This naturally generates two distinct positions: 1. Certain neutral outsiders are now a threat; they are disliked. 2. Certain neutral outsiders are now an asset; they are especially liked.
But note that the whole conflict here is happening within the group. The risk here is twofold 1. The nativists manage to create a permanent enemy of some group resulting in war 2. The alienists manage to his themselves anyway, causing massive damage to their society
-
-
These tend to happen because the successors of these two original movements, because these movements are saying one thing but really mean another, tend to forget the joke and take the rhetoric completely seriously.
Show this thread -
A funny example of Alienist hypocrisy is that MP from Britain who supposedly took in foreign refugees but it was really the diplomat from some country (for a lot of money) but ended up somehow losing their house because of diplomatic immunity or something of this sort.
Show this thread -
We all know of the person who notoriously had their child killed by illegal aliens but justified it because of the good food trucks. When you are starting to annihilate yourself for the sake of your politics take a pause, ladies and gentlemen!
Show this thread -
The counter example of this, which has no doubt happened, would be a person justifying the loss of all their sons in war because they managed to kill a few of the hated out-group. The French pretty much depleted their society's great force and character this way.
Show this thread -
rather than claiming, as some men do, that these choices were necessary to be made and thus nations are trapped into degeneration, I'll note, evolutionarily, that the nations that survive are those who were able to produce and elevate leaders able to undertake other options.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
