scripts

[scripts @scripts145]

@SageOfTime1 can you explain the pro's of independence minus imperialism?

[scripts @scripts145]

@ArielGonzalez_1 @DSA_Watch he larped as a socialist for votes and virtue signals. now look.

[scripts @scripts145]

@BoCampbell18 @DSA_Watch you don't live in dubai you visit Dubai. high temp, high humidity, uv index of 11. im good after 1 week.

[scripts @scripts145]

@SimplySubstance i mean he qualified it fairly well. stating both are just yes men. and his problems with it. he is a moderate he would rather have moderate. he still leans blue. jd was very anti trump and fairly centrist with right leanings. aoc is far more extreme on the left side. all he said.

[scripts @scripts145]

@Hybridh139266 @mistergeezy that he should have been in them?
https://t.co/J4cD4ZGybt

[Brett Boyer 🇺🇸 @BrettHBoyer]

@hasanthehun Well here is 20 minutes worth of clips. I guess these are all out of context?

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan no you. Good one, chief. Continue to exert your influence with all this sanctimoniousness and moral authoritarianism over the will of the people. You can have your ideals, but you do not speak for the masses. instead of but colonialism. state how if would benefit the people.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan oh sorry sahould i say elite paternalