jroseland

I hope so! I've long held this hypothesis that racial/ideological violence is symptomatic of economic constriction and in an environment with a true abundance of economic opportunity racial tension will all but disappear. If Trump really does make America great again (economically) it will hopefully prove or disprove my hypothesis.

Last night I watched this incredibly compelling Netflix documentary about the Maidan Revolution in Kiev, Ukraine. The film really illustrates how powerful the in group preference us versus them narrative is. The film shows that you really don't need to get that many angry people together before people (well, men) start deciding that they are willing to die or kill for their group. Like all emotionally compelling films at the end the good guys win. The corrupt President of Ukraine resigns. I've lived in the Ukraine and have heard a bunch of different perspectives on this. I know it's a complicated event that I would do a real disservice to if I tried to meta analyze. As I watched the film I thought about how mobs of millions of liberal idiots in the US who think that Trump is literally Hitler would watch a film like this be all the more inspired to take action that is going to escalate into violence. Anytime I see an interview with these anti-Trump protesters they seem pretty convinced that they are fighting an evil dictator. Luckily Trump protesters seem to be mostly wimpy SJWs; high estrogen beta males and fat girls - nothing like the stoic Ukrainians that occupied Maidan square for months in the freezing winter. Perhaps the scariest difference is that the Maidan revolution was a bunch of white Ukrainians beating up a bunch of other white Ukrainians; same race and language - whereas, especially in major US cities, there are three very distinct racial groups that ideologically divide pretty consistently down racial lines. The US is just looking more and more like Yugoslavia in the late 1980's. It seems to me that there are three possible outcomes a) Trump is really tough on the protesters which produces a bunch of viral videos of scenes reminiscent of Winter on Fire; which inspire a bunch more crazing liberals to get involved. The race war intensifies. b) Trump is weak on the protesters. Maybe he even panders to them like Obama has. He let's them burn down their own cities. c) Trump trolls the protesters. He just makes fun of them on Twitter for being fat and wimpy. The protesters get demotivated and go back to their lives. I'm hoping for C but I fear A is a much more likely scenario. What do you think is more likely?

Touche!

This book begins with a treatise on free speech by Quintus Curtius. He makes the point that we assume incorrectly that society will just get better and better; we assume that we will just become freer and freer, we see the tremendous improvement in human quality of life in the past hundred years of history recorded via grainy photographs, shaky news reel and newspaper clippings and we assume that it's just going to get better but Quintus warns that progress is not our birthright. It's especially easy for young people with no children to assume that the nature of the world is just get increasingly free over time, barring some extraordinary life experience it's likely that over time all they've personally experienced is their freedom expanding. We do associate the abstract idea of freedom with our concrete quality of life, consumer choice and the advent of new technologies making our lives more convenient and amusing. Since there is no sign of the Cambrian explosion of consumer options slowing, the idea of freedom contracting seems incomprehensible to most.. But Quintus writes Time is as much a destroyer as a creator: and perhaps more of the former than the latter. He makes the case that our society of unequaled freedoms wobbles on a knife's edge and that there is a good chance that human rights will regress within our lifetimes I've long believed likewise that... human rights are antithetical to human nature. Human nature is evolutionary - of course - and prone to devolve into brutal competition. Human nature is a strong man taking power, money, women and resources from those who he can by sword, law or guile. Human nature is a tribe being fiercely unsympathetic to an out group. Human nature is a syndicate of elites depriving the common people of the fruits of their labor. Human nature is a dictator depriving his people of the ability to defend themselves from their overreaches. Human nature is a ruling narrative stiffling and censoring dissenting voices. Human rights are not something we deserve by default, human