Sri Lanka Will Always Be Ceylon

Flanders

Verified User
April 5, 2019
Buried lede: So now we have caravans loading up with migrants from Sri Lanka, Congo, Haiti...?
By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...with_migrants_from_sri_lanka_congo_haiti.html

The longer ruling classes control a totalitarian system the more brutal the people become. It took centuries for people in the Orient and Africa to become as brutal as their leaders. The American people are getting there in one century thanks to the Democrat Party. Bet your last buck that Nancy Pelosi and Upchuck Schumer will bring in those caravans from Ceylon.

I went to Colombo, Sri Lanka in my long ago youth when it was called Ceylon. It was a God-awful place then, and the people were worse. I doubt if the people trying to come here today are any better.

The first time I went ashore in Colombo I saw a dozen or very scary people crawling towards me in the dim lit. Needless to say I did not know if I should run back to the ship, or ignore them. Luckily, an old-time seaman was with me. He pulled some coins and paper money and threw them at the advancing hoard. He laughed and explained that he always kept unspent currency from a country he left. He called them “beggar notes” to be used if and when he returned to a shit hole port as he did that evening.

Mutilating infants so they could be beggars was Ceylon’s contribution to civil society although it is common practice elsewhere.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...j0i22i30j0i22i10i30j33i160j33i299.utVdPJSuY_8

Incidentally, every time my family watched that TV show Columbo, (spelled with a u) I thought “How good can a detective be with that name?” I can only image what Ceylon is like now that it is the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. That is a name that warms the hearts of every double-talking American Socialist. It implies democratic ideals implemented by Socialists in a Republic. How has that been working out for used-to-be-free Americans?

Incidentally, to me Myanmar will always be Burma.

I often say Formosa. I do it because over the years I noticed that it drove liberals up the wall. I say Formosa because it confuses liberals with Taiwan. I often say Peking instead of Bejing because it annoys China’s ass-kissers on the Left. There are more countries whose names changed since my youth, but I still think of the names they went by before I swallowed the anchor.
 
Your inability to keep up with the name changes of different countries is probably more indicative of your advancing Alzheimer's disease.
(Did you know that East Germany no longer exists?)
 
It's the Republican Party that is brutalizing American national character.

To jimmymccready: No it is not. It is Socialism’s moral filth that is turning the American people toward brutality. The most obvious example is the illegal aliens the Democrat Party is forcing on the country. Not only do those illegal aliens brutalize the American people, Socialists/Communists give sanctuary to the murderers, the rapists, and every other criminal here illegally. To hear Democrats tell it illegal aliens only come here for jobs. Before long the American people will have no choice but to meet brutality with brutality.

Note that Democrats must fight on the side of brutality in order to protect their political gains. Naturally, Socialists/Communists wrap their garbage in the tax collector’s morality.

Americans in the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century were the envy of the world because they did the most good for the most people. There is no way Socialism can do the most good for the most people.

Socialism/Communism in the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century changed the country’s direction. Communists made the change by convincing useful idiots: “If it is not perfect it is no good.” Ergo, only Socialism can be perfect. Perfect means Utopia to Democrat Party Socialists. The fact is that their Utopia must be built on brutality.

The Democrat Party’s support for violence against white Americans is only one result of the change they instituted. In short: One brutal act on top of another must lead to a reaction. The tragedy is that the Democrat Party’s hatred is so entrenched in the halls of power the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century’s lost national character may never be recovered.

Finally, it was male white Christian missionaries who devoted their lives to stopping governments from throwing girl babies in the river in many parts of the world. Today, Democrats claim they are the party of women while they slaughter millions of infants of both sexes. Democrat women are leading the slaughtering in case you have not noticed.

Nothing is faster than infanticide when it comes to transforming the national character into a nation of brutal people.

p.s. China’s Communism evolved from centuries of government brutality.
 
Flanders: (1) You have no idea what is Socialism.

(2) The Dems support border security that works. No one gives sanctuary willingly to murderers. Overwhelmingly aliens come here for a better life, with jobs and lack of fear from oppressive governments.

(3) Drop the 'brutality' threat this instant. Any American who brutalizes any immigrant will meet the awesome brutality of American governments and the defense by decent American people.

(4) "Americans in the 19th century were the envy of the world because they did the most good for the most people" is an absolute falsehood. Destruction and ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples, enslavement of blacks, brutality toward Hispanics and Asians and immigrants from Europe easily refute your claim.

(5) No one is urging violence against white Americans. That is a claim worthy of those used by white Europeans in the twentieth century.

(6) White male missionaries were often the wedge that shattered communities such as in Hawaii and New Zealand and the American west, introducing disease and famine.
 
