NO ONE IS ILLEGAL ON STOLEN LAND

@Flenflyys Uh... I think you may be misusing the word "immigrants"...

@Flenflyys Conquered? No. It was stolen. Anyone with even the most basic understanding of US history will know this. This country was built by immigrants. So if they hate immigrants then they must therefore hate themselves and should leave. Illegal or not, an immigrant is an immigrant.

Not by the definition people are trying to apply in this situation.

Yes the country was built by immigrants, I’m Canadian and all for immigration. Then you can say that every country in the world was “stolen” repeatedly. Before the Europeans arrived the aboriginals “stole” this land from each other repeatedly.

@Flenflyys And what would that definition be? Europeans came from other countries, left those countries (emigrated), got on boats, and came to North American (immigrated). Most were undocumented, didn't speak English, didn't naturalize for generations, had little or no skills, etc. Perhaps a good dictionary would help you out here.

@Flenflyys A tiny number of Europeans who came to the Americas were imperial subjects coming as colonial settlers. I suppose that you can say that while violent and genocidal, that's not immigration. But the vast, vast majority of Europeans in the Americans--including Canada, I'm sorry to inform you--came as immigrants.

You can’t apply a blanket dictionary definition to every situation, this is obvious to anyone above a grade six reading level. The only definition of immigration that the conquering Europeans fit is that they changed geographic locations. They did not immigrate to an established community. Do you want a gold star for making me clarify that for you 😂

@Flenflyys wise words, but if you were replying to someone it seems they blocked me, I don’t see anyone replying to you before me

@th3r0n it’s not worth it anyway they’re arguing about petty technicalities

@Flenflyys I wonder if maybe we're on the same side here? Although you're vastly oversimplifying the history of white settlement in the Americas (again, the vast majority of Europeans came here as immigrants to join established states with immigration policies), are you arguing that we're being too easy on European conquerors and those who committed genocide by calling them "immigrants"? If so, then we agree and should stop arguing. Trying to find common ground. But if you're trying to say Europeans are justified in being here and current immigrants aren't, then you're just wrong.

@mountainguy I think you’re assuming I’m including the entire duration of the history of the Americas. And I’m not saying I have a problem with immigrants; I find the original post to be a weak argument.

@Flenflyys I don't understand why you wouldn't include the entire history unless there's a racial assumption that every white person--even those who immigrated in the 1920s--has some automatic link to people who showed up in 1620 or something. It's not at all a weak argument. Every single person supporting Trump in the US has immigrants in their family tree, most of whom were much less skilled than those coming here now. The only people who can seriously claim native status and argue against immigration would be Native Americans and maybe African Americans. Those are the people who really can't be counted as immigrants.