rights are a gift given to us by those before us who paid dearly for them in blood, sweat and ink and it's a duty for us to maintain and pass them on to our own children. As Quintus writes Rights, once won, do not remain won forever. He argues that free speech is our cornerstone human right that all other rights depend upon, he comments upon the shoddy maintenance of this foundational right by our institutions Are we progressing ever upwards in our tolerance of free speech and a free press? Or are there more subtle, insidious ways of stifling free speech? freedom of speech and the press is an absolute necessity for any forward-moving society. The surveillance state is antithetical to the idea of freedom of speech, In the first Matrix movie Morpheus tells Neo that 1999 was the peak of human civilization, after Neo takes the red pill he discovers that while technology has advanced exponentially human freedom has steeply declined and nearly been totally snuffed out. An analogy for the delicacy of human rights so apt that the film became the metaphor for men rising above their own visceral desires, revulsions and whims to grasp the fleeting nature of freedom. It's a bit of a conspiratorial premise, that some may call alarmist or fear mongering but the rest of the book is a memoir of the public demonization of Roosh V that pretty clearly shows how the cultural left is strangling free speech. The author is a personal development guru, Internet entrepreneur and nomadic pickup artist. Which is kind of what I do, which is a career and lifestyle path that an increasing number of intelligent young men are choosing. Men have an evolutionary motivation to spread their genes as far as possible and the modern world of budget travel has made it easier and more appealing than ever to chase the skirts beyond our national borders. Men also have a motivation to build... something. For generations in the past it was building a family home, digging a well for the village or working on an old Porsche, our generation finds this same fulfillment in building online tribes and websites that attract the like minded, styling one's self into a personal development guru which of course means that you have to be Internet entrepreneur of some technical aptitude to communicate effectively. People are free to call us douchebags for the deviant lifestyle we've chosen but it's human nature to try to figure out how to maximize hedonism while minimizing labor, they would be doing the exact same thing given the option. The book follows the author as he goes on a speaking tour and hosts personal development meetups in several different cities in Europe and North America. Which dosent exactly sound outrageously scandalous does it? Plenty of personal development gurus and pickup artists do tours. However, Roosh V, in addition to being a pioneer of this lifestyle is also a career courtier of scandal - he has an uncanny ability to piss off loud people and is a talented practitioner of the art of Internet trolling. Because of his past writing in Canada and the author becomes the target of a vicious media scandal. I read this book while I was also reading Trust Me, I'm Lying by Ryan Holiday and the Canadian outrage is a quintessential case how the "fake news" that the media manufactures become self fulfilling prophesies which manifest in the real world as violence. I recommend the two books together. In the end... Free speech wins, he's able to hold all of his meetups. The Canadian police don't throw him in jail and the worst the hysterical mob manage to do is throw a beer in his face. Quintus writes What is now clear is that freedom of speech and the press exist merely as possibilities, and not as the absolute rights that they should be. The book helped me to clarify my belief in radical and extreme free speech, otherwise known as free speech. Baring exceedingly clear examples of speech intended to cause violence (like a mafia boss ordering a hit) as culture unless we have an extreme level of free speech than inevitably the right will decline for everyone. Extreme free speech means that we will have hate preachers and neo nazis along with gangsta rap music and really terrible comedians but it also means that we can use our free speech to ostracize and expose their bad ideas. In the book he includes the full transcript of the speech he gave, here's the crux of speech which sparked a controversy from coast to coast of the second largest country on Earth... At any other point in history day to day life was likely a tremendous struggle for the individual man; he had to labor in a factory or a field for well over 10 hours a