April 5, 2019
Buried lede: So now we have caravans loading up with migrants from Sri Lanka, Congo, Haiti...?
By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...with_migrants_from_sri_lanka_congo_haiti.html

The longer ruling classes control a totalitarian system the more brutal the people become. It took centuries for people in the Orient and Africa to become as brutal as their leaders. The American people are getting there in one century thanks to the Democrat Party. Bet your last buck that Nancy Pelosi and Upchuck Schumer will bring in those caravans from Ceylon.

I went to Colombo, Sri Lanka in my long ago youth when it was called Ceylon. It was a God-awful place then, and the people were worse. I doubt if the people trying to come here today are any better.

The first time I went ashore in Colombo I saw a dozen or very scary people crawling towards me in the dim lit. Needless to say I did not know if I should run back to the ship, or ignore them. Luckily, an old-time seaman was with me. He pulled some coins and paper money and threw them at the advancing hoard. He laughed and explained that he always kept unspent currency from a country he left. He called them “beggar notes” to be used if and when he returned to a shit hole port as he did that evening.

Mutilating infants so they could be beggars was Ceylon’s contribution to civil society although it is common practice elsewhere.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...j0i22i30j0i22i10i30j33i160j33i299.utVdPJSuY_8

Incidentally, every time my family watched that TV show Columbo, (spelled with a u) I thought “How good can a detective be with that name?” I can only image what Ceylon is like now that it is the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. That is a name that warms the hearts of every double-talking American Socialist. It implies democratic ideals implemented by Socialists in a Republic. How has that been working out for used-to-be-free Americans?

Incidentally, to me Myanmar will always be Burma.

I often say Formosa. I do it because over the years I noticed that it drove liberals up the wall. I say Formosa because it confuses liberals with Taiwan. I often say Peking instead of Bejing because it annoys China’s ass-kissers on the Left. There are more countries whose names changed since my youth, but I still think of the names they went by before I swallowed the anchor.

Jesus Christ I can practically smell old people after reading this post. There has never been a more boomer thing ever written.

1. "I was at a random port town in a country once for a small period of time and saw some beggars, therefore they are a nation of uncivilized savages with no redeeming value." Like look, the beggars congregate in the touristy areas, at least the ones the government doesn't throw natives out of and treat as a reserve for privileged westerners. This is the case in virtually every poor country with a tourist industry, the government walls off areas for wealthy tourists because they don't want pestering beggars giving the place a bad name. But they don't give a shit about docks and stuff usually so you got the full brunt of the beggars. One exception is Cuba, they don't wall off beaches there and you can freely intermingle with the natives. Strangely there are almost no beggars there either because it's a horrible totalitarian evil society that actually takes care of its people and thus has basically no homelessness or poverty. Which I constantly hear of in the US as issues that are impossible to deal with. But Cuba dealt with them somehow even though they're much poorer. Go figure. Anyone good luck to the neocolonies like Sri Lanka still following the road their former colonial masters set out for them like good running dogs, and get rewarded by having hordes of their people turned into beggars and having to treat their own countrymen like invasive animals to be brushed aside and kept out of the sight of visiting royal dignitaries from visiting dignitaries from the world nobility, white civilization.

2. FYI Ceylon was a name that the Portuguese pretty much invented when they arrived. When Ceylon achieved independence, the Sinhalese majority took control of the countries and began instituting a number of reforms to emphasize the country as Sinhalese, to the great displeasure of the Tamil minority. The Tamils had previously been hugely favored by the British administrators and basically treated as the teachers pets, they were given all the positions in the state bureaucracy and such. When the Sinhalese took over they were incredibly resentful and instituted a number of measures against the Tamil minority. One of these was changing the name to Sri Lanka, that's the the Sinhalese name for the place. Tmail's use a different name, Elam, and FYI a lot of Tamil's still use Ceylon and refuse to use Sri Lanka because they find the colonial name more neutral than the Sinhalese one.

So basically you're taking the side of the Tamil Tigers and are a terrorist. Congrats.

It actually doesn't have anything to do with the somewhat bizarre decision to formally name the country the "Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka". It's not a communist or socialist nation and never has been. South Asian countries just have some sort of obsession with giving themselves commie sounding names. For instance, Bangledesh is formally the "People's Republic of Bangladesh". Even though there is essentially no large socialist movement in the country. India goes with the rather banal "Republic of India", but it does declare itself a socialist state in its constitution. Which has pretty much no meaningful legal effect and doesn't change the fact that it's a capitalist country definitely in practice. I think it's a holdover from the Cold War - because the US was allied with Pakistan, and later China, both huge enemies of India, neighboring enemies of Pakistan were pushed into the Soviet sphere of influence for strategic reasons even though they were not really communist. Even after all this time India still basically has a Russian supplied armed forces, even under "based" "nationalist" "right wing" Modi. While Pakistan is happily placing M-16's on the border with Afghanistan, looking the other way and whistling for a bit, and then turning around like "Whoops, I wonder where the those went?"

