanation for that is that after annexing Czechia and Moravia in 1939 the Germans instantly got their hands on enough weaponry of all sorts to equip roughly 45 divisions.
Botond173
2mo ago
However, I have to acknowledge that a great many things about my brother’s life became infinitely more constrained, more stressful, more irritating, when he had children. His ability to hang out with us, to do any activity or attend any venue that is not friendly to small children, is massively constrained by access to childcare.
But childlessness isn't yet(?) that normalized in general. Wanting to hang out with other singles will be more or less frowned upon as you age. The basic message you'll get is that "hanging out" is what the youngsters generally do. If you want to keep living that lifestyle you'll eventually lose most of your social circle, because people'll just move on. You'll no longer get invited to events etc. Being a parent is rightfully seen as a new chapter in life - you lose old habits and acquire new ones, your priorities and social environment change, you lose something old and gain something new etc.
Botond173
2mo ago
Correlli Barnett's works, however, paint a rather unflattering picture of the British war economy, don't they?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlli_Barnett#The_Pride_and_Fall_Sequence
Also, it was British colonists who came up with the legal concept of the white race in the late 17th Century. I'm pretty sure no Briton in the 19th Century would take serious offense at the argument that they have more racial similarity with Serbs and Bulgarians than with Haitian or South African blacks.
More options
Context Copy link