YouTuber removed from Yooka-Laylee game for his controversial views on race and immigration

I see where you're coming from but that kind of thinking is stuck in the past and too late. The people (I'm talking legally) are already here from all kinds of nations and cultures. They are the "people" of nation and as so the nation must reflect all of their views, on top of that the arguement is broken by one question: what is the "white" cultural identity in America? Is it the catholic conservative? Is it the liberal hippie? Is it the moderate middle class? And what is the culture that is unifying for all the different white people? And when do they not over lap with other sub cultures like Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc? America invted Rock, Jazz, Blues, which were influenced by music from other cultures. Pizza is very American, but is based on Italian culture. The Matrix, a great American "white" film, takes heavy influences from East Asian martial art films. It's too late, conversion is happening and instead of trying to stick your head in the sand, why not be a part of it?

Going to do this in numbered format for ease of reading.

1. People "already here" is why I mentioned 1965 immigration changes and said the US is doomed. Sometime within the next 20 years this country will split, legally speaking because of the interests of the people on the continent.

2. "What is white" isn't a refutation of the argument, its supporting evidence. It's also why white nationalists will never achieve what they claim to want. Whites are only "white" until someone brings up their German or Scandanavian heritage. This is why Europe consists of multiple countries that have warred with one another over the centuries.

Diversity is real, and it has bigger implications than music and food.

3. American diversity will have the same end result as every other multicultural territory: a very big, very bloody war. This has been the case across all of history. And it's always happened during the "current year."

4. I am a part of the diversity you speak of. I'm multiracial and have history on both sides of the family that made or participated in "cultural enrichment."

5. It is too late. The political discussion now isn't about changing minds--the real-world results will do that. What you're seeing now, even on these forums, is partitioning.
 
I see where you're coming from but that kind of thinking is stuck in the past and too late. The people (I'm talking legally) are already here from all kinds of nations and cultures. They are the "people" of nation and as so the nation must reflect all of their views, on top of that the arguement is broken by one question: what is the "white" cultural identity in America? Is it the catholic conservative? Is it the liberal hippie? Is it the moderate middle class? And what is the culture that is unifying for all the different white people? And when do they not over lap with other sub cultures like Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc? America invted Rock, Jazz, Blues, which were influenced by music from other cultures. Pizza is very American, but is based on Italian culture. The Matrix, a great American "white" film, takes heavy influences from East Asian martial art films. It's too late, conversion is happening and instead of trying to stick your head in the sand, why not be a part of it?

Going to do this in numbered format for ease of reading.

1. People "already here" is why I mentioned 1965 immigration changes and said the US is doomed. Sometime within the next 20 years this country will split, legally speaking because of the interests of the people on the continent.

2. "What is white" isn't a refutation of the argument, its supporting evidence. It's also why white nationalists will never achieve what they claim to want. Whites are only "white" until someone brings up their German or Scandanavian heritage. This is why Europe consists of multiple countries that have warred with one another over the centuries.

Diversity is real, and it has bigger implications than music and food.

3. American diversity will have the same end result as every other multicultural territory: a very big, very bloody war. This has been the case across all of history. And it's always happened during the "current year."

4. I am a part of the diversity you speak of. I'm multiracial and have history on both sides of the family that made or participated in "cultural enrichment."

5. It is too late. The political discussion now isn't about changing minds--the real-world results will do that. What you're seeing now, even on these forums, is partitioning.

Somewhere in hell Arthur de Gobineau is proud of you.
 
^^^ I'm going to respond to this because it's instructive.

There have been five noteworthy responses to my posts in this thread. Two of them at least attempted to make a point. Three of them have been little more than shallow one-liners, quoted here in no particular order:

Somewhere in hell Arthur de Gobineau is proud of you.
You sure make me embarrassed to be a fellow Texan.

This is why the left (and fake rightwingers) are losing. They preach diversity, tolerance, and "freedom of speech." But as soon as you go to any of them with a position they feel is emotionally objectionable, all they are capable of responding with is name-calling and shaming tactics. When that is not enough, they advocate that badthinkers be punished for their thought crimes:

You can say what you want in this country, just don't expect to be protected from the consequences.

There is no discussion, there is no debate, there is no honesty, and there certainly isn't any tolerance. This is what is moving the political pendulum from the left to the right. The general public is tired of having to speak behind a filter for fear of being ruined by a minority of duplicitous bullies who've managed to maneuver their way into considerable power.

This is why dumping Jafari was short-sighted. Playtonic could have leveraged that momentum. Instead, they are taking a stand against it.
 
Okay folks - let's not start making personal attacks on people just because we have different points of view. I actually make sure I have friends who have very differing political views from mine just so I'll have insight on other perspectives. We have deep conversations about these topics but neither of us will convince the other to switch sides. It's just about recognizing that people see things and are affected differently.

You've got to learn how to progress even with people around you who have different mindsets. Hear what they say and try to understand where those differences are but don't immediately go on the attack (unless they are causing immediate harm of course.) Try not to descend into name calling and bickering and instead try to share (like a rational adult) your point of view and how you may see it affecting others, but don't expect that you will convince someone to change their view. All you can hope for is that they will begin to understand or at least recognize your point-of-view.
 
Okay folks - let's not start making personal attacks on people just because we have different points of view. I actually make sure I have friends who have very differing political views from mine just so I'll have insight on other perspectives. We have deep conversations about these topics but neither of us will convince the other to switch sides. It's just about recognizing that people see things and are affected differently.