Also the practice of mutilating infants to make them more useful beggars is basically an Indian one. Indians are based and right wing now due to Modi though so I guess you're not going to bother criticizing them.

As for the implementation of socialist ideals in America, we have no clue as to how that would work out as at no time has a government in America existed that strayed the least bit from pretty standard boring western liberal and imperialist ideology. Our president is still elected by an electoral college, this is essentially a relict of feudalism inherited from the Holy Roman Empire. We still have fucking middle ages ideas in our fucking constitution. There's nothing radical about America. The most radical time in American history was that time Debbs got 6% of the vote.

3. FYI the name change to "Myanmar" was a move by the fascist nationalist Burmese military government, who also wanted to spit in the face of ethnic minorities basically and rename the country after their own ethnic group. I'm glad that that you're taking the side of the Muslim Rhakine refugees and refusing to use that name, it's very progressive of you.

4. Wow using Formosa really does make you seem old. Again that's the fucking Portuguese name. Taiwan is the name used by the Chinese, because the Taiwanese are Chinese it is also the name used by residents of Taiwan province in China. I'm sort of noticing a pattern here, you're basically pissed that white people lost all their colonies and have decided to act petty and still use the colonial names. You know this isn't going to ever make white people rule the world again.

5. Peking was never anything. In the 19th century western Chinese scholars developed a standard for phonetically describing Chinese words using latin characters. The rules of this system did not at all follow the phonetic conventions of the way latin characters are used in English though. Strange as it sounds, "Peking" was supposed to be pronounced the exact same as "Beijing". But people who didn't know anything about the actual rules of the spelling system just started reading it using English phonetics, so you get "Pay-king", which was never at any point anything like the actual name of the city. Basically you are proudly misprounouncing some letters that some 19th century scholar arbitrarily decided to use to represent "Beijing". I truly hope this act of bravery and rebellion provides you with the satisfaction you desire.

Honestly the way most people pronounce "Beijing" is wrong anyway, "Beijing" is the spelling of the Pinyin latinization system, which was developed by the Chinese Commies in the middle of the 20th century to do away with the multitude of ass backwards systems westerners had invented to write Chinese over the years. But people again make the same mistake, they don't actually know the rules of Pinyin, so they come up with vague approximations of how it would be said if it were an English word. This often means pronouncing the "jing" syllable with some foreign sounding Frenchy "zhing" instead, because it looks a bit like how you would say some words of French etymology in English, so we start using French etymology for some reason, because again English spelling is garbage and has no rules, it is the calvinball of scripts. But properly it's just a simple "bay-jing", just a regular j, no weird French shit about it, as that phoneme doesn't even exist in Mandarin Chinese actually. Honestly "Peking" might actually sound closer to how the word actually sounds to a regular Chinese person than the beizhing shit. So again, I appreciate your work in achieving the goals of the Chinese communist party, and your deep respect for Chinese traditions and the Chinese government and people. I will pass along your sentiments to the local party boss and see that you are rewarded comrade.
 
I do the same thing sometimes though. I hate this shit with "Spain", it will always be "Al-Andalus" to me. Inshallah.

I also prefer to use the term 夷, AKA "barbarian" in Chinese, for white people too. In protest of the 1860 Treat of Tientisn, which literally had a subsection officially banned the Chinese from calling Americans, Russians, French, and British citizens 夷, because it hurt the poor little feelings of the 夷's too much and the 夷's thought it was raaayyyyccciisss. Cry me some more tears 夷.
 
I have to point out here that the 夷's literally invented hate speech laws basically right there. Which they spend all their time whining about and being resentful over these days, why can't I say da n-word if da rapper can?

But oh Chinese government official how dare you call a holy member of the world nobility 夷? Do as I say, not as I do...
 
To jimmymccready: No it is not. It is Socialism’s moral filth that is turning the American people toward brutality. The most obvious example is the illegal aliens the Democrat Party is forcing on the country. Not only do those illegal aliens brutalize the American people, Socialists/Communists give sanctuary to the murderers, the rapists, and every other criminal here illegally. To hear Democrats tell it illegal aliens only come here for jobs. Before long the American people will have no choice but to meet brutality with brutality.

Note that Democrats must fight on the side of brutality in order to protect their political gains. Naturally, Socialists/Communists wrap their garbage in the tax collector’s morality.