day just to put a little bit of bread and soup on the table. He was in constant mortal danger of the tribe from over the hill invading his territory and killing him. His freedom of vocation and recreation was limited to a very few options and there was always a high likelihood that his king or country would conscript him to go marching off in a suicidal war. Fast forward to modern day life and we find a stark contrast in a man's life; we suffer from diseases of superfluous comfort, we are exhausted from the decision fatigue of deciding between so many enjoyable ways to spend our time and our lives are so safe that out of boredom we invent risky sports and hobbies to participate in. But there was one thing that was quite easy for the man of the past: courting and marrying a good wife. The hardness of life created all the incentives for women to be very feminine, virtuous and loyal. Women who didn't marry a similarly virtuous and hard working man at a young age were literally not likely to survive. Roosh V makes the point that the kind of loyal, wife material woman that was so prevalent in times past is now very rare and that the great struggle men face today is the holistic personal development necessary to find and attract a "unicorn" - a woman who is young and attractive with a good character that is unspoiled by cultural influences. Every time period has a sacrifice, and the sacrifice that we have to make is not food, is not work, is not living in filth, but it’s quality relationships with women. (p. 150) It now takes hundreds of hours of game work and self-improvement work to enter a sexual relationship with a girl who is good looking. Did your dad have to put in a hundred hours to meet your mom? My dad had to take a shower every day. (Laughter and clapping.) Is that enough now? (No.) (p. 146) He goes on the describe the modern day necessity of the art of seduction Their “natural” self will lead to reproductive failure without purposeful intervention that increases their attractiveness in the eyes of women who (p. 199) “Game” is a collection of socially-based tactics and reproducible behaviors that increase a man’s sexual attractiveness to women (pp. 199-200) You can read the rest of the speech in the book, it's mostly NOT about clever ways to pickup and have one night stands with women from bars or clubs. It's mostly about how to long term become a better man that can enter a relationship with a great woman. That was the secret sentiment communicated at these meetups that so many people in Canada did so much, so ineffectively to prevent from happening. You may totally disagree with this sentiment, I'm not sure if I'm 100% on board with it either, but if you think about it, it's really a useful message... It's a call for personal development it's a call for adapting oneself to the culture environment It's a call to rediscover the visceral experience of being a man by unplugging from the technological and ideological matrix Which brings me to a nuanced point... There's certain false beliefs that serve us very well Like recently I was watching an interview with the author Sam Harris and he said that libertarian free will is not a real thing. Libertarian free will is the idea that we can chose our our socio-economic position in life. That we can pull ourselves up by our bootstraps from poverty to become successful. Sam Harris makes a pretty good case why Libertarian free will is an illusion. I'm not sure, I'm not convinced either way; however, what I know for sure of is that I would definitely rather live in a society and have friends that believe in Libertarian free will than the opposite. If an accurate social science experiment could be conducted on different cultures I'm sure it would find that the cultures that believed the most in Libertarian free were the most healthy and had the happiest people. If Sam Harris is right (and I suspect he is) Libertarian free will is an very useful illusion we should embrace. Now you may totally disagree with Roosh's sentiment, you may believe something more mainstream like that courtship is simply more difficult for both men and women in the modern age. You may disagree with the premise of the book, that we have lost free speech and that this will lead to the decline of the most advanced culture this planet has ever seen. But logically you must see how, like Libertarian free will, Roosh's ideas will lead both to personal development and and a more free, healthy society. At least you will after reading this book.

If you think my experience might change someone's mind on this issue I would totally welcome anyone's edits or suggestions...

