Poll of the Day > Trump official: Statue of Liberty poem is about Europeans

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://apnews.com/290fe000b4584ddca46a6eb36a74a703?

Some people are gonna say that this isnt racist

They are clearly wrong

---

How can it be racist? He didn't say the n-word.
---

Lol I love how they can just be open about racism and people will flock to defend it.

---

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

---

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

What ideals are you referring to? Living a better life?

---

EvilMegas posted...

What ideals are you referring to? Living a better life?

the specifics don't actually matter. more compatible ideals are preferable to less compatible ideals, for any country's immigration system, and for any particular set of ideals.

if you want some examples for USA, off the top of my head, maybe things like they don't execute people for adultery, and they don't force rape victims to marry their rapists, those kinds of things.

---

I'm actually too flabbergasted to respond at how off base you are.

---

EvilMegas posted...

I'm actually too flabbergasted to respond at how off base you are.

k, thanks for nothing I guess

---

Sahuagin posted...

maybe things like they don't execute people for adultery, and they don't force rape victims to marry their rapists

Can you point me to somewhere in America where people are advocating for people to be executed for adultery or for rape victims to marry their rapists?

Because, if not, it doesn't look like those values are being brought into the country.
---

Sahuagin posted...

k, thanks for nothing I guess

It's not my fault that I can't rationally respond to your ramblings.

---

I hate Trump, but I don't understand how France writing something on a statue they gave us means we have to offer green cards to people that will leach off society.

I forgot about how every single immigrant who ever came from Europe was rich and self sufficient upon arrival.
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

I forgot about how every single immigrant who ever came from Europe was rich and self sufficient upon arrival.

Fucking seriously

SkynyrdRocker posted...

I hate Trump, but I don't understand how France writing something on a statue they gave us means we have to offer green cards to people that will leach off society.

As if we don't have native-born Americans who "leach" off others every day?
---

SkynyrdRocker posted...

I hate Trump, but I don't understand how France writing something on a statue they gave us means we have to offer green cards to people that will leach off society.

Most of the people on this board leech off of us as natural born citizen. Also, France may have wrote it, but if it wasn't applicable then why accept it for so long?

---

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Obviously only rich people are allowed in, right?

But tbh, it wouldn't surprise me if the poem was only meant to include white people. The rich, wealthy people of yore were known to be hypocritical (kinda like today's people, actually...)- the biggest case in point would be the American Revolution. "Oh hey, we wanna be free from British rule. But owning slaves is still cool, right?"

Obviously not every person was/is like that, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the poem was meant for whites only.
---

It's not like Italian, Irish or Jewish immigrants were considered "white" at the peak of their immigration cycles into the US. They were a class below native-born Americans, but a class above black Americans.
---

RCtheWSBC posted...

It's not like Italian, Irish or Jewish immigrants were considered "white" at the peak of their immigration cycles into the US.

Yeah, that is true
---

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

This is a really stupid thing to say

Nothing in the original poem talks about race or preferring people from a certain region. You can tell by fucking reading it.

---

it was when it was written
---

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

I'm gonna take a crack at this, because it's probably the most nonsense thing I've ever read here.

A) there's no law saying you can't be a citizen because of something you believe in.

2) just because your home country has certain laws doesn't mean every individual believes in them. In fact those laws are probably why they're leaving in the first place, in search of a better place.

iii) denying entry because of the beliefs of one's country is pretty fucking racist in itself.
---

EvilMegas posted...

It's not my fault that I can't rationally respond to your ramblings.

It completely is your fault. You chose to be lazy with your response instead of making a calculated post that directly engages the topic. Your intellect is being stashed away when you might have had the chance to participate in an actual discussion instead of this sad banter.
---

GanglyKhan posted...

It completely is your fault. You chose to be lazy with your response instead of making a calculated post that directly engages the topic. Your intellect is being stashed away when you might have had the chance to participate in an actual discussion instead of this sad banter.

Based on the post in question I really cant blame him for being flabbergasted.

---

Also that guy said this.

"No one has a right to become an American who isn't born here as an American."

---

GanglyKhan posted...

It completely is your fault. You chose to be lazy with your response instead of making a calculated post that directly engages the topic. Your intellect is being stashed away when you might have had the chance to participate in an actual discussion instead of this sad banter.