Americans in the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century were the envy of the world because they did the most good for the most people. There is no way Socialism can do the most good for the most people.

Socialism/Communism in the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century changed the country’s direction. Communists made the change by convincing useful idiots: “If it is not perfect it is no good.” Ergo, only Socialism can be perfect. Perfect means Utopia to Democrat Party Socialists. The fact is that their Utopia must be built on brutality.

The Democrat Party’s support for violence against white Americans is only one result of the change they instituted. In short: One brutal act on top of another must lead to a reaction. The tragedy is that the Democrat Party’s hatred is so entrenched in the halls of power the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century’s lost national character may never be recovered.

Finally, it was male white Christian missionaries who devoted their lives to stopping governments from throwing girl babies in the river in many parts of the world. Today, Democrats claim they are the party of women while they slaughter millions of infants of both sexes. Democrat women are leading the slaughtering in case you have not noticed.

Nothing is faster than infanticide when it comes to transforming the national character into a nation of brutal people.

p.s. China’s Communism evolved from centuries of government brutality.

1. Someone moving somewhere else is not force. Also FYI if you want to find an immigrant criminal, you will. Immigrants are humans, therefore some of them are criminals. It is absurd to criticize them for the existence of criminals among their ranks, literally you're holding them to a perfect standard you'd never apply to native citizens.

2. You literally gassed them, are you under the impression that America's current stance with regards to enforcement of immigration law is not already pretty brutal? Is this supposed to be nice?

3. We are not thinking about political gains. That is projection. That is what's on your mind, you look at rates of white people going Republican and do a linear projection of Republican vote as white population decreases and you have a panic attack. Here's the thing about linear projections though, we can about 100% be sure that they're not going to pan out. Just do one in reverse and you'd find that McCarthy was supposed to win about 70% or so of the vote in the 1950 election due to how many white people there were back then and how Republican they are now. But that's not quite how it was was it? A linear projection is no better at predicting the future than it is at predicting the past, but usefully we can look up actual history with regards to the past instead of having a panic attack.

4. 19th century America was barely a free country. Literally a third or more of electoral votes were chosen by white supremacist single party totalitarian dictatorships in the south where minorities (or in some cases, majorities) of the populations voice was totally ignored and the state constantly used tactics of terror and repression to keep the ethnic minority in line. States in the north were only barely better, many of them were almost laughably corrupt, literally in the gilded age the country was so corrupt that politicians would openly boast about how corrupt they were as a point of pride, and politicians that were less corrupt were viewed with contempt as weaklings. Which with Trump seems to be the way things are returning to anyway. Also FYI the president still is not democratically elected, they are appointed by a meeting of 538 elites with no regard for the opinion of the American people, in an electoral college system. Which was common among nations, such as the Holy Roman Empire, when America was founded, as its a feudal institution from the middle ages; America is the only nation in the world still using a feudal based system to elect its leader, somehow we're proud of that.

5. Communist nations were not perfect, but they were better than capitalist ones. Poverty and homelessness were virtually eliminated and these societies made great leaps and bounds of progress in science, notably imitating the space race. If Communist nations were truly incompetent, why were they considered such serious competition in the 20th century? Western imperialists have this strange ideology, they believe in survival of the fittest of course, and they assume that to be themselves. But any time they're doing bad they slink into their hole and flatter themselves over their own perfection and invent conspiracies for why they, the stronger, are being unfairly beaten by the weaker. Which in proper evolutionary terms is nonsense, the only thing that matters is who survives. Capitalism survived because Capitalists believed in themselves, while in the 1980's the Soviet Union had an utterly cucked leadership who didn't really believe in anything and was constantly seeking to appease the capitalists. Still Russians even today acknowledge that things were much better living under communism than capitalism. Large majorities in eastern european nations also agree that things were better under communism, they hated being under the thumb of Russia, but they didn't hate everyone having a house. Which capitalists pretend is some unfathomably distant goal, we just have to have homelessness, nothing we can do about it. Oh wait some other society and some other system did away with it easily. In fact all you have to do is just build a house for every family, which is pretty fucking easy for society to accomplish. Capitalists don't *want* to do that, that's why it doesn't happen. They'd rather only build McMansions for millionaires and let them sit vacant for years on end desperately seeking to make a higher profit. Instead of just one simple home for every family.

