• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar launch 'America First Caucus,' and it's as bad as you imagine

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
93,583
Reaction score
81,659
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

4/16/21
Do not—Do. Not.—dismiss this as just a handful of Republicans: Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar are starting an “America First Caucus” in the House of Representatives, and they might as well go ahead and call it the You Will Not Replace Us Caucus or get real honest and call it the White Supremacist Caucus, because the introductory description of the group’s purpose, as reported by Punchbowl News, is breathtaking. The group is forming around a “common respect for uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions.” That string of words comes from the discussion of immigration, and apparently that common respect for uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions strengthens the border somehow. While immigration may increase the nation’s “aggregate output,” they acknowledge, it’s still unacceptable because of “the long-term existential future of America as a unique country with a unique culture and a unique identity being put at unnecessary risk.” Oh, and they have ideas about infrastructure. Yes, white supremacist ideas about infrastructure. “The America First Caucus will work towards an infrastructure that reflects the architectural, engineering and aesthetic value that befits the progeny of European architecture. The progeny of European architecture pretty much puts it right out there, just in case you’d missed the Anglo-Saxon bit: We’re talking about white people, and nobody but.

This is also significant because it’s not coming out of nowhere. A “certain intellectual boldness is needed amongst members of the AFC to follow in President Trump’s footsteps, and potentially step on some toes and sacrifice cows for the good of the American nation.” There are footsteps for them to follow in when they sketch out this white supremacist vision of the U.S.—footsteps that went into the White House. For years the Republican Party as a whole has gotten the benefit of the doubt about its far-right members. It’s just a few, people said. It’s the fringe. But the party as a whole keeps moving toward that fringe, making the fringe of a decade ago the center of the party now. It is never safe to assume that Republicans will cleanse themselves of the racists or the conspiracy theorists or the sex pests in their party. We’ve watched them refuse to do so again and again, and if we don’t learn from that, it’s a guarantee of disaster.


The germination of a Republican white-supremacist neo-Nazi movement inside the US House of Representatives.
 
I'm just trying to get one more post in before my 1st amendment rights are canceled by the moderators this morning.
 
If the media and the rest of America ignored assholes like Green, they would go away. This is nothing but a stunt to keep her name front and center for her deplorables..

The rest of the country don't give a shit about her..
 
EzMYr6gUcAMn6yZ

EzMXsADVkAcvgYz
 




The germination of a Republican white-supremacist neo-Nazi movement inside the US House of Representatives.

The stupid woman knows that the first Americans were not white nor christian?

And that the first explorers to the US were vikings? Northern European sure, but not Anglo-Saxon and certainly not christian.

And the second wave of explorers (Columbus and who came immediately after him) were Southern Europeans and catholics.

None were anglo-saxon protestants.
 
The stupid woman knows that the first Americans were not white nor christian?

And that the first explorers to the US were vikings? Northern European sure, but not Anglo-Saxon and certainly not christian.

And the second wave of explorers (Columbus and who came immediately after him) were Southern Europeans and catholics.

None were anglo-saxon protestants.
Anglo-Saxon ethnicity actually only comprises only about 8% of the US population.
 
Anglo-Saxon ethnicity actually only comprises only about 8% of the US population.

As is to be expected, with the influx of Italians, Germans, Polish, Spanish, Latino's, African American, Irish, Jews, etc. etc. etc. the level of WASP dwindled to a very small minority. When I hear these idiots like Marjorie Taylor Green and her lot, I immediately think of

 
The stupid woman knows that the first Americans were not white nor christian?

And that the first explorers to the US were vikings? Northern European sure, but not Anglo-Saxon and certainly not christian.

And the second wave of explorers (Columbus and who came immediately after him) were Southern Europeans and catholics.

None were anglo-saxon protestants.

1) The Indians were not the first Americans. They had no concept of America before it was created by European Powers and they had to assimilate into it.

2) Leaf Erikson, who discovered Vineland for the Vikings was in fact a Christian. And in his generation most of the Nordic countries became near University Christian because of Saint Olaf.

3) Columbus did not discover any land that would become part of the constituent territory of the United States. The colonies that became the United States were founded by the protestant maritime powers of great Britain and Holland
 
1) The Indians were not the first Americans. They had no concept of America before it was created by European Powers and they had to assimilate into it.

2) Leaf Erikson, who discovered Vineland for the Vikings was in fact a Christian. And in his generation most of the Nordic countries became near University Christian because of Saint Olaf.

3) Columbus did not discover any land that would become part of the constituent territory of the United States. The colonies that became the United States were founded by the protestant maritime powers of great Britain and Holland

They may not have the name "Americans" but they were the first inhabitants of the land that was later named the USA.

