top of page

True Citizenship


   Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that while reading this section, some of the points may come across quite harsh. However, the following statements are meant to be considered in the spirit of careful thought and analysis, not prejudice. They are not meant to persecute others or their ethnic heritage/religious beliefs, but rather provide possible clarity on the subject matter. If you are a sensitive person or are easily offended, please do not read this page.

Issue

   Even though violating the terms of citizenship may be a concern for any nation, the following are a few examples that have occurred in America that may apply for other countries as well.
Hispanics

   The Hispanic population may have violated the terms of citizenship regarding their responsibility to respect the laws of the country.

   One possible concern is their promotion of the Spanish language. Even though English was not legally established as the official language in America until recently, it was always considered to be as such for the nation. However, by encouraging Spanish in various ways (e.g., product labeling, voting ballots, ATMs, television broadcasts, etc.), it shows that the Hispanic population was disrespectful towards the other nationalities and the country. Even though this issue is not important enough to cause legal action, it shows that the Hispanic population was disrespectful towards the country that is not reflective of being a true citizen.

   Another concern is the Hispanic population's support for outsourcing jobs to Latin America through certain trade agreements (e.g., NAFTA). Showing favor towards another country at the detriment of America's welfare is contrary to the terms of citizenship that requires to hold the country in the highest regard, and not have allegiance towards others.

   A more serious matter, however, is the Hispanic community's voting record in how they consistently voted against candidates who opposed Hispanic-related issues. For example, if a federal judge or governor ran on the premise of having more secure borders from illegal immigrants, the Hispanic population overwhelmingly voted against that candidate. Their intent to disrupt legal matters is actually obstruction of justice since it was meant to prevent government officials from performing their duties effectively. Their behavior in this matter was not only disrespectful towards the country, it was criminal in nature.

   Their most serious offense, however, is the Hispanic population's support for aiding and abetting illegal border crossings. Harboring and providing sanctuary for those who enter the country illegally was conducted with the full knowledge and intent that such behavior was in violation of federal law. Acting in this manner is contrary to fulfilling the terms of citizenship that requires citizens to uphold the laws of the country, not violate them. Such immoral conduct by their community continued for decades without remorse or reconsideration nationwide.

   In a pure democracy that will no longer be influenced by corrupt officials vying for votes, the nation will need to decide how to handle the Hispanic population's unethical and criminal behavior. In particular, where they had repeatedly violated the terms of citizenship and whether they should be held responsible collectively as a whole by having their citizenships rescinded due to their conduct.
Blacks

   The Black population had repeatedly violated the terms of citizenship in America.

   One violation is regarding their repeated acts of racism. Normally, racism by itself is not grounds for dismissal since it's just an opinion, however, racism to the degree that the Black population has committed over the years has been excessive in nature, and contrary to being an American citizen.

   For example, certain behaviors that reflected their racism are the Miss Black America pageant, NAACP, Black Lives Matter, BET channel, Jet magazine, Black History Month, black colleges, black Jesus Christ, among others. Such conduct represents that the Black population has a serious and underlying racism issue. Widespread racism to this degree is problematic and when it becomes so commonplace in society, it also affects other situations as well. Sometimes subconsciously due to the repetition of behaving in such a racist manner throughout life.

   Their racism is clearly prevalent with the Black community's voting record of consistently deciding in favor of black candidates. In Barack Obama's 2008 campaign, more than 96% of black people voted for Obama even though the candidate's policies offered little for that community. Even the chair of the Republican National Committee (who was black) mentioned that he was stuck between voting for a member of his own party, or the opposition party's black candidate.

   Opinion among black people during that time (among others) was that they had willingly, and quite blatantly, voted based on race. Skin color should never be a consideration when deciding who to vote for in this country. Nor to pressure others to vote in similar racist manner which occurred as well. The Justice Department should have condemned such outspoken and abhorrent racism by threatening to file criminal charges against the Black community for discriminating against the other candidates. Discrimination is normally a civil offense, but interfering with political elections and the intimidation of others regarding their vote is a criminal offense.

   Additional justification for considering that racism of this magnitude should be considered a criminal offense is to reference bribery. Bribery, a similar crime in which one's vote is coerced in some manner, carries a prison penalty of up to thirty years for federal cases. This is especially true when it involves the fate of the Presidential election. When considering the number of voting infractions that black people have committed over the years, they should have faced decades of imprisonment for repeatedly having their vote coerced due to their racism.

   Bribery is against the law because of corrupt intent, regardless whether the influence with the individual's decision is money driven, racist views, or some other means. Having one's vote coerced in a manner that unfairly influences the election's outcome warrants that the infraction becomes a criminal offense. ​Either that or make bribery legal in America to avoid the double standard. Again, over 96% of the Black population voted quite blatantly and openly bragged about their racial discrimination just with Barack Obama's elections alone.

   However, instead of condemnation, such racist conduct was deemed acceptable and even considered to be normal within the Black community. Such systematic racism by the Black population over the years has been an embarrassing and disgraceful part of America's history.