6. I swear the way you idealize 19th century America reminds me of the way that ISIS followers idolize the Rashidun caliphate. Everything from 19th century America that does not currently exists, did not deserve to. It was the weaker. The law of natural selection weeded it out. It was not some conspiracy by the Jews to make the stronger lose to the weaker somehow. The Dodo was cute but it only survived because it was walled off from the rest of the world in its own island, had no pressure to evolve, and once it got exposed to predators from the dog eat dog world on the continent it was devoured. You want to make America some kind of island to preserve a state you imagine to be the universal ideal, if you were to succeed all you would wind up doing is remove evolutionary pressures from American society until a point in time comes when the walls you built are about as effective as the ocean was in protecting the Dodo. Your America will not change, it will have no need to do so safe within the walls. But it was also not survive.

7. Again with the telling colonial references. Yes white people often invented these tales of horrible brutality among others in order to justify their own self-interested colonial behavior. That's not why we conquered these countries though. Also FYI the fetal rights movement is an entirely modern invention, the pre modern church did not care about abortion or consider it equivalent to murder. Like most reactionary fantasies you are projecting your own entirely modern desires onto these people from the past that you have some boyish naive worship of. The people from the past were just people. They did what they did to survive. Now they're dead. Don't think about them, if their ideas and movements died out, it was because they were weaker, if you want to survive in the future I'd recommend not modelling your behavior after those who were utterly eliminated long ago.

8. China's communism evolved as a reaction to the century of humiliation they endured in the 19th century. It still exists because it worked, and it's pretty fucking successful. It's different now than it was, because it evolved with the times. But America is different now than the collection of totalitarian white supremacist dictatorships and laughably corrupt fake democracies that we were in the 19th century, that America did not survive because it was weaker than the America that exists now. This America is not perfect, but we at least know for certain that's it's more perfect than that one, because if that America had been perfect it'd still fucking be here, it wouldn't have had any pressure to evolve and change. And it's not. It's in the fucking grave. Let it rest in peace, cease your desperate attempts at necromancing it back to life, if it died once I guarantee you it's just going to die again.
 
Flanders: (1) You have no idea what is Socialism.

(2) The Dems support border security that works. No one gives sanctuary willingly to murderers. Overwhelmingly aliens come here for a better life, with jobs and lack of fear from oppressive governments.

(3) Drop the 'brutality' threat this instant. Any American who brutalizes any immigrant will meet the awesome brutality of American governments and the defense by decent American people.

(4) "Americans in the 19th century were the envy of the world because they did the most good for the most people" is an absolute falsehood. Destruction and ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples, enslavement of blacks, brutality toward Hispanics and Asians and immigrants from Europe easily refute your claim.

(5) No one is urging violence against white Americans. That is a claim worthy of those used by white Europeans in the twentieth century.

(6) White male missionaries were often the wedge that shattered communities such as in Hawaii and New Zealand and the American west, introducing disease and famine.

Past success breeds arrogance and pride, arrogance and pride breeds naval gazing, inward looking behavior which responds to outside challenges with resentment and doubling down rather than changing as necessary. As that society would have done before it had such success. This is the state of decadence in which that society because a brittle, fragile creature, the wind blows and it breaks rather than bend, and it takes it arrogance and pride with it to the grave. American society is a brittle, fragile society. The wind is blowing, and we decided to harden rather than bend. America now treats the rest of the world with arrogant and entitled tirades which are out of touch with reality, rather than gratitude for the incredible privileges we have as a nation that allows us to be successful.

There's over six trillion dollars worth of transfer every year from the global south to the global north due to neocolonial policies. Is America grateful to the global south for this? No, it calls them shithole countries and bans them. It's mad that it does not receive even more resources from these countries so that it's quality of life can dwarf their own by ever larger amounts. In turn it itself expects incredible gratitude for a few billion of foreign aid, mostly used to promote US interests, and utterly dwarfed by the trillions in neocolonial outflows. You know one day the global south are going to start respecting themselves and cut off the spigot that is keeping the decadent and brittle societies of the global north afloat. You can always identify the laziest members of society, they're the ones calling everyone else lazy and expecting the most from others. Like the master who doesn't even work but is furious about how his slave, who works all day, doesn't do enough. Every desire of the masters, they are totally open about. While the slaves keep their mouth shut and feign happiness, so that the master will not be bothered by outward expressions of displeasure on their part that reflect their actual feelings. Rightists are masters of projection of course. I'm sure the master is astonished when he gets his throat slit in the middle of the night by the slave he'd spent decades beating into silence, his external appearance was perfectly content, but the internal experience, the master of course doesn't consider.

It's like the dog who gets beaten for growling, and so eventually bites without warning; you removed the warning system.
 
To New! Imperialism and Genocide™: I used to charge liberals for using my threads in their attempts to sound intelligent. I would have charged you triple my usual fee.


