This triggers the ethnic nationalist

...

Other urls found in this thread:

heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/theodore-roosevelt-progressive-crusader
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

He was probably just talking about how the Irish are muricans too

Civic nationalism is absolute shit. Also remember that Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive and the equivalent of modern day liberals for his time. Civic nationalism is a cancer that is literally no different from globalism. Instead of it being
>we're all just human beings mang
It's
>we're all Americans mang
Both which attempt to build a foundation on sand. Civic nationalism is the calling crying of a corrupt decadent civilization that has realize that it's pushed the limits of it's ingroup to include too many people and now it has to try and forge a new identity on top of the corpse of the old.

Based Teddy

Time to go back to TRS

>to the American people
Niggers aren't human.

>everyone is American
The only reason this triggers me is because you fucks still can't use a map

Youre using buzzwords and sating nothing.

Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive in the sense that he gave a fuck about nature because he was an outdoorsman. Hence why he created national parks. To this day we have the best conservation system in existence. He was also a soldier, as was his family. He's the definition of a red blooded american. Naziboo faggot.

Yes, that does indeed trigger all the black supremacist liberal dogshit, all the muslim trash, all the tranny scum and etc.

Thanks for pointing that out.

>tfw the liberal PM of Canada was more conservative at the same time than the Republican president of America

>it's a civic nationalist uses the boogeyman argument
You're forgetting about ten other ebil boogeymen. Also you realize this board has always been a mix of ethno-nationalists with some dude weed lmao lolbertarians thrown in, right? The civic nationalism me is a meme

Don't confuse "progressive" in 1910 with progressive in 2010. Roosevelt was a hardcore nationalist who fully subscribed to the racist theories of his time and was obsessed with the manliness shit Sup Forums is always talking about. If he was around today he would probably be too conservative for the Republicans.

The only things that made him "progressive" by modern standards were his beliefs in the importance of preserving the country's environment (hence the national park system) and his dislike of monopolies.

...

>>/leftypol/

Deport the chinks then. Their allegiance lies with China, not USA.

>p-progressive doesn't meant progressive
I mean obviously the context is different and the extent of the progressivism is different but that doesn't mean wrong. The fact that you faggots haven't taken the traditionalist pill yet is kek worthy though. Keep lurking my friends.

>implying he wasn't talking about a country of white European Americans
>implying he could have envisioned a world with spics, niggers, faggots, dykes, jews, mudslimes, and the non-faggot white man a minority in his own country

>keeps posting the person that was President when the U.S was 90% white

you have to be a shitskin, your IQ is showing.

You guys think I'm not a white nationalist? White nationalism is not ethnic nationalism

...

It is in America. Don't confuse white nationalist and pan-european nationalism.

I keep trying to tell people, but they don't seem to care or want to listen. You don't have to pick Civic over Ethnic nationalism, and vice-versa. You're trying to make this into a political zero-sum game, when really it can be win-win. If you choose civic nationalism, but lack an overwhelming majority, you will end up with all ethnic groups being disenfranchised and competing for federal resources (China, United States, Russia, any multi-ethnic nation); especially in the USA since thanks to assholes like Teddy we have the government involved in the management of things like insurance. If you choose strict ethno nationalism, you alienate everyone around you (Israel), deprive yourself of potential economic gains due to political polarization (North Korea), and make it so that the only way you can expand your volk is through conquest.

The best way is to find a balance between the two. Remember, there's no point in having a state if there's nothing worth protecting, and there's can be nothing worth protecting without a functioning state.

...

Just because you're an ethno-nationalist state doesn't mean you have to shitty relations with your neighbors. The reason Israel is on such hostile terms with it's neighbors is because the overwhelming number of Jews in the country have only been there a few generations and the state of Israel itself is a completely artificial construct

>“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.

>And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

--Abraham Lincoln

Ethnic nationalism means rejecting white European immigrants. White nationalism means allowing white European immigrants.

>completely artificial construct
How would you describe any other country or civilization?

i don't think nigger crime was so relevant at his time

>the ethnic versus civil nationalism meme
What about us social nationalists?

>When you disagree with a nigga, but his get be too fine

Natural population movements, invasions, declines and growth, etc. Having a few million people come over on boats and planes, kick out the locals, and act as a giant military base for a foreign civilization (the west), and then have the same West prop them up is obviously not something that is going to make friends

Again, not in America.

You realize that's different from national socialism, right?

>a white person in America and a white person in Europe have the same ethnicity

White nationalism is civic nationalism for white people. Ethnic nationalism is like Britain wanting all the polish immigrants out.

Wise man.
Saddly those are a minority in Burgerland.

>wanting to rally all of the Germanic people under one flag
that's ethnonationalism. It's literally in the first chapter of Mein Kampf what the fuck are you doing

What? This does the opposite. He clearly says that someone who doesn't identify solely as an American is not an American, and that people who speak other languages aren't American. This rules out "African-Americans", who identify as black over American, and spics, who identify as Mexicans and speak Spanish. He also says that there is only one flag, yet the liberals burn that flag, while waving the Mexican flag. And he says there is only room for loyalty to one people, the American people, which rules out immigrants and the entire narrative that immigration is positive.

