Brian🇲🇽🇮🇱

@BRICbreaker @kausmickey @Selkis_2028 We don’t care about sanctuary cities in the long run. That’s important only because of Biden w open border wave. We’re certainly not trading away permanent concessions for it.

Obviously. Only they'll do it 3x. Unfortunately that is the way. You will need an actual immigration law to stop it. But that law would include things that make both sides happy and very unhappy. For example, a good immigration law would make sanctuary cities impossible. And they could be pressured to obey immigration law by other state district attorneys, so even if a Democrat was POTUS, a republican DA could sue New York for sending their state too many illegals, for example. You would also need mandatory e-verify, with the failure to use it punishable by heavy legal fees for business owners and the c-suites. But Republican states can't even agree on that. See idaho. You would also need limits on H-1B visas. But the killer among all of this is that you would need to grant the people that are here now some sort of Spanish style legal status. At best you can remove those who bum rushed the border during the Biden years and disqualify all of them and I suspect most of them left already. But others who have been here for 10 years or more and working under the table, or with false documents, if they have no criminal record, they will have to be on the path to green card and citizenship. Maybe you make them pay a fine for Visa fraud if they want to stay.. That is the only way you get an immigration law and that is the only way you don't have a Democrat bringing in 10 million or more a year. Because it would be illegal to do so, codified into law, enforceable, and any district attorney from any state could enforce it. Both sides get something they want and both sides get something they don't want. But because none of those things will happen, it simply means when Gavin Newsom is president you will not have 10 million people rushing across the Mexican border... you will have 30 million people rushing through the Mexican border. Simple as that. Palantirs super spy drones won't be able to do anything about it. Remember, Biden's homeland security was literally flying people in. Gavin Newsom would do exactly the same. We have precedent now. No law... Everyone Trump removed returns twofold. The border that Trump brags about now swings wide open and Mexico does whatever the ruling party in Washington says it should do regarding that order. And if that government says leave it open and let them walk through, Mexico will oblige.

If Biden lets in 5-10 million migrants who aren't supposed to be here, and they get to stay, that's a huge victory for the Dems who did it, and a virtual guarantee that the next Democratic administration will open the floodgates again.

@DmitriThaSheep @mattforney Have you heard him talk? Seen his famous drink of water SOTU response?

@SpeakingBee @mattforney He doesn’t have a rich kid accent though.

Hate to say it bros, but I don't think Vance is gonna be the 2028 nominee. It'll take the polls a few months to catch up at least. Kamala Harris is going to stomp her pasty white competition. Either way, the future is bright for another ten years of Republican dominance.

@mattforney @DmitriThaSheep Rubio won’t have any ethnic solidarity outside Cubans. That upper crust overprivileged rich kid accent is going to turn off Chicanos and Puerto Ricans hard.

@mattforney @DmitriThaSheep Latinos are client voters in the USA. They’re guaranteed to go back to the party willing to pay to buy their votes. The GOP got up to 40% in 2024 only because Biden was attacking them with the open border and unlimited crime. Dems won’t be so vicious to their own voters forever.

@squirrelspcsuit @RogueWPA There used to be a whole subculture of whites who loved and admired the indians. But they were rough edged and kind of individualistic and they can’t get museum curator jobs anymore, even though men like them did the research and created the museums in the first place.

@RogueWPA White museum curators of native artifacts are the truest practitioners of woke praxis (their presentation of them is so bad you have to go to the museums run directly by the tribes to get any interesting detail or nuance)

Visited American Indian Smithsonian and about 1/3 of the exhibit space was on broken treaties. Very little about pre-Columbian lifestyles or how the Columbian exchange affected lifestyles in ways that were not coercive.

@RogueWPA The Navajos (with other local tribes) put up a big tent exhibit at the 2002 Olympics in Salt Lake City, most of it focused on Indian military service.

More things mostly or entirely missing from Smithsonian American Indian museum: - pre-Columbian migration, including the Bering straits migration - potlatch - slavery, manumission, and sacrifice - pain as means of reaching liminal states - Will Rogers - Indian military service

@RogueWPA All the archaeology from the Bering Strait is underwater. We would know a lot more about it if we could dig.

@ConnorEvinger @TonyPaul1984 They diversified the club.

@TonyPaul1984 I wonder who started the fire

Oakland Hills Country Club's new clubhouse will open to the membership on Easter Sunday. It is risen, four years after a fire destroyed the 100-year-old clubhouse. The new clubhouse cost $100M, and is a virtual replica, albeit with modern infrastructure and amenities.