You have defeated me. Now, I die!

*melts*

---

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

Compatible ideals like those of white south Africans, who held power in one of the most crazy racist countries on the planet
---

Blighboy posted...

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

Compatible ideals like those of white south Africans, who held power in one of the most crazy racist countries on the planet

It's still a racist country now just the other way around.
---

Fazeo13 posted...

Blighboy posted...

Sahuagin posted...

it is probably true that the poem is referring to people with western ideals. for all I know the original poem is racist, but preferring immigrants with compatible ideals over immigrants with incompatible ideals is not racist.

Compatible ideals like those of white south Africans, who held power in one of the most crazy racist countries on the planet

It's still a racist country now just the other way around.

obviously you can't be racist towards white people...
---

Back in the early 20th century the only ones turned away in immigration were those found to be mentally insane or those with major health problems. If you got on a boat and arrived in America you were taken in barring those two issues, so yeah acting like it only referenced whites when Irish and Italians were NOT considered white back then is ridiculous.

Yes it was, as it was the original intent behind the poem.

Just look at WHEN it was written. The poet had no interest in Africans or Asians in mind, as was the mindset of the turn of the century.

The dogwhistles are more like bullhorns these days.
---

TheWorstPoster posted...

Yes it was, as it was the original intent behind the poem.

Just look at WHEN it was written. The poet had no interest in Africans or Asians in mind, as was the mindset of the turn of the century.

So a bit like your mindset now?

There was actually a lot of interest in Africans back then

We ended up having a war about it

---

Honestly the US should close it's borders pretty soon, and concentrate on controlling it's own population. Just because something was ok in the past, does not mean it still is now.

Population control should be a center concern for every nation, and that starts with closing borders and only allowing as many people into a country, as leave to another.

Global warming etc, all show that while the world can support an even larger population then we have now, it will not be healthy for the planet, and is not sustainable long term. This might change in the future with technology, but for now, the focus should be to curtail population growl and try to actually reduce the total population of the world if possible over the next 50 years.

So yeah, it doesn't really matter what the Statue of Liberty says at this point, it's a new age.
---

wolfy42 posted...

Honestly the US should close it's borders pretty soon, and concentrate on controlling it's own population.

China tried that for a few decades with its One Child policy. It's now widely recognized as a disaster that badly screwed up male/female ratios.

Japan is in a similar boat, being the closest thing to a developed country with closed borders. Years of plummeting birthrates have now produced a country where demographics are so skewed, adult diapers outsell ones for children. This has led to a burgeoning crisis in Japan as massive numbers of retirees strain the social system as there are far fewer working-age citizens to care for them.
---

Mead posted...

There was actually a lot of interest in Africans back then

We ended up having a war about it

You're forgetting that in the turn of the century, and in the North ONLY (but not everywhere in the North), there were pushes for civil rights for blacks who live here, but NOT for African immigration.

Unless if you want to deliberately forget about things like this all due to Political Correctness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ota_Benga

wolfy42 posted...

Honestly the US should close it's borders pretty soon, and concentrate on controlling it's own population. Just because something was ok in the past, does not mean it still is now.

Population control should be a center concern for every nation, and that starts with closing borders and only allowing as many people into a country, as leave to another.

Global warming etc, all show that while the world can support an even larger population then we have now, it will not be healthy for the planet, and is not sustainable long term. This might change in the future with technology, but for now, the focus should be to curtail population growl and try to actually reduce the total population of the world if possible over the next 50 years.

So yeah, it doesn't really matter what the Statue of Liberty says at this point, it's a new age.

Globally population growth is leveling off as more and more countries face lower birth mortality rates they tend to try to have less children and experts think human populations will actually decrease dramatically in coming decades due to sub replacement fertility rates.

Meanwhile in the US many metro areas are facing major challenges due to urban decay and dropping population numbers. Detroit, St Louis, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh are just a few examples.

Immigrants wanting to work and start families benefits and enriches our country in just about every way imaginable.

---

darkknight109 posted...

wolfy42 posted...

Honestly the US should close it's borders pretty soon, and concentrate on controlling it's own population.

China tried that for a few decades with its One Child policy. It's now widely recognized as a disaster that badly screwed up male/female ratios.