You realize I was joking, right? But doesn't it seem weird that the combination of the terms nationalism and socialism does not yield the same thing when they switch positions? Doesn't it seem weird that social nationalism is more socialist than national socialism, and national socialism is more nationalistic than social nationalism?

He was literally condemning what he called "any man who carries a hyphen about them," meaning african-amerucans and irish-americans. He thought of nogs as the most "effeminate" race and was pro a united america because anglo saxons were the most numerous at the time. He called anglo saxons the master race and thought of white america as the pinnacle of civilization.

Teddy was a progressive in the sense that he fucked up corporations and expanded government power (that could be good or bad; that's a separate argument). However, he is nowhere close to a modern liberal. The guy was a hardcore nationalist and makes Trump look like a wimp on immigration. Also, he was actually racist.

whoa muh murica muh constitution whoaaa made me think

Niggers are another species and we cant coexist

That's not what I'm arguing at all you stupid fuck

The problem is that the foundations were the same you mong. The same universalist mindset that if we set everyone to the same standard and force them to assimilate that they will be indistinguishable in behavior than the host population.

He was literally the American Churchill. Teddy is pseudo-based, but he's actually another shabbos goy.

America was still 95%+ white when Roosevelt was in office.

He's talking about Irish Americans in that quote.
And guess what? The Irish are white.

That doesn't trigger ethnic nationalists at all.
We all believe that America should remain a white European country.

>universalist mindset
What the fuck are you talking about? Teddy wasn't a "universalist" he merely wanted immigrants to America (mostly from Ireland and Germany at that time) to assimilate and become Americans. When you immigrate to a foreign country, you are supposed to adopt their customs and their ways. It's how it works. That's nationalism.

>the foundations
You're assuming progressive applies to all his views. He was only an economic progressive.

This. He was bad ass but I would take Jackson anyday

It was closer to 90%. You also have to remember though that the country had become inundated with recent European migrants since the late 1800's from countries that before had virtually zero European immigration. Tons of Poles, Italians, and Jews. This caused upheaval in and of itself. I mean you could argue that they all assimilate, Poles surely did however the super majority of Italian-Americans live within a few hundred miles of each other (overwhelmingly in the North East) so they didn't assimilate like other immigrant groups like the, same with Jews, Jews overwhelming are still in about ten major cities. It may not seem harmful at first but when you have shifting demographics that urbanized as a trend based on ethnic lines and lifestyles versus what America was for most of it's history, an agrian nation, it causes problems. The trend of urbanization would have happened anyway but as fast as it did. Italians and Jews have an aversion to farm life unlike Anglo-Saxons, the Irish, Germans, Scandis, and to an extent Poles.

wow so deep holy shit let me get myself together

i almost fell out of my chair

. . .

>mostly from Ireland and Germany at that time
No they weren't you stupid fuck. In the late 1800's they started letting in more Eastern Europeans, Jews, and Southern Europeans and it got so bad that you had entire mini cities that almost predominantly spoke their mother tongue.

...

*but not as fast as it did

who is this theodor roosecuck?

...

Wut

>these two females are the "same" race; the white race

lul

>he still called American, African-Americans
>hypen-american

You're grandfather didn't fight in world war 2 for his country to become 56% white you filthy civic nationalist.

damn you're stupid

only works with western yuropoors. slavs don't even properly assimilate

We need to hit the reset button on civilization soon, we keep putting it off, but everyone is too scared.

>posts facts
>can only reply with y-you're stupid

By fighting they did.

This, even the French are a bit of a stretch. I'd rather keep to Germanics and non-continental celts (ie Irish, Scottish, Welsh)

Why is it whenever a Vietnamese shows up, they always inevitably talk shit about China? Are your people really that inferior and pathetic? Not even the Japanese or Koreans talk shit about them that much. Are you still butthurt over being colonized 1,000 years ago, Nguyen?

I pray to Kek for yellowstone to go off every day

> I'd rather keep to Anglos and only Anglos

Agreed.

you're stupid because you missed his entire point and instead latched on to a miscellaneous fragment of his post to correct and make yourself feel superior.

>civic nationalism works for 200+ years
>only stops working once people start actively sabotaging it from the inside
>civic nationalism doesn't work guys

...

Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson knocked apart the separation of federal powers by connecting the President directly to public opinion/mandate of the people

>civic nationalism work for 200+ years
>it actually doesn't because the second you introduce people who aren't North Western European the entire country goes to shit
Also the reason it "functioned" is because the states were largely independent and you didn't have the population density that put pressure on people to urbanize nor the scarcity of resources.

Last time I checked English is a European language.

I stand strongly by my original statement... Can we discuss this, like we might go back 100+ years in technology advancement, but at least we know it's a better starting point. Remember when they didn't charge us for water? Me either...