@BFranklin2024 @mattyglesias Existing borders have not been respected by America or anyone. Negotiated treaties might get some respect in commerce and trade barriers, but nobody takes them seriously in diplomacy. Organizations are either organs of one power (NATO) or an embarrassment (UN) or both (WHO).

@SpeakingBee @mattyglesias I'm not sure what you mean. What I'm getting at are things like: (1) sanctity of exiting borders, (2) respect for negotiated treaties, + (3) empowerment of international organizations (the UN, NATO etc.). Aspirational? Sure. But plenty of examples of action as well, yes?

The respectable case for restraint in American support for Ukraine is that we want to shift the burden to Russia and reduce European free-riding. But Trump & Vance relentlessly promote pro-Russian parties in Europe who are the leading opponents of sharing more burden!

@UnderSneege @simongerman600 It's perfect for convenient conversions, too, because there are 640 acres in a square mile.

@simongerman600 The imperial system is the most beautiful and human measurement system ever created. An acre is the size of field you can plough in a day with a team of oxen.

Not coming from an agricultural background, some measurements don’t make intuitive sense to me. A Hectares are easy enough to come to terms with: 10,000 square meters. Easy. An acre?! I still can’t wrap my head around this…

@mattforney Nonsense. Gabbard is a serious person with long careers in both politics and the military. She knows you don't win every battle.

Tulsi Gabbard is going to be forced to resign in the next month because she is caught up with Joe Kent. Caught up in a very compromising way. There's a reason she wouldn't fire him. Bookmark this. (A little birdie gave me this info.)

@CamieMarti76914 @brockm There’s no such thing as Marxist ideology.

No mention of Marxist communism and how that corrupt ideology in this analysis. Interesting spin to blame republicans for the Obama/Biden era of failed policies. The tech revolution was happening and evolving fast. The problem was crap leadership in both parties (uniparty). Patriotism exists in all classes, and we are in the process of saving this country. We know the leftists were leading the demise of America.

If you're just waking up, and you want some backstory on how it all went wrong in Silicon Valley, I offer you this essay I wrote over a year ago, tracing its ideological roots: notesfromthecircus.com/p/the-plot-aga…

@didymus_twin @Aelthemplaer The Census says 50% white around 2023.

@Aelthemplaer Other white people?

It will be interesting to see how Americans react to the fact they're killing educated blue eyed white people when they bomb Iran. Will their brains break when it's not the othered browns they're used to killing? Or will they get excited to wipe out other white people?

@r_h_martins @razibkhan America is also a slow motion catastrophe, but Europe is becoming Africa while America becomes Brazil.

@razibkhan Europe is a slow motion catastrophe

Why America is so much better than Europe at immigration open.substack.com/pub/theargumen… pretty obv to those who have looked into this; european immigration is a massive disaster area

@Muller_Lab @cremieuxrecueil With no ideology, actually. He just followed the linear extrapolations. Ideology is what helps us to laugh at the linear extrapolations.

@cremieuxrecueil An approximate guess of Paul Ehrlich's IQ? Based on academic pedigree etc, I'd say 130 minimum. High IQ, coupled with extreme idiology.

Paul Ehrlich provides us with staggeringly certain, practically dispositive evidence that peer review allows basic, critical mistakes to be published with the imprimatur of the establishment.

@LionBlogosphere My ex wife never told me she was a witch before wet got married either. But I blame myself; all the signs were there.

@dan571255049045 @phl43 Well put. The purpose of the NATO has always been to keep Germany down. Aside from that, it offers nothing to America.

Lots of us have no interest in projecting power over the middle east, nor influencing European govts. Those are non-starters to average Americans. There is still some universal benefit in keeping Europeans on the same team so you all don't start another world war, but we're no longer able to afford that sort of charity, and frankly probably not as interested anymore.

