He regarded slavery as “a crime whose shortsighted folly was worse than its guilt” because it “brought hordes of African slaves, whose descendants now form immense populations in certain portions of the land.” Contrasting the European conquest of North America with that of South Africa, Roosevelt felt that the fate of the latter’s colonists would be different because, unlike the Native American, the African “neither dies out nor recedes before their advance”, meaning the colonists would likely “be swallowed up in the overwhelming mass of black barbarism.”

http://www.alearned.com/theodore-roosevelt-believed-criminals-sterilized/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37243227)

2) south winning the civil war wouldn't have changed much except that CSA would be even more TTT for a longer time and the northern union would have eventually absorbed lot of blacks too

3) second worst thing was to have not sent them back to haiti or africa like lincoln wanted

basically money makes everybody act selfishly. blame short sighted slave owners who were completely focused on their economic wealth for this. no different than the farmers/chamber of commerce cucks who oppose deportations/mandatory everify in the GOP

three biggest mistakes domestically

1) slavery

2) not providing freed slaves their own independent country

3) not abolishing birthright citizenship in the 50s/60s when the illegal immigration problem first became a national issue under Ike

3 biggest foreign policy mistakes

1) entering WWI

2) failing to understand the rise of china and doing nothing to contain it

3) Iraq war and destabilizing the middle east

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37243228)

i considered the 65 immigration act which was a YUGE disaster. but i think not abolishing birth right citizenship MUCH MUCH worse. legal chain migration is kind of slow (takes 15 years to sponsor your sibling for example) and we can still restrict it somewhat by restricting student visas etc. birthright citizenship is irreversible and essentially cannot be removed without civil war 2.0

also birthright citizenship impacts demographics more negatively than legal immigration

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37281990)

There's obviously a multitude of ways to view WW1 - but one of the least talked about / most interesting ways to view it is economically. The war was VERY good for America financially - vast sums of old world European British wealth was transferred over to America, specifically as the center of world finance shifted from London to NYC.

There's an old banking saying that's something like if you owe the bank a moderate sum of money the bank holds the power over you, if you owe the bank a great deal of money then you hold power over the bank - i.e. the bank then becomes highly invested in your financial success to be able to repay the loans.

That's a similar situation to the America / Britain situation in WW1 - it got to a point where Britain owed America such vast sums of money that we needed to protect our interest and ensure the success of Britain to make sure we got repaid.

That's obviously only a part of what was going on I'm not implying that's purely the reason we entered WW1 - but it sure did align with the timing and our financial interests to do so.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282109)

1) helped the wrong side win in WWI. this was and is yuge disaster for europe and mankind in general. without US intervention france probably folds. it almost folded right before US sent troops

2) was the first time that "globalists" successfully corrupted national interest for vested reasons both in US/Europe and was the event that changed our nation at a fundamental level. look at balfour declaration for example and why it was even necessary

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282117)

The more I read and learn about Vietnam recently - the more I see how fundamentally it shifted the culture in the U.S. in big cities VERY drastically, broke the military for several years, and just gave rise to a protest, anti-capitalist culture that still plagues us today.

But obviously you could correctly argue that making the correct ww1 decision would mean no French colonial involvement and conflict with the Viet minh and therefore no u.s. involvement in Vietnam so I'll definitely concede that to you.

But I'd also add that Britain had millions and millions of potential soldiers still left throughout their colonies to draw from to continue fighting, even though yes the French were near folding, and Britain itself was near financial and moral collapse.

In fact - it's documented and specifically Churchill writes about this in his histories of WW2, that Britain was so near financial and moral collapse that they had already began making plans of what to do for fighting the war in 1919 - and this involved air bombing of German civilians and use poison gas themselves, specifically some "blue gas" or something it was called - which contained tiny crystals that make a person vomit violently through the gas mask if you inhale it. So it makes you either suffocate on vomit or more likely people would rip off the gas mask to vomit violently leaving them suffocating to the poison gas. There was only one single type of gas mask in the world that worked against this blue gas and Germany didn't have them. Britain had already began stockpiling this blue gas in case the war dragged on into 1919........

I'll check back tmr - ty brother

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282127)

(1) It solidified a bloc of power between two peoples with shared language, culture, legal history, and strategic outlook.

(2) It allowed us to become the next major world power WITHOUT fighting a war against the outgoing superpower. I can't think of another time in history that's ever happened.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282443)

that constitutional coup by the founding plutocrats --the illegal replacement of the articles of confederation with the undemocratic constitution---ultimately doomed american whites....if the articles of confederation had remained in place, the non-slave states could banned any blacks from entry...that way blacks would have been confined to the slave states...and the non-slave states today would have all political control at the state level, which would mean they could have local control over immigration, civil rights etc...meaning the USA would totally different..

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282174)

They we're like thoroughbreds of Revolutionary era heros.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4111626&forum_id=2#37282449)