The book review of Adiós, America that Amazon censored... I'm a Spanish speaking, salsa dancing, Reggaeton music loving former illegal immigrant. I would be an understatement to say that I really enjoyed my new country... I mastered a new language I tried a bunch of new types of food Made a lot of friends Luckily avoided cops checking my passport And well, to be honest... I enjoyed a lot of bump'n grinding to Reggaeton music. My social circle was about 50% countrymen of mine, a lot of them wasted incredible amounts of time and money becoming legal residents but a lot of them just procrastinated like me and had the same legal status. After about 2 years my brother announced that he was getting married and as much as I enjoyed my life there certain things had grown to annoy me, I was homesick and longed to be back in the country and culture where I belonged, so I bought a flight to go home. Just showing up at the airport would be a recipe for disaster so I went down to the immigration office and announced my status and presented my ticket home to a very bored clerk, I half expected to be thrown in handcuffs but apparently this was a VERY normal thing. A week later I met with a surprisingly attractive state attorney, explained myself and she gave me the option of just being deported with a 1 year ban from visiting again, which I went with. No fee. No jail time. No apparent consequences. No problemo! When I entered my home country, I expected to be thoroughly questioned about my oblong absence abroad but instead the overwhelmed customs officer looked at my passport for all of about 9 seconds and waved me through. But here's the thing; I was not an illegal immigrant in the United States, I was an illegal in Colombia. I'm from Colorado originally. I came to Colombia on a 90 day tourist VISA that I overstayed by 2 years. When I lived in Colombia I had to be a very good immigrant and totally integrated myself into society because the Colombian government wasn’t giving me incentives to be lazy and irresponsible. Colombia didn’t... Give me free healthcare Give me free housing Help me get a job Give me free Spanish language classes Offer to support any children that I had there Give me cash support Give me food stamps Let me vote Give me a drivers license I had to be an adult and take care of myself. Our government offers all of the above which encourages the worst immigrants to come. In Colombia I had a number of Colombian friends who were smart, young, hardworking ambitious people and they all wanted to come to the United States but they couldn’t because our immigration system is so backed up dealing with lower quality immigrants and illegals. In case it's not clear, I have great love for latino countries… The friendly old people The salsa dancing The constant festivals Las chicas lindas The food I’m headed back to the south of Spain in about a month to live it up! But, there is a profound disfunctionality in these cultures, the anecdotal evidence of this is abundant if you’ve spent much time in these countries: The rampant alcoholism The manana, manana work ethic The shoddy workmanship of everything The very k-selected reproductive practices (family values and catholic chastity are a big joke!) The utterly incompetent state-run electric, phone and internet service providers The disregard for safe sex The rampant prostitution The terrible customer service in stores and restaurants I had a couple of friends try to start businesses in LATAM and it was next to impossible for them to hire reliable employees The general hedonistic imperative - everything is always less important than partying and getting laid… Except for maybe futbol! I would occasionally ask my latino friends about politics and their response was pretty consistent, they just thought all politicians were corrupt assholes, which is mostly true in their countries and also confirms the data in Stefan Molyneux's presentation The Truth About America’s Survival. I meditate everyday there's an excellent book on mindfulness that I read and reviewed by the philosopher Sam Harris; who is probably best known for his strong criticism of Islam. I joined his forum to discuss mindfulness and science and I made the mistake of sharing my insights and observations of latino culture with some liberals in a discussion of America's changing demographics. I was astounded by the willful ignorance, bigotry and refusal to think that I encountered on this issue. Here's how I ended the discussion... Some other issues and complex topics that Adios, America addresses... On Amnesty Everyone knows that one amnesty begets more illegal aliens, (239-240) There have been a half dozen more amnesties since then, legalizing millions more foreigners who broke our laws.(246-247) Amnesty is forever. (267-268) IQ Squared held an excellent debate on the topic of amnesty a few weeks prior to the US election. Remarkably, the anti-amnesty team's facts and arguments overcame the feelings and womanly sentiments of the pro-amnesty team and a very liberal New York crowd was convinced. Self Interest vs Compassion Wouldn’t any sane immigration policy be based on the principle that we want to bring in only immigrants who will benefit the people already here? (274-275) America takes in half the refugees of the entire world. (284-285) At what point will Americans remind their government that it has a responsibility to us, not to every sad person in the world? (286-287) The answer to that final question was answered on November 8th, 2016. Welfare Usage I've often thought that the real problem with immigration was the welfare state. To paraphrase the the defining point of another IQ Squared debate on immigration: You can't have open immigration and an open welfare state Ann clarifies this issue: immigrants