Jesus Christ I can practically smell old people after reading this post. There has never been a more boomer thing ever written.

1. "I was at a random port town in a country once for a small period of time and saw some beggars, therefore they are a nation of uncivilized savages with no redeeming value." Like look, the beggars congregate in the touristy areas, at least the ones the government doesn't throw natives out of and treat as a reserve for privileged westerners. This is the case in virtually every poor country with a tourist industry, the government walls off areas for wealthy tourists because they don't want pestering beggars giving the place a bad name. But they don't give a shit about docks and stuff usually so you got the full brunt of the beggars. One exception is Cuba, they don't wall off beaches there and you can freely intermingle with the natives. Strangely there are almost no beggars there either because it's a horrible totalitarian evil society that actually takes care of its people and thus has basically no homelessness or poverty. Which I constantly hear of in the US as issues that are impossible to deal with. But Cuba dealt with them somehow even though they're much poorer. Go figure. Anyone good luck to the neocolonies like Sri Lanka still following the road their former colonial masters set out for them like good running dogs, and get rewarded by having hordes of their people turned into beggars and having to treat their own countrymen like invasive animals to be brushed aside and kept out of the sight of visiting royal dignitaries from visiting dignitaries from the world nobility, white civilization.

2. FYI Ceylon was a name that the Portuguese pretty much invented when they arrived. When Ceylon achieved independence, the Sinhalese majority took control of the countries and began instituting a number of reforms to emphasize the country as Sinhalese, to the great displeasure of the Tamil minority. The Tamils had previously been hugely favored by the British administrators and basically treated as the teachers pets, they were given all the positions in the state bureaucracy and such. When the Sinhalese took over they were incredibly resentful and instituted a number of measures against the Tamil minority. One of these was changing the name to Sri Lanka, that's the the Sinhalese name for the place. Tmail's use a different name, Elam, and FYI a lot of Tamil's still use Ceylon and refuse to use Sri Lanka because they find the colonial name more neutral than the Sinhalese one.

So basically you're taking the side of the Tamil Tigers and are a terrorist. Congrats.

It actually doesn't have anything to do with the somewhat bizarre decision to formally name the country the "Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka". It's not a communist or socialist nation and never has been. South Asian countries just have some sort of obsession with giving themselves commie sounding names. For instance, Bangledesh is formally the "People's Republic of Bangladesh". Even though there is essentially no large socialist movement in the country. India goes with the rather banal "Republic of India", but it does declare itself a socialist state in its constitution. Which has pretty much no meaningful legal effect and doesn't change the fact that it's a capitalist country definitely in practice. I think it's a holdover from the Cold War - because the US was allied with Pakistan, and later China, both huge enemies of India, neighboring enemies of Pakistan were pushed into the Soviet sphere of influence for strategic reasons even though they were not really communist. Even after all this time India still basically has a Russian supplied armed forces, even under "based" "nationalist" "right wing" Modi. While Pakistan is happily placing M-16's on the border with Afghanistan, looking the other way and whistling for a bit, and then turning around like "Whoops, I wonder where the those went?"

Also the practice of mutilating infants to make them more useful beggars is basically an Indian one. Indians are based and right wing now due to Modi though so I guess you're not going to bother criticizing them.

As for the implementation of socialist ideals in America, we have no clue as to how that would work out as at no time has a government in America existed that strayed the least bit from pretty standard boring western liberal and imperialist ideology. Our president is still elected by an electoral college, this is essentially a relict of feudalism inherited from the Holy Roman Empire. We still have fucking middle ages ideas in our fucking constitution. There's nothing radical about America. The most radical time in American history was that time Debbs got 6% of the vote.

3. FYI the name change to "Myanmar" was a move by the fascist nationalist Burmese military government, who also wanted to spit in the face of ethnic minorities basically and rename the country after their own ethnic group. I'm glad that that you're taking the side of the Muslim Rhakine refugees and refusing to use that name, it's very progressive of you.

4. Wow using Formosa really does make you seem old. Again that's the fucking Portuguese name. Taiwan is the name used by the Chinese, because the Taiwanese are Chinese it is also the name used by residents of Taiwan province in China. I'm sort of noticing a pattern here, you're basically pissed that white people lost all their colonies and have decided to act petty and still use the colonial names. You know this isn't going to ever make white people rule the world again.

5. Peking was never anything. In the 19th century western Chinese scholars developed a standard for phonetically describing Chinese words using latin characters. The rules of this system did not at all follow the phonetic conventions of the way latin characters are used in English though. Strange as it sounds, "Peking" was supposed to be pronounced the exact same as "Beijing". But people who didn't know anything about the actual rules of the spelling system just started reading it using English phonetics, so you get "Pay-king", which was never at any point anything like the actual name of the city. Basically you are proudly misprounouncing some letters that some 19th century scholar arbitrarily decided to use to represent "Beijing". I truly hope this act of bravery and rebellion provides you with the satisfaction you desire.

Honestly the way most people pronounce "Beijing" is wrong anyway, "Beijing" is the spelling of the Pinyin latinization system, which was developed by the Chinese Commies in the middle of the 20th century to do away with the multitude of ass backwards systems westerners had invented to write Chinese over the years. But people again make the same mistake, they don't actually know the rules of Pinyin, so they come up with vague approximations of how it would be said if it were an English word. This often means pronouncing the "jing" syllable with some foreign sounding Frenchy "zhing" instead, because it looks a bit like how you would say some words of French etymology in English, so we start using French etymology for some reason, because again English spelling is garbage and has no rules, it is the calvinball of scripts. But properly it's just a simple "bay-jing", just a regular j, no weird French shit about it, as that phoneme doesn't even exist in Mandarin Chinese actually. Honestly "Peking" might actually sound closer to how the word actually sounds to a regular Chinese person than the beizhing shit. So again, I appreciate your work in achieving the goals of the Chinese communist party, and your deep respect for Chinese traditions and the Chinese government and people. I will pass along your sentiments to the local party boss and see that you are rewarded comrade.

I do the same thing sometimes though. I hate this shit with "Spain", it will always be "Al-Andalus" to me. Inshallah.

I also prefer to use the term 夷, AKA "barbarian" in Chinese, for white people too. In protest of the 1860 Treat of Tientisn, which literally had a subsection officially banned the Chinese from calling Americans, Russians, French, and British citizens 夷, because it hurt the poor little feelings of the 夷's too much and the 夷's thought it was raaayyyyccciisss. Cry me some more tears 夷.

I have to point out here that the 夷's literally invented hate speech laws basically right there. Which they spend all their time whining about and being resentful over these days, why can't I say da n-word if da rapper can?

But oh Chinese government official how dare you call a holy member of the world nobility 夷? Do as I say, not as I do...

1. Someone moving somewhere else is not force. Also FYI if you want to find an immigrant criminal, you will. Immigrants are humans, therefore some of them are criminals. It is absurd to criticize them for the existence of criminals among their ranks, literally you're holding them to a perfect standard you'd never apply to native citizens.

2. You literally gassed them, are you under the impression that America's current stance with regards to enforcement of immigration law is not already pretty brutal? Is this supposed to be nice?

3. We are not thinking about political gains. That is projection. That is what's on your mind, you look at rates of white people going Republican and do a linear projection of Republican vote as white population decreases and you have a panic attack. Here's the thing about linear projections though, we can about 100% be sure that they're not going to pan out. Just do one in reverse and you'd find that McCarthy was supposed to win about 70% or so of the vote in the 1950 election due to how many white people there were back then and how Republican they are now. But that's not quite how it was was it? A linear projection is no better at predicting the future than it is at predicting the past, but usefully we can look up actual history with regards to the past instead of having a panic attack.

4. 19th century America was barely a free country. Literally a third or more of electoral votes were chosen by white supremacist single party totalitarian dictatorships in the south where minorities (or in some cases, majorities) of the populations voice was totally ignored and the state constantly used tactics of terror and repression to keep the ethnic minority in line. States in the north were only barely better, many of them were almost laughably corrupt, literally in the gilded age the country was so corrupt that politicians would openly boast about how corrupt they were as a point of pride, and politicians that were less corrupt were viewed with contempt as weaklings. Which with Trump seems to be the way things are returning to anyway. Also FYI the president still is not democratically elected, they are appointed by a meeting of 538 elites with no regard for the opinion of the American people, in an electoral college system. Which was common among nations, such as the Holy Roman Empire, when America was founded, as its a feudal institution from the middle ages; America is the only nation in the world still using a feudal based system to elect its leader, somehow we're proud of that.