Japan is in a similar boat, being the closest thing to a developed country with closed borders. Years of plummeting birthrates have now produced a country where demographics are so skewed, adult diapers outsell ones for children. This has led to a burgeoning crisis in Japan as massive numbers of retirees strain the social system as there are far fewer working-age citizens to care for them.

China would often kill female babies though, if there was no accidental pregnancies, and no skewing of gender that would not happen.

Japan is very overpopulated and has a large problem with men actually wanting sex, let alone having children. The whole economic thing will be less of a problem as automation becomes more common and the number of jobs reduce greatly.

Meanwhile, closing the borders and ensuring that all pregnancies are planned initially would make a big difference. Honestly any larger restrictions (like only x children per parent) would be very hard to implement. I think if we closed the borders and tied tubes etc around puberty for adults, that would eventually cause our population levels to drop significantly.

The US isn't really that over populated, but I do think we are at a point where we should start focusing on the citizens that are here, and ensuring that they have good lives, their children are supported and loved etc, and reducing our imprint on the world, as apposed to continuing to expand our population anymore.
---

wolfy42 posted...

Japan is very overpopulated

Having just spent a month there I can attest firsthand that no, they're not, especially outside of the major metro areas. Seriously, roughly a quarter of the country's population lives in Tokyo and Osaka. Get out into Aomori, Iwate, Hokkaido, or any of the other more "rural" prefectures and you'll find similar population densities as you would find in just about any other developed country.

wolfy42 posted...

and has a large problem with men actually wanting sex, let alone having children

The problem isn't sex drive, it's overwork.

wolfy42 posted...

The whole economic thing will be less of a problem as automation becomes more common and the number of jobs reduce greatly.

I could say the same about environmental impact.

wolfy42 posted...

I think if we closed the borders and tied tubes etc around puberty for adults, that would eventually cause our population levels to drop significantly.

Forced sterilization would be an absolutely enormous violation of personal freedoms, far more draconian than any reproductive policy ever implemented, and one that would stand precisely zero chance of ever becoming law or being enforced.
---

wolfy42 posted...

The US isn't really that over populated, but I do think we are at a point where we should start focusing on the citizens that are here, and ensuring that they have good lives, their children are supported and loved etc, and reducing our imprint on the world, as apposed to continuing to expand our population anymore.

The problem is most people moving to big cities like New York City (which is too damned small for a city that has 8 million people living in it, and is straining the infrastructure) or Los Angeles (which has some of the most restrictive laws and heavy pollutants of any city in the country). They refuse to move inland, unless if its to another city or sizable town. Take most of Nevada for instance. The vast majority state is Federal Lands protected by the National Park Service, even though the state could comfortably fit in 20 million people and still have enough room left over.

Even some states have no land that are not part of a city or town. I live in Massachusetts, and the only place in this state that are not part of any cities or states, are the State Houses at the Big E, which are owned and governed by their respective states (All of them are New England States), which they act something like embassies (and I believe it is the only place in the country to do so, since the Big E is the only "state fair" in Massachusetts, although it is a New England Fair).

TheWorstPoster posted...

They refuse to move inland, unless if its to another city or sizable town.

The issue is that people go where jobs are. I'm not going to move into the middle of nowhere unless I'm confident the employment prospects are as good or better than where I am now.

And right now cities are what's generating most of the jobs and most of the growth. Rural centres, primarily based around resource extraction, largely haven't been able to adapt to the changing needs of the economy and have been lagging behind their urban counterparts.
---

I admit, my perspective is skewed as I have pretty much always lived in areas that are in very high demand (bay area CA, near Seattle WA etc). The number of homeless, and the extreme cost of renting/living in such areas makes it seem like there are just too many people and too much demand.

I am also looking towards a future where, in theory, about 50% of the jobs we currently have will no longer exist. It won't happen over night, but neither do babies (well I mean...they get created over night hehe..but they take awhile to grow up).

I am not arguing at all that we don't have enough space, we do, easily, we have tons. I am arguing that there are just too many people on this planet and there is no need to keep increasing our population. If we could halve it, and split the resources more fairly, everyone would live a very nice life, there would not be so many people homeless or struggling, and every child would be appreciated and cared for.

People could still have kids, but just 1 per adult max, at least till there was a surplus (more people died then were born in a year) at which point you could enter a lottery for the extra babies if you already had one per adult in a relationship.