You've got to learn how to progress even with people around you who have different mindsets. Hear what they say and try to understand where those differences are but don't immediately go on the attack (unless they are causing immediate harm of course.) Try not to descend into name calling and bickering and instead try to share (like a rational adult) your point of view and how you may see it affecting others, but don't expect that you will convince someone to change their view. All you can hope for is that they will begin to understand or at least recognize your point-of-view.

Agreed. It is also important for fleshing out your own ideas. You'll never know if a boat actually floats until you put it into water, and you can't do that if it never leaves dry land.
 
I am enjoying the comments more than the article. Interesting how some people express their thoughts. I applaud davislane1 for his persistence and well thought out posts. I agree with a lot of what you have said davis, however, my view is slightly different. I do not think it is based on race as you seem to view it. America staying majority white, IMO is the wrong thing to say. America staying true to the American way of life and American Ideals are what this country needs, it doesn't matter if someone is black, brown, white or green (you used purple, I'm being different!) it is how they adopt OUR way of life. One thing no one pointed out, is the person this article is about is Iranian and Hungarian. Which to me Iranian is Arab, and not White. Therefore he cannot be a white nationalist, at most a half white nationalist. Either way it shouldn't matter. What most of us want is our way of life preserved because we think it is so good that others should live this way. In order for that to happen, we cannot bow down to the "PC" crowd and adopt everyone else's beliefs and ideals. That as I agree leads to what we have happening. You cannot force someone to believe as you do, but you cannot just make it OK to "fundamentally change" a country. There are forces at work, trying to change the political and ideological landscape of the entire world. That is what will cause a war here.

Anyway, sorry I had way too many thoughts running around and can't express them all without a wall of text. Just enjoy what freedom you have, while you have it.
 
Going to do this in numbered format for ease of reading.

1. People "already here" is why I mentioned 1965 immigration changes and said the US is doomed. Sometime within the next 20 years this country will split, legally speaking because of the interests of the people on the continent.

2. "What is white" isn't a refutation of the argument, its supporting evidence. It's also why white nationalists will never achieve what they claim to want. Whites are only "white" until someone brings up their German or Scandanavian heritage. This is why Europe consists of multiple countries that have warred with one another over the centuries.

Diversity is real, and it has bigger implications than music and food.

3. American diversity will have the same end result as every other multicultural territory: a very big, very bloody war. This has been the case across all of history. And it's always happened during the "current year."

4. I am a part of the diversity you speak of. I'm multiracial and have history on both sides of the family that made or participated in "cultural enrichment."

5. It is too late. The political discussion now isn't about changing minds--the real-world results will do that. What you're seeing now, even on these forums, is partitioning.
On 3, so now you can predict the future, too?

What you are suggesting, countries must protect their demographic balance, has been tried before. In its worst incarnation, Nazi Germany did it. Look how well it worked out for them. I think the arguments presented by you in this thread are specious and simplistic as well as outright racist - like it or not that I am saying that to you.

As I see it, historically some countries have had severe problems, or at least they perceived that they had problems. Along came a leader that gave them a focal point for their frustration in the unfolding cultural diversity. However, such focal points have never been the cause of the problems, but rather as I see it, the focal points became a vent for the anguish each country had at the time. They were not a solution to the problem; instead, they diverted from the real problem, and the harder choice of working to resolve those problems. The first place an entity must look to find a problem is within. It takes courage to do that, and not facing those problems is in itself a problem. People only have power over themselves and can only change themselves. Trying to change others, especially when it is unjustly done, can never resolve a problem that lies within. Certain humans have tried time and again throughout the ages to oppressively control certain other humans. It has never worked, and it will never work. The oppressed eventually stand up to the bully.

Over the centuries, the US has been defined by its laws and constitution. Most immigrants who come here do so because they are trying to find a better life for themselves. They come here because they cannot stand their own governments. Both of my parent's families came here for just such reasons. Many immigrants who come here believe that they can find a better life here away from the political abuses that exist in their countries of origin. Despite what 45 says, not every immigrant comes here because they think that they can get away with whatever they want - I would also imagine that at least some of those who are here illegally have come here because they believe that they can build a better life here in spite of the risks that they know that they are taking by coming here illegally.

As I see it, the immigrants that have come here to escape their toils will not attempt to destroy what gives this country its foundation - the US Constitution and its laws. Why? Because they know that doing so would create in this country the exact same conditions that led them to leave their country of origin. The picture of these immigrants that you have allowed yourself to embrace is likely far different than the reality of the situation. Try a thought experiment - put yourself in their place. Picture yourself having your house blown up while living in Syria or having to live with the possibility of losing your life every day there as you go about trying to live that same life in a peaceful manner.

Take the time to look at immigration statistics, they paint a vastly different picture than 45 has. In light of the statistics, 45 has purveyed many alternative facts that reside only in 45's mind.

I also find it interesting that you think that they political voice is shifting from the left to the right. With the most recent approval ratings at 36% and the fact that 45 lost the popular vote by a wide margin, I cannot agree with you on that.
 
Last edited:
I think the company made the right move. Yes, being able to make statements of your own accord is your right. But expect that you may lose some business or professional positions because you couldn't be responsible enough to think about the consequences before you opened your mouth. Sometimes just not saying anything is the best solution to take. Why do you think Police tend to not comment when asked by reporters about details? They're smart enough to know that word will get around and they don't want to raise panic or make their station look bad. And they would've won a huge PR victory? Are you kidding me? For what purpose? To show the world that they support racism and other negative things? The world is still progressing towards a dynamic culture; that isn't gonna stop any time soon. The company is smart enough to understand that and dropped him to keep from losing face and customers. The best position to take as a company is to take a neutral stance because you support the ideas of more that one person and not just employees. You can't simply decide that single person should let his ideas and comments be those of the company.
 
Back