My bad. "Steward of the people" was what TR coined

>During his presidency, Roosevelt immersed himself in the writings of Abraham Lincoln as he sought inspiration for his ever more expansive view of executive power. In his autobiography, TR cast himself as the “steward of the people,” charged with the right and duty to do whatever the needs of the nation required unless the Constitution or the laws expressly prohibited such action.[15] In other words, he believed that the President did not have to cite some specific grant of power to justify his actions.

>This, however, was a novel view of executive power, and one that far exceeded the Jackson–Lincoln view he claimed to be following. Whereas Lincoln had claimed military necessity and was careful to cite specific constitutional provisions to justify his actions, Roosevelt was under no such necessity but merely thought that he could take whatever affirmative measures would advance the public welfare as long as they were not specifically prohibited.

>Roosevelt’s stewardship theory thus unmoored presidential power from the Constitution and made it directly accountable to the people. It is not uncommon today for progressives to give short shrift to constitutional questions or to cite phrases such as “We the people” and “the general welfare” rather than specific constitutional provisions to justify their proposals.

heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/theodore-roosevelt-progressive-crusader

He was talking about how ethnic Europeans (Italians, Germans, etc.) came here and held on to their culture instead of integrating into British-American culture.
Do you seriously think that Roosevelt was an egalitarian who wanted whites and blacks to be equal?

Sadly your majority is being raped sad killed by your recent influx of a minority also known as rapeugees.

Go suck a mudslide dick nigger lover.

Also, remember that time a German went to the moon?
I'll wait...

You are fucking historically illiterate. For 200 years America was a country explicitly for WHITE people.

>Also you realize this board has always been a mix of ethno-nationalists with some dude weed lmao lolbertarians thrown in, right?

Get a load of this newfag. Let me guess, you just hopped on the bandwagon when the election started? Just a few years ago, Sup Forums was predominantly libertarian. Most of the stormweenies were ostracized after m00t and the other mods cracked down on them. Sup Forums has only recently become a total cesspool again

I've been here for far longer than the election. It was always full of "stormx" or whatever. Also why are you proud that moot censored everything anyway? That's not the point of this place.

>only English speakers can be American
absolutely based, mexican """immigrants""" BTFO

Unusually accurate

>asians haven't been here for over a hundred years
>black people weren't freed over a hundred years ago
>the absurd amount of racial tension caused by the irish doesn't matter just because they were white

Teddy Roosevelt was literally a liberal. Don't forget the first conservative Republican was Warren G. Harding.

>asians haven't been here for over a hundred years
>black people weren't freed over a hundred years ago
>the absurd amount of racial tension caused by the irish doesn't matter just because they were white
Nice strawmen you've built there. No one is saying that there were no non-white, it's just that they were such an insignificant percentage of the population and the economic, social, and political life that they didn't effect the culture or body politic at large. As for the Irish what about them? Obviously there was tension there but I'm not sure what you're trying to imply by bringing that up and passive aggressively stating
>the irish doesn't matter just because they were white
Because no one said that, it's just that they assimilated eventually.

>Because no one said that, it's just that they assimilated eventually.

And so did everyone else for a good period of time.

>it's just that they assimilated eventually.
Well, they didn't, really. The Irish immigrants made America more like Ireland; however, while becoming more like Ireland isn't desirable, it's tolerable, whereas become like Africa or Mexico is intolerable.

but.. they are more human.. and we have neanderthal in us.. please educate yourself...

racism is worthless when you lower ur self to nigger level.

>blacks have assimilated
>asians have assimilate
>jews have assimilated
>hispanics have assimilated
But they didn't. The fact that there are still somewhat distinct Asian, black, hispanics, jewish communities and identity says that they haven't. Meanwhile almost all Irish descendant people are mutts with other Europeans, even those whose parents showed up not too long ago.

They assimilated in the sense that since they were still European their culture was more similar and it didn't radically change the social and political landscape on a national level

Roosevelt's were jews

So Roosevelts were really Rosenschafts?

There's a difference between not wanting to get the same picket fence house as everyone else and wanting to enact sharia. The asians do consider themselves american first, blacks do to. Mexicans are iffy, and Sup Forums shit aside there's a good reason why most jews don't want to go to israel. Just because someone eats with chopsticks doesn't mean he can't have the same ideals believe it or not.

>They assimilated in the sense that since they were still European their culture was more similar and it didn't radically change the social and political landscape on a national level

Well, "radically change" here is just a relative term. Perhaps they didn't radically change it compared to black and brown immigrants, but some would say that things like FDR's New Deal were "radical", and progressive policies like those would not have gained a platform without the more socialist Ethnic whites overpowering Anglo-America.

>just because they don't assimilate doesn't mean they don't assimilate
lel

Fair enough

Civic Nationalism has been around since the days of Rome kid

And how did that turn out for Rome? The Romans were no longer Roman and ended up displaced by the people they conquered