use welfare only at 18 percent above the native-born rate. No, the fact that any immigrants are on welfare proves we’re not taking the right immigrants. It’s like saying, Only 18 percent of our cars burst into flames when you start them. (307-309) Our government does such a terrific job at choosing who gets to immigrate to America that 52 percent of legal immigrant households with children are on government assistance. (311-313) Seventy-five percent of immigrant families from Mexico are on government assistance. (3848-3849) it would be easier to repeal the law of gravity than to prevent immigrants from accessing welfare. (325-326) On White Guilt America takes in half the refugees of the entire world. (284-285) America is the only country to fight a revolution based on the principle that all men are equal before God, and it is the only country to fight a bloody civil war to end slavery and redeem that promise. (946-947) On Diversity Putnam’s study showed that the greater the ethnic diversity, the less people trusted their neighbors, their local leaders, and even the news. People in diverse communities gave less to charity, voted less, had fewer friends, were more unhappy, and were more likely to describe television as “my most important form of entertainment.” It was not, Putnam said, that people in diverse communities trusted people of their own ethnicity more, and other races less. They didn’t trust anyone. (1127-1130) no matter how many variables he accounted for, Putnam kept getting the same results: Diversity damages social cohesion. (1136-1137) Diversity from immigration harmed social harmony even more than America’s traditional black-white racial diversity. (1141-1142) Ann concludes There’s nothing good about diversity, other than the food, (1164-1165) Too which I'll add I do enjoy the bump'n grinding! Arguing with Liberals about Immigration As I discovered on the Sam Harris forums facts, data and my relevant anecdotal experiences do almost nothing to change people's minds on this issue. I watched an excellent TEDx talk about how conservatives and liberals talk past each other because they make arguments based on fundamentally different values. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LrThf-Beq0 Liberal Values Equality Fairness Protection from harm Tolerance Diversity Multiculturalism Conservative Values Loyalty & Patriotism Respect for Authority Purity & Morality Hard Work Voluntarism So next time I find myself in an immigration debate with a liberal as opposed to going with an informational argument I'll say this... The problem is not with the immigrants the problem is with our government. So our current immigration system and policy is really unfair to other countries and actually disadvantages the individual immigrants. Here's why... Firstly, the United States and Western countries steal the best people from all of these other countries. The greatest resource that any country has is it's most intelligent, inventive, ambitious and driven citizens. As long as we have wide open immigration policies, the countries most needing help will just get worse and worse as long as we enable the brain drain from these countries. For example... Take a country like Greece; for Greece to not just turn into a total hell hole that country needs the best Greek entrepreneurs to stay there and start companies, to invent new things, they need good Greeks who can become principled politicians that will fight corruption. All those Greeks are moving to Germany, England or the United States. Watch any of the documentaries about Greece and you'll see this. What Greece badly needs right now is for the best Greek people to really fight for the future of that country and that's not happening because our governments make immigration such an appealing option. How much better off would South Africa be if Elon Musk started Paypal and Tesla there? It's fundamentally unfair to all the other countries and to the people in those countries that we encourage their best people - their best natural resource - to come to our country instead. It's like if we went and stole all of Venezuela's oil, all of Brazil's coffee, all of Italy's olives, all of Mexico's tequila, all of Africa's diamonds or all of Colombia's beautiful women. It's fundamentally wrong for our country to steal resources from another country. Secondly, we really disadvantage the immigrants by giving them welfare. Immigrants have tremendous potential to really be productive members of society because when you move to a new country and are surrounded by a new culture and language it really sparks neuroplasticity which is the capacity of your mind to grow, adapt and invent awesome new stuff. But we blunt that potential by giving them so much free stuff. Free healthcare Free language classes Free schooling of their children Free vocational training Free legal services Free groceries Even free housing and cash support in some cases When people have no other option other than to succeed they become incredibly innovative, this is what really unlocks our limitless human potential, All of the success stories you hear about immigrants are evidence of this; they are people who came to a brand new country and out of desperation worked really hard to create something great. But when people are given a monthly stipend of a $1000 cash and a bunch of free stuff we make them way too comfortable to ever reach beyond mediocrity. Not only does our immigration system steal the best people from the countries that need them the most it disadvantages them when they get here while at the same time attracting the worst people from these countries who just want to take advantage of our generous welfare system. How's that for a fact free argument to appeal to womanly liberal feelings?