2. Great Britain sure, but at that time it was already the Netherlands (seven provinces of the Netherlands).
 
They may not have the name "Americans" but they were the first inhabitants of the land that was later named the USA.

2. Great Britain sure, but at that time it was already the Netherlands (seven provinces of the Netherlands).
so you’re conceding the Viking who discovered Newfoundland was a Christian then? Are you going to tell me you know more about my heritage?

Netherlands versus Holland is a pedantic argument. I have history textbooks from my college days referring to the Netherlands as Holland during this time period. This is pointless quibble. You’re not contesting that the Dutch founded New Amsterdam which became New York right?

In fact their influence was so strong Dutch was spoken in rural New York until the early 1900s. The famed black abolitionist Sojurner Truth who grew up in New York spoke Dutch as a first language, and then well meaning leftists for a century actually rewrote a speech she gave to make her sound like she was an uneducated black woman from the south when in fact she was educated in Dutch and was very intelligent. That’s an aside though.

In any event, the Dutch and English are very close, both ethnically and in their conception of political rights and philosophy. They were in effect a junior partner of Britain.

The American Indians cannot be called “the first Americans” America did not exist as a concept, the Indians only became American after assimilation into the culture created by the English.
 
Last edited:
so you’re conceding the Viking who discovered Newfoundland was a Christian then? Are you going to tell me you know more about my heritage?

Netherlands versus Holland is a pedantic argument. I have history textbooks from my college days referring to the Netherlands as Holland during this time period. This is pointless quibble. You’re not contesting that the Dutch founded New Amsterdam which became New York right?

In fact their influence was so strong Dutch was spoken in rural New York until the early 1900s. The famed black abolitionist Sojurner Truth who grew up in New York spoke Dutch as a first language, and then well meaning leftists for a century actually rewrote a speech she gave to make her sound like she was an uneducated black woman from the south when in fact she was educated in Dutch and was very intelligent. That’s an aside though.

In any event, the Dutch and English are very close, both ethnically and in their conception of political rights and philosophy. They were in effect a junior partner of Britain.

The American Indians cannot be called “the first Americans” America did not exist as a concept, the Indians only became American after assimilation into the culture created by the English.
I did not respond to it now did I?

And no, it is not a pedantic argument it is a substantial and fundamental argument. Holland was only North-Holland and South-Holland, 2 provinces of the 7 provinces that made up the Netherlands.

And they were still the first Americans, they lived there when the settlers came. They may not have been recognized as Americans but that does not matter. They cannot help it that the British stole their lands, and later the rest of the "white people" living in America.
 
I did not respond to it now did I?

And no, it is not a pedantic argument it is a substantial and fundamental argument. Holland was only North-Holland and South-Holland, 2 provinces of the 7 provinces that made up the Netherlands.

And they were still the first Americans, they lived there when the settlers came. They may not have been recognized as Americans but that does not matter. They cannot help it that the British stole their lands, and later the rest of the "white people" living in America.
Their lands were not stolen. They were either ceded by negotiated treaties or taken through military conquest. And taken in a manner far less brutal then the Indians seized land from other Indians. You should read about some of these tribes.

It is a pedantic argument. English speakers at the time referred to the country as Holland. It would be like if you referred to Mexico and I went “whoah there, surely you mean Estados Unidos Mexicanos or if you said “Bolivia” and I went “he you’re wrong man, it’s the Estado Plurinacional Boliviano

Are you going to get mad if we discuss the Netherlands during the Napoleonic war and i don’t say “Potovian Republic”?

Shorthand names in another language are not wrong.

You made a massive claim that the first discoverers of the Americas (at least in your argument, I don’t actually consider Lief Erickson to have discovered America because they didn’t think they discovered any massive new land, they though it was another island off the coast of Greenland and they never made any permanent successful settlements there. The Norse at the time didn’t have smallpox and without the diseases they couldn’t conquer the Indians and their colonies failed) were not Christian which is factually false. In fact it’s massively false, not only did Lief Erikson convert, he brought priests to Greenland to see to the conversion of the Norse settlements there. He Christianized substantial parts of the Norselands. This is even recounted in the Saga of Erik the Red in the detail, it’s one of the main things contained in the Saga.
 
Last edited:
Their lands were not stolen. They were either ceded by negotiated treaties or taken through military conquest. And taken in a manner far less brutal then the Indians seized land from other Indians. You should read about some of these tribes.

It is a pedantic argument. English speakers at the time referred to the country as Holland. It would be like if you referred to Mexico and I went “whoah there, surely you mean Estados Unidos Mexicanos or if you said “Bolivia” and I went “he you’re wrong man, it’s the Estado Plurinacional Boliviano

Are you going to get mad if we discuss the Netherlands during the Napoleonic war and i don’t say “Potovian Republic”?

Shorthand names in another language are not wrong.

