I am not saying that and I think the only relevant change is welfare programs—which we can remove/limit for immigrants to stop it from being excessively costly.
I had a good friend who was Spanish. His grandmother was so proud of him for being a Naval Officer. Then he married a Mexican girl and all his pictures disappeared from grandma's house.
Are you sure you're not conflating "Spanish" with "Hispanic"? As I recall, the two major systems for profiling ethnicity in America include "Latino" or "Hispanic" but definitely don't break out "Spanish".
hyper-nationalistic, filled with bravado, lauding yet reserved, sense of authenticity, extremely humble, it's austere, category of conversation in many other contexts, optimism from a source that does not appear to use it as an instrument of control
Sorry English is not my first language and it is not easy for me to understand such advanced writing.
Is it that you like the sort of pride that quantifies the material wealth of the nation and attributes it to a market based economy and furthermore there are other sorts of pride that do you not like?
I'm not the author, but I think they were alluding to the type of pride that results in negative forms of nationalism, especially when it's tied into ideas about ethnic states. Various nationalist parties (e.g. the British National Party in my country) are actually thinly veiled parties for racial supremacy, and the Nazi regime was born out of a myth of German natural supremacy. Not to say that all nationalism is like this, but there is a certain strain of national identity that cares much more about race or religion than culture or values.
What are you on about? I'm intentionally laying out the worst extreme of "nationalism" as an example. Would you prefer that I responded to someone asking about what excessive nationalistic pride could do, with "well some people in the UK leer at the french a bit"?
Also, what do you mean by my "political mirrors"? I'm a libertarian, I don't particularly identify with the left or the right. I'm also a nationalist in the sense that I love my country and the values it supports. You're being hyperbolic.
It is important to understand the United States is leading a bombing campaign that has recently killed over 50,000 people in Syria and Iraq. Killing people on a vast scale from countries and also accepting immigrants (including military age males) from the same country at the same time is more complicated than #WereACountryOfImmigrants.
> United States is leading a bombing campaign that has recently killed over 50,000 people in Syria and Iraq
Isn't it a bit disingenuous to omit the fact that both Iraq and Syria have areas experiencing active warfare? The bombing campaign is not occurring in a vacuum, is targeted at people engaged in warfare against us or our allies, and those conflicts have killed far more people than just the bombing campaign - including via the use of chemical weapons.
I'm not trying to justify civilian casualties, the ongoing drone attacks on multiple continents, or even answer whether we should be involved in these conflicts - I just think the situation is more nuanced than "the US has bombed/killed 50,000 people in Syria and Iraq".
I'm aware that the US/NATO was involved in the Arab Spring. But again, I think the reality was far more complex - Mohamed Bouazizi didn't immolate himself because the CIA/MI6 told him to. There were videos from the time of people marching and being shot by their governments - those governments could have chosen to bring meaningful reform but instead chose violence. Likewise with Assad in Syria - the CIA/MI6 aren't making him drop barrel bombs or use chemical weapons.
Even outside of internal pressures, geopolitics are at play as well - Iran and Russia are playing "the great game" as much as the US/NATO are in the fight against terrorism.
Since the so-called Arab Spring started in Tunisia, you have to ask yourself why we didn't push for "regime change" in that country.
The demonstrations in Syria were not spontaneous. They were engineered. If you have time, read the email exchanges between the US ambassador to Syria and H. Clinton.
Regarding Iran and Russia playing "the great game", they're supporting the legitimate govt of that country. Without their support, Assad would have been dead years ago, and Syria would have been in worse shape than it is now.
Considering that Iran has been, without the least exaggeration, in active cross-hair of the "great game" of the Anglo vs Russ for the past 150 years, saying that Iran is playing the "great game" is rather bizzare.
We probably share the same opinion on why no one has pushed for "regime change" in Tunisia.
Iran is definitely playing geopolitics when they arm Houthis (fighting the internationally recognized government) with anti ship missiles in the Strait of Hormuz. Were they also not arming the Iraqi insurgents/sending military forces over the border during the height of the conflict in Iraq? How about Russia in Ukraine (are the "little green men" freedom fighters or rebels?)? Russia has more than just the support of a government in mind when it supports Syria.
I'm not saying one side is right or wrong - just that none of these actions happen in a vacuum.
While that may be true, the odds that something that hasn't happened in eight years could happen in 90 days are pretty small. Most of what agitated people was the order's execution, which involved some fallout that may have been avoidable.
But think about this for a second; if not for us destabilizing those countries, there will be no refugee crisis to deal with.
We basically took the most and arguably the most prosperous country in Africa (Libya) and ruined it. Now we're refusing to take in those fleeing from our mess. We did the same thing in Iraq and Syria.
But it seems we're not done yet. Iran is next.
Bit is anybody protesting war against countries that can do us no harm? Nah! It makes for good war video games and Hollywood war movies.
This is the first legal test of the pervasive practice of Indian nationals hiring predominantly or exclusively other Indian nationals from their same region in India.
edit:
From the Department of Labor complaint:
"...Oracle nevertheless preferred Asian applications over other qualified applicants in the Professional Technical 1, Individual Contributor Job group and in the Product Development job group at statistically significant rates."
Who is it who is favoring Asian applicants for this job group?
This sort of bias is a danger when hiring decisions are made at a team level rather than a systematic company-wide process like at Google.
You mean how the child of an immigrant is President?
The president's father was never an immigrant. An immigrant is someone who comes to life permanently in a new country. He was a foreign student with a wife in Kenya and eventually returned to Kenya with an American third wife upon the completion of his studies.
Several presidents have been a child of an immigrant: Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, James Buchanan, Chester Arthur, Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover.
In my lab we developed a different assay that favoured the isolation of generalist phages and we were really successful in finding broad host range phages (many were multi-genera in host range).
Did your group publish anything on this approach? If so, could you share a link to one or some of the papers?
Yes we did, but we didn’t make a huge deal about it in the papers (it is just in the methods sections). If you want to find my phage papers just have a look at my profile on ResearchGate [1].
The basic idea is pretty straightforward. Rather than plating a filtered sample directly onto a overlay plate of a single bacterial strain, we pre-enriched for phages in a mixed culture of multiple bacterial strains (we would sometime use up to 50 different strains/species in the one enrichment flask). What this does is give the broad host range phages a competitive advantage since they can reproduce in multiple hosts and outgrow the narrow host range phages. When you plate out onto a specific strain for isolation of the phages you end up with mostly broad host range phages.
The idea is so obvious I am surprised it is not more widely used in the field. It seems to be the norm to just use a single bacterial strain for the phage isolation. I think most people just assume all phages are narrow host range.
Are you sure nothing has changed about the economy since 1914?