The problem with Trump's veiled threats to leave NATO is that they're not credible because, as I keep repeating, the US is getting *at least* as much out of the alliance as Europe. Despite memes about "europoor", Europe is a massive economic and technological power. It also has significant military power, with the potential to become much larger, precisely because it has such a large economic and technological basis. The European alliance allows the US to harness that power to further its own interests. For instance, if the Europeans weren't on board with them, US-led export controls and economic sanctions would be much less effective. We have seen that in practice on the rare occasions where Europeans have refused to subordinate their interests to Washington's desiderata and presented a united front against US pressure to do so. For example, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration tried to block the Yamal pipeline project by imposing oil and gas technology export controls against the Soviet Union, but was eventually forced to back down because the Europeans refused to go along with them. US military bases in Europe greatly enhance the ability of the US to project power outside of its borders, while having a relatively small cost that only amounts to a tiny fraction of the US defense budget. For that small cost, they provide the US with facilities in a very favorable environment, with a friendly population, a stable political environment and all the infrastructure they need, to launch strikes against targets in the Middle East, provide logistical support for troops closer to the theaters of operations, perform maintenance, etc. If you ask me, the US would be better off not having this ability to project power in the Middle East, because that's not really doing much for them and on the contrary it's constantly tempting them to get involved into stupid shit, but the truth is that most Americans who complain about having to pay for Europe's defense wouldn't like losing it. American rightoids who constantly whine about European "freeloading" simply don't understand how the alliance between the US and Europe and more generally they don't understand power. They talk as if the US wasn't getting anything in return for its military presence in Europe, but that presence buys Washington significant political influence over European countries, which as I just noted it can use to tap into European technological, economic and military power to further its own aims. Americans keep talking about how they are "defending" Europe, but who are they defending us against exactly? Even during the Cold War, the Soviet threat was inflated since as we now know the Soviets never intended to invade Western Europe, but the Cold War is over anyway. Europe is objectively one of the most secure group of countries in the history of the world. We don't really need to be defended against anyone, because nobody really threatens us. Americans only think otherwise is because they believe in stupid propaganda about how Iran might shoot missiles at European cities for no reason or whatnot, which is absolutely laughable. The only real threat we face is Russia, not because it might "take over" the former Warsaw Pact countries — something that is well beyond its capabilities — as many clueless people claim, but because the Baltic countries are very difficult if not impossible to defend and there is always a risk that Russia might decide to test our resolve by attacking them. However, that's hardly a threat we couldn't manage on our own by a combination of military and political measures, so the idea that we'd be lost without the US is disconnected from reality. Russia is not the Soviet Union in 1980 and it's even less Nazi Germany in 1939. Such comparisons are ridiculous and historically illiterate. Now, we could manage this threat more cheaply and more easily with the US, which is why I'd rather that we keep the status quo in place because it has worked decently for both Europe and the US so far and there is no reason why it should change, but if you think we'd be lost without the US you are just high on your own supply. The reality is that the European alliance is a huge power multiplier for the US and, though American rightoids clearly don't understand that because their brains have been broken by stupid memes, the American deep state does and that's why Americans aren't going to do shit. For what it's worth, it's kind of the same thing with Europeans, who talk a big talk about going it alone but aren't particularly eager to end the alliance with the US because it solves various coordination problems for us and in general is quite comfortable and because over the decades subservience to the US has become a deeply ingrained habit for European elites. But the truth is also that, after decades of alliance, Europe and the US are deeply integrated at the economic, cultural and military level and there is considerable inertia in the relationship, so I think that despite all the noises people on both sides are currently making, the alliance will survive Trump.

@_Locke_XX @phl43 No one has ever believed that the NATO benefits America. It has always existed as a charity gift from America to Europeans who resent or hate us. That has not reduced its popularity.

Funny, it was not too long ago that numerous European countries were worried that the US was disengaging from Europe and asking aloud if the US would honor an Article 5 request from Europe. There are still daily calls for the US to do more to aid Ukraine when it is not an immediate concern of the US. And at the same time, there is a continued habit of European NATO members not only declining to be useful, but actively obstructing activities such as by refusing use of bases or air space. If the goal is to sever the US from Europe (something that has always been Russia's goal and now China's), it's much closer to fruition. It is an error to think that it is only about Trump and that in 2028 it will snap back to status quo. The general belief that NATO is advantageous to the US has been declining for years and the past few weeks has done nothing but accelerate it. I believe your predictions to be far too sanguine. And I'm sad about it since I also believe NATO was a massive success. But nothing stays the same forever and maybe US/European interests have diverged too much for the old arrangements to be workable anymore.

@codechallenged @phl43 So we could leave western Europe out and have them contribute even less than the tiny amount they do now? And leave us to defend eastern Europe alone?

@phl43 We could easily split NATO in half and work with the countries that work with us. Then what. These brain treatises never think things through

@phl43 @novussubsole The NATO is not an important alliance to America. It offers us no benefits, only costs. Still, Trump has shown zero interest in changing it. He’s probably warning England to stop the silly process on the Chagos Islands.

@novussubsole Trump has less than 3 years left and he will face a hostile Congress in a few months. He isn't going to be in a position to take the US out of its most important alliance.