   Racism of this magnitude also endangers public safety. Their dehumanization of law enforcement shows the general disrespect for upholding the laws in this country. It seems that whenever a police officer apprehends a black suspect who is resisting arrest, the Black population automatically decides in favor of the unruly suspect. It doesn't matter what the offense is, or whether the officer is justified in defending him/herself from harm, the Black population consistently decided in favor of the black suspect regardless of the situation.

   Supporting those who resist arrest and oppose law enforcement violates the terms of citizenship that requires all individuals to uphold the law. The issue of excessive force by law enforcement, whether justified or not, is a secondary matter.

   The Black population's failure to support the law was further demonstrated with their violent protests and riots throughout the country. Their willful destruction of property with the intent to do harm should have been condemned as domestic terrorism by the Justice Department, not tolerated by the officials.

   Furthermore, the Black population's contention with the courts that dismissed charges, or not file charges against law enforcement, is another failure to support the rule of law. Threatening to "burn down the city" if the court didn't rule in favor of the black suspect was clearly criminal with hostile intent.

   Such unruly behavior of acting against the court's decision was repeated across the country without apology or remorse. The problem is not only with those who protested and opposed the court's decision, but rather that the entire Black community who collectively supported such behavior due to their widespread racism is the issue for the country.

   If those events weren't bad enough, the Defund the Police movement further worsened the situation since it endangered public safety nationwide. By acting in a manner that is not in the best interests of the nation (by decreasing police presence or slowing their reaction to crimes), they intentionally endangered public safety even after being notified that their actions to defund the police would have that result.

   Even if the Black population's behavior is disregarded, the basis of their citizenship should be questioned as well. In other words, if President James Monroe (1817-1825) was successful in his effort to deport slaves with the American Colonization Society, their failure to uphold the terms of citizenship wouldn't even be an issue today.

   In addition, President Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) mentioned that he preferred to free the slaves and deport them as part of a colonization effort, but didn't do so because he was worried about their health and well being. Not because the African descendants deserved or were justified in becoming American citizens. If either President had followed through with their original intent, or if the country never participated in the African slave trade, the Black population may not even exist today to violate the terms of citizenship.

   When the Black population's illegitimacy is combined with their repeated acts that endangered public safety (e.g., favoring criminals that resist arrest, opposing court's decisions, nationwide rioting, racist/coerced voting, aggressiveness towards law enforcement, domestic terrorism-like behavior of threatening cities and the courts, Defund the Police movement, etc.), such conduct violates the terms of citizenship in this country.

   To be a citizen is to uphold and respect the laws of the nation at all times. The new constitutional powers of a pure democracy (that grants the nation's voters the ability to rescind citizenships in order to resolve offenses of this importance) will determine the Black population's fate.
Muslims

   The Muslim population may have unknowingly violated the terms of citizenship in America. The issue of concern is that the Islamic doctrine may be in direct contrast to the country's laws and customs.

   For example, the Islamic custom for females to cover themselves so that males would not be tempted is contrary to being a citizen in this country. A fundamental principle in America is that all people, both male and female, should be treated equally and fairly at all times. Behaving otherwise is in direct contrast to the country's principles and values.

   If a particular religious doctrine is opposed to this ideal then people of that religion should not become citizens since they will be unable to fulfill the terms of citizenship. The freedom of religion mandate has lower precedence compared to the higher obligations and requirements of the primary principle in America, in that, all people are considered equal.

   If a religious doctrine like Islam prevents people from fulfilling the terms of citizenship, they should not become citizens and their dismissal is justified since engaging in such a religious practice is contrary to the country's laws and customs.
Anti-Americans

   Burning the flag is common practice in anti-American demonstrations, however, this behavior is not really about the freedom of speech argument. Citizenship requires that one must hold the country, and symbols thereof, in the highest regard of respect. However, if a person stomps, spits, burns, or defaces the flag in some manner while saying that America is not their country, how may they fulfill these terms of citizenship? Such are grounds for dismissal.
Summary

   Some may say that exiling an entire ethnic group of people would be a harsh corrective action, however, not addressing the issue of violating the terms of citizenship would be an even greater problem for the country.

   Keep in mind that the above arguments are not to be taken to be mean or malicious towards others, but rather what is important is to be honest and truthful about the situation. Take a sincere look at all of this. If a particular group of people repeatedly violated the terms of citizenship in the country, should they really be citizens of the nation?

   On a global level, some of these issues may be resolved by having corrected policies imposed by the international community. For example, the United Nations should evaluate if dual (or multi) citizenships should continue since having allegiance towards another country may cause similar problems as the above.

   In America's situation, allowing allegiance towards another country has caused: (1) the Hispanic population to support moving jobs to Mexico at the detriment of America's welfare, (2) the Jewish population's support of using America's military to attack Iraq/Iran for the benefit of Israel that endangered American lives, and (3) at a lower level of importance, allowing foreign immigrants to become citizens even though their only interest is to benefit themselves financially (e.g., became a citizen only to stay longer than a work visa permits for more money before returning to their native countries where their true allegiance lies).

   Allowing fake citizens to continue would be problematic for any nation since such people don't behave as true citizens for the country. The international community can solve some of the problem by denying multi citizenships with the penalty of being permanently denied citizenship in the country that they denounce (to prevent manipulation of visas/citizenships).
bottom of page