Forced sterilization could wait till after you have that many children I guess...but....I would imagine such a precidure could be improved apon quickly if we focused on it, to the point where it was pretty easy to do, and undo.....more like just a really great form of birth control.

Anyway, I know my opinions on this matter are not normal, or entirely reasonable. I strongly feel every child should be supported and loved, and that anyone who has a child should be in a position to care for it.

There are many ways to make that happen, but I think preventing any and all accidental pregnancies is the first step.

As far as closing the borders, I think it just makes sense to have an even-trade policy at this point or something close to it. We accept someone from another country if they accept someone from ours etc.
---

Next from the Trump administration, the 15 Bible verses that demand people be welcoming to immigrants are only relevant for Middle Easter... no wait
---

wolfy42 posted...

If we could halve it, and split the resources more fairly, everyone would live a very nice life, there would not be so many people homeless or struggling, and every child would be appreciated and cared for.

That has little to do with the amount of resources and more with distribution.

Take the bottom half of the world population - all 3.7 billion. The 42 richest people in the world have as much wealth as those 3.7 billion combined.

There's enough resources for everyone to live comfortable lives; they're just horribly unequally distributed right now.
---

darkknight109 posted...

There's enough resources for everyone to live comfortable lives; they're just horribly unequally distributed right now.

And just WHY do you think they're horribly unequally distributed?

I stopped reading at....

https://puu.sh/E5h9h/7742c7e607.png
---

Trump 2020
---

Mead posted...

wolfy42 posted...

Honestly the US should close it's borders pretty soon, and concentrate on controlling it's own population. Just because something was ok in the past, does not mean it still is now.

Population control should be a center concern for every nation, and that starts with closing borders and only allowing as many people into a country, as leave to another.

Global warming etc, all show that while the world can support an even larger population then we have now, it will not be healthy for the planet, and is not sustainable long term. This might change in the future with technology, but for now, the focus should be to curtail population growl and try to actually reduce the total population of the world if possible over the next 50 years.

So yeah, it doesn't really matter what the Statue of Liberty says at this point, it's a new age.

Globally population growth is leveling off as more and more countries face lower birth mortality rates they tend to try to have less children and experts think human populations will actually decrease dramatically in coming decades due to sub replacement fertility rates.

Meanwhile in the US many metro areas are facing major challenges due to urban decay and dropping population numbers. Detroit, St Louis, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh are just a few examples.

Immigrants wanting to work and start families benefits and enriches our country in just about every way imaginable.

Nah, every immigrant that comes here wants to leech off the system! I know that because Trump said it!

/Above comment maybe sarcastic in nature.

darkknight109 posted...

Can you point me to somewhere in America where people are advocating for people to be executed for adultery or for rape victims to marry their rapists?

muslims will happily tell you how much they support sharia law. whether that's an actual problem in USA or not I don't know, it's just an example of incompatible ideals.

Mead posted...

Nothing in the original poem talks about race or preferring people from a certain region. You can tell by fucking reading it.

I didn't say it was racist, I said maybe it is and I don't know it. you're right that I should read it. the poem uses the phrase "from her beacon-hand glows world-wide welcome", so that does seem to indicate maybe there's no preference in the poem. however, the poem definitely *was* written with westerners in mind.

keyblader1985 posted...

A) there's no law saying you can't be a citizen because of something you believe in.

not sure if that's true or not, but it is a good point and gets to the core of the issue. "should beliefs be a criteria for immigration". in at least extreme cases I would definitely have to say something approaching "yes". a capitalist democratic country should not import huge amounts of anti-capitalist anti-democracy immigrants. (or vice-versa).

keyblader1985 posted...

2) just because your home country has certain laws doesn't mean every individual believes in them. In fact those laws are probably why they're leaving in the first place, in search of a better place.

yes, it's about the individual's beliefs not the country's necessarily, though the culture of the area is going to be a very strong indicator of the general ideals held by the average person.

keyblader1985 posted...

iii) denying entry because of the beliefs of one's country is pretty fucking racist in itself.

aside from that it's the beliefs of the individual that matter not the country, that's literally not racist. race and country are at most slightly correlated. race has nothing to do with anything, it's ideals (beliefs) that matter.

thanks for the reply

---

however, the poem definitely *was* written with westerners in mind.

citation needed

---