Sex will be free for everyone. Once a month the government will pay for a hooker to bang you. Which sounds ridiculous but if you're socially liberal and fiscally conservative it really makes sense. Let me explain... It will create A LOT of jobs. For college graduates with worthless degrees who can't find jobs, single mothers and especially immigrants (because we all know that we secretly like to bang brown people). The hookers will practice proper birth control so we won't have anymore unplanned pregnancies which solves the abortion issue. If you're an unemployed white male with a muscled body and ruggedly good looks from years of working in the manufacturing sector you'll have a new career as a gigolo! Also great for normal single women because they aren't obligated to sleep with a guy after sitting through 3 dates of his dumb jokes. It solves Islamic terror because once all the guys named Mohamed start getting free sex, well that's the closest they'll ever get to 72 virgins, which is pretty much why they signed up to be suicidal terrorists first place. We'll have the geeks create an app that's kind of like a cross between Tinder and Uber, it will be like the Obamacare website but you will select a hooker to bang you. There will be a matching system like Tinder where you will select hookers that you find attractive (and vice versa of course). Then a supply and demand system like Uber will determine how long you have to wait to get your free sex, but because the hookers also get to see your photos and swipe right or left it creates an incentive for everyone to go to gym and eat healthy so they look good. This will solve a lot of healthcare problems and result in a massive boom in the gym, tanning salon and healthy food industry. You can be a fat troll if you want but you will have to wait a longer time to get your sex ration from less desirable hooker. Which is just fair to the hookers right? You might say... This is the most preposterously sexist thing I've ever seen on the internet, obviously this is just mostly just to benefit straight males. Well, yes but straight males but pay WAY MORE taxes than anyone else, they kind of deserve it. And it really does benefit other groups also, read on... It will improve wealth inequality because guys can have sex with supermodels without needing to buy a huge golden yacht like Donald Trump or Jordan Belfort. Greedy guys won't want to get so rich to impress girls! Equality promoting Feminists should really be for it since it's so similar to the many social programs they've implemented benefiting women. Free sex benefits everyone! Isn't equality great? Feminists also don't need to worry all the time about men raping them! All the rapists can find hookers who have rape fantasies, which is a thing according to those books that sold 100 million copies. You may say... But it will increase the national debt by trillions to pay millions of hookers to have sex with everyone! Actually it pay for itself because people (well, men) waste SO MUCH time and money trying to get laid and these resources can used so much more efficiently elsewhere and our economy. If you're socially liberally enough to go along with medical marijuana, gay marriage, transsexual bathrooms and all the other weirdness... Well, hey we all knew legalized prostitution was coming next. If we're going to have free healthcare, free college, free abortions and free cellphones it's just the progressive thing to also have free sex! It will also end all our expensive pointless wars because we can just send armies of hookers into the places we are bombing/invading to seduce the guys who really like to say Allahu akbar loudly. So there's like another trillion dollars saved! Republicans might not like but once those grumpy old guys get some free sex they'll change their minds real fast, let's be honest you guys gave up on family values a long time ago! Democrats, my socialist European friends and especially you Bernie supporters must see the genius this big beautiful government program! No way it could turn into huge, civilization ending disaster...

Thanks! Yep here's a few highlights...