You made a massive claim that the first discoverers of the Americas (at least in your argument, I don’t actually consider Lief Erickson to have discovered America because they didn’t think they discovered any massive new land, they though it was another island off the coast of Greenland and they never made any permanent successful settlements there. The Norse at the time didn’t have smallpox and without the diseases they couldn’t conquer the Indians and their colonies failed) were not Christian which is factually false. In fact it’s massively false, not only did Lief Erikson convert, he brought priests to Greenland to see to the conversion of the Norse settlements there. He Christianized substantial parts of the Norselands. This is even recounted in the Saga of Erik the Red in the detail, it’s one of the main things contained in the Saga.
Of course, they voluntarily ceded all their lands, sorry, but their lands were taken under duress, through military conquest and not really in an honest manner.

And it is not an pedantic argument. I could not care that people from other countries called the Netherlands Holland. It just simply is not the name of my country, it never was. And during times when the Netherlands was occupied is really not the Netherlands. It was not our choice to be name the Batavian republic, never heard of Potovia.
 
Of course, they voluntarily ceded all their lands, sorry, but their lands were taken under duress, through military conquest and not really in an honest manner.

And it is not an pedantic argument. I could not care that people from other countries called the Netherlands Holland. It just simply is not the name of my country, it never was. And during times when the Netherlands was occupied is really not the Netherlands. It was not our choice to be name the Batavian republic, never heard of Potovia.
Yet you won’t even acknowledge messing up a major part of the history of my people. You made a flatly false claim of fact about my peeps and I got the receipts to prove it.

I can call your country the Netherlands, but you won’t acknowledge my Ancestors national hero and most prominent historical figure was a follower Christ. You ever been to Reykjavik? Tell me where the big Statue of Leif Erikson is.... it’s in front of the Cathedral. The Cathedrals of both the Lutheran Church of Norway and the Catholic dioscese of Oslo are named after King Saint Olaf who’s Successor was the king who commissioned Erikson to spread the gospel. He took monks with him on all his voyages!

Ok I was wrong to say Holland, you want to own up to your errors?
 
Last edited:
Isn't this a white caucus?

PUKE!
 
Yet you won’t even acknowledge messing up a major part of the history of my people. You made a flatly false claim of fact about my peeps and I got the receipts to prove it.

I can call your country the Netherlands, but you won’t acknowledge my Ancestors national hero and most prominent historical figure was a follower Christ. You ever been to Reykjavik? Tell me where the big Statue of Leif Erikson is.... it’s in front of the Cathedral. The Cathedrals of both the Lutheran Church of Norway and the Catholic dioscese of Oslo are named after King Saint Olaf who’s Successor was the king who commissioned Erikson to spread the gospel. He took monks with him on all his voyages!

Ok I was wrong to say Holland, you want to own up to your errors?
Yes, hence me not claiming Leif was not a christian, you educated me about that and I accepted that and read up on him on wikipedia, his wife started a christian church where they lived but his father Eric was opposed to it.

It was kinda like we had christianity introduced here in Friesland.
 
Again a reminder that the America First Committee they take their name from was isolationist and anti- semitic. They take their name from the people that wanted Hitler to win.
 
Again a reminder that the America First Committee they take their name from was isolationist and anti- semitic. They take their name from the people that wanted Hitler to win.
Did they want Hitler to win or were they isolationist? Those are separate concepts.
 
Did they want Hitler to win or were they isolationist? Those are separate concepts.
Isolationism meant they didn't mind Hitler to win. Some of them founded the America First Party in 1943, when the US already were at war with Germany (and had been for more than a year). Many previous America First members stopped associating with the movement after Pearl Harbor, but the ones that kept using the name were all about: Jews bad. Btw, this is what Charles Lindberg said on a America First Rally in September '41

"It is not difficult to understand why Jewish people desire the overthrow of Nazi Germany. The persecution they suffered in Germany would be sufficient to make bitter enemies of any race. No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution the Jewish race suffered in Germany. But no person of honesty and vision can look on their pro-war policy here today without seeing the dangers involved in such a policy, both for us and for them. Instead of agitating for war the Jewish groups in this country should be opposing it in every possible way, for they will be among the first to feel its consequences. Tolerance is a virtue that depends upon peace and strength. History shows that it cannot survive war and devastation. A few farsighted Jewish people realize this and stand opposed to intervention. But the majority still do not. Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government."

So the greatest danger to America was the Jews. At least Lindbergh was one of the people that stopped associating with America First when US entered the war. Then the America Firsters went with the name Christian Nationalist Crusade for some time, and their goals were to fight "mongerlization, Jewish traditions and Jazz music". America First is a tainted slogan, it's like asking for being associated with bigotry and anti- semitism.
 
Back
Top Bottom