5. Communist nations were not perfect, but they were better than capitalist ones. Poverty and homelessness were virtually eliminated and these societies made great leaps and bounds of progress in science, notably imitating the space race. If Communist nations were truly incompetent, why were they considered such serious competition in the 20th century? Western imperialists have this strange ideology, they believe in survival of the fittest of course, and they assume that to be themselves. But any time they're doing bad they slink into their hole and flatter themselves over their own perfection and invent conspiracies for why they, the stronger, are being unfairly beaten by the weaker. Which in proper evolutionary terms is nonsense, the only thing that matters is who survives. Capitalism survived because Capitalists believed in themselves, while in the 1980's the Soviet Union had an utterly cucked leadership who didn't really believe in anything and was constantly seeking to appease the capitalists. Still Russians even today acknowledge that things were much better living under communism than capitalism. Large majorities in eastern european nations also agree that things were better under communism, they hated being under the thumb of Russia, but they didn't hate everyone having a house. Which capitalists pretend is some unfathomably distant goal, we just have to have homelessness, nothing we can do about it. Oh wait some other society and some other system did away with it easily. In fact all you have to do is just build a house for every family, which is pretty fucking easy for society to accomplish. Capitalists don't *want* to do that, that's why it doesn't happen. They'd rather only build McMansions for millionaires and let them sit vacant for years on end desperately seeking to make a higher profit. Instead of just one simple home for every family.

6. I swear the way you idealize 19th century America reminds me of the way that ISIS followers idolize the Rashidun caliphate. Everything from 19th century America that does not currently exists, did not deserve to. It was the weaker. The law of natural selection weeded it out. It was not some conspiracy by the Jews to make the stronger lose to the weaker somehow. The Dodo was cute but it only survived because it was walled off from the rest of the world in its own island, had no pressure to evolve, and once it got exposed to predators from the dog eat dog world on the continent it was devoured. You want to make America some kind of island to preserve a state you imagine to be the universal ideal, if you were to succeed all you would wind up doing is remove evolutionary pressures from American society until a point in time comes when the walls you built are about as effective as the ocean was in protecting the Dodo. Your America will not change, it will have no need to do so safe within the walls. But it was also not survive.

7. Again with the telling colonial references. Yes white people often invented these tales of horrible brutality among others in order to justify their own self-interested colonial behavior. That's not why we conquered these countries though. Also FYI the fetal rights movement is an entirely modern invention, the pre modern church did not care about abortion or consider it equivalent to murder. Like most reactionary fantasies you are projecting your own entirely modern desires onto these people from the past that you have some boyish naive worship of. The people from the past were just people. They did what they did to survive. Now they're dead. Don't think about them, if their ideas and movements died out, it was because they were weaker, if you want to survive in the future I'd recommend not modelling your behavior after those who were utterly eliminated long ago.

8. China's communism evolved as a reaction to the century of humiliation they endured in the 19th century. It still exists because it worked, and it's pretty fucking successful. It's different now than it was, because it evolved with the times. But America is different now than the collection of totalitarian white supremacist dictatorships and laughably corrupt fake democracies that we were in the 19th century, that America did not survive because it was weaker than the America that exists now. This America is not perfect, but we at least know for certain that's it's more perfect than that one, because if that America had been perfect it'd still fucking be here, it wouldn't have had any pressure to evolve and change. And it's not. It's in the fucking grave. Let it rest in peace, cease your desperate attempts at necromancing it back to life, if it died once I guarantee you it's just going to die again.

Past success breeds arrogance and pride, arrogance and pride breeds naval gazing, inward looking behavior which responds to outside challenges with resentment and doubling down rather than changing as necessary. As that society would have done before it had such success. This is the state of decadence in which that society because a brittle, fragile creature, the wind blows and it breaks rather than bend, and it takes it arrogance and pride with it to the grave. American society is a brittle, fragile society. The wind is blowing, and we decided to harden rather than bend. America now treats the rest of the world with arrogant and entitled tirades which are out of touch with reality, rather than gratitude for the incredible privileges we have as a nation that allows us to be successful.

There's over six trillion dollars worth of transfer every year from the global south to the global north due to neocolonial policies. Is America grateful to the global south for this? No, it calls them shithole countries and bans them. It's mad that it does not receive even more resources from these countries so that it's quality of life can dwarf their own by ever larger amounts. In turn it itself expects incredible gratitude for a few billion of foreign aid, mostly used to promote US interests, and utterly dwarfed by the trillions in neocolonial outflows. You know one day the global south are going to start respecting themselves and cut off the spigot that is keeping the decadent and brittle societies of the global north afloat. You can always identify the laziest members of society, they're the ones calling everyone else lazy and expecting the most from others. Like the master who doesn't even work but is furious about how his slave, who works all day, doesn't do enough. Every desire of the masters, they are totally open about. While the slaves keep their mouth shut and feign happiness, so that the master will not be bothered by outward expressions of displeasure on their part that reflect their actual feelings. Rightists are masters of projection of course. I'm sure the master is astonished when he gets his throat slit in the middle of the night by the slave he'd spent decades beating into silence, his external appearance was perfectly content, but the internal experience, the master of course doesn't consider.

It's like the dog who gets beaten for growling, and so eventually bites without warning; you removed the warning system.
 
Back
Top