You're thinking of nation states — a relatively recent construct from the 19th century. But it's not at all a requirement for a state to be organized according to ethnicity. You'll find many examples in history of highly successful states that never were. And US certainly never was.Rob wrote:Gibberish. You make it sound like "the state" emerged from the ether and we just happened to be the first to chance into it. The foundation is the people. Sweden is not Sweden without Swedish people. Japan is not Japan without the Japanese. Third world diversity will transition America from an "advanced, well-functioning state" into something more akin to the failed states they fled from.
But perhaps you'd like to enlighten me: How do you define American ethnicity, how does one become part of it, and what's the ideal ethnic distribution in your opinion?
Not sure what you're trying to imply. The American colonies had strong institutions, enforcement of laws, and a robust civil society even before independence, Liberia never had that. Big difference.We can give Liberians a blueprint and it means next to nothing.
Don't waste your time posting links to anti-immigration lobby groups — I don't need to read their articles to know what the conclusion will be.Buncha layabouts. Native low skill employment on the decline over the past 50 years, coinciding with mass third world immigration.
Also, what's with your strange obsession with the term third world?