I did something you guy may find useful, I created this visual flowchart that breaks down the top 200 or so most popular FDR Youtube videos and playlists by categories like... Books Culture Donald Trump Economics Feminism, Men's Rights and Gender Objectivism History Libertarianism Politics Philosophy Psychology Race Rebuttals Religion Sex Technology Terrorism The Red Pill The Truth About... Etc Check it out https://www.mindmeister.com/792884205/stefan-molyneux-philosophy-flowchart Share it? https://twitter.com/JRoseland/status/798865536373420032

For the first time in my life I'm going to be doing a televised debate with a Hillary supporter (actually a DNC Hilary delegate) in Kiev where I live. I'd like to get some feedback from you guys; I suspect my opening statement is where I will really win or lose the debate. Here's the rough version of my opening statement There's one issue in this debate that's more important to me than any other and I'll make case of why it should be the most important to you - especially because you are here in Kiev - that issue is war. I hate war, if there's one thing that makes me truly ashamed about my country it's that my country has been waging war on the rest of the world for so long now. There is a mountain of smoldering bodies reaching to the sky because of the foreign policy of the United States for last 20 years. And it has accomplished nothing, trillions of dollars and millions of bodies later, we have nothing to show for the wars of aggression that the Republicans and the Democrats waged. There are three criteria which indicate what our potential leaders are going to do, these are the three criteria we should use to judge our potential leaders The financial incentives they have (the most important) Their past behavior What they say they are going to do Hillary Clinton will mean more war; she's already said that she will use military force with Russia, she has made a career of using military force and she has taken __ millions of dollars from the Military Industrial Complex. War between the US and Russia maybe really bad for the Ukraine, for the people in this room and Trump is the bet for averting that. Trump is the isolationist candidate, if you've read Trump's books you'll know that his expertise is in making win-win deals. That's why he's a billionaire. Trump is in the business of selling luxury condos, silk neck ties and inspirational books. He gains nothing from the world being at war. In 6 months if Kiev is being shelled by Russian artillery and people are dying in the streets because a hot war has broken out between the US and Russia, because the elites in Washington D.C have poked the Russian bear one too many times, will you really care about Trump University, some politically incorrect thing that Trump said flippantly about women or any of the relatively petty Trump issues that me and Reno are going to be debating here tonight. I suspect that the audience is going to be pretty left leaning being. I think the moderator is a liberal, I've already gotten a bad vibe from him, so I'll be at a bit of a disadvantage there. My challenge will be making arguments quickly before the moderator or my opponent cuts me off... My strategy In my opening statement I'm making a really strong moral positioning I'm going to try to frame the debate by explaining that we should look at Trump and Hillary a little different since one is a private businessman and the other is a life long, highly compensated public servant. I'm going to emphasize that all of the criticisms of trump are conspiracy theories which can be debated back and forth Whereas Hillary's scandals are pretty plain black and white, especially the email scandal I'm going to focus on the email scandal because it's an easy case for Hilary's incompetence, since it's so recent and irrefutable I'm going to focus on the likelihood of a US-Russia war under Clinton, which will be very bad for the Ukraine I suspect my primary challenge will be the accusation of Trump's racism I'll emphasize that in history whenever we see racism associated with war, slavery, genocide it's almost always explicit racism where people are totally upfront about. Trump has created +30,000 jobs which many have been filled by minorities I'm going to specify the difference between expressing benign racial preferences I'm sure we are going to discuss immigration; I'll make the point that the elites in the United States are trying to do something weird which is to turn one country with a distinctive cultural, ideological, ethnic, religious makeup into a completely different country with a different cultural, ideological, ethnic, religious makeup. The elites never asked the American people if that's what they wanted. There was no public discussion. This will be the election where people decide if that's what they want. Trump is going to be called a charlatan and a scammer I'll respond that in America true charlatans and scammers go to jail. Bernie Madoff, Martha Stewart and Jordan Belfort (The Wolf of Wall Street guy) all had the best attorneys that money could buy yet they went to jail. If Trump is such a scammer why hasn't he ever gone to jail? I'm going also going to make a more emotional cases I welcome any suggestions, I haven't done a televised debate before. I appreciate any factoids or really damning quotes you guys can share with me that support the arguments I'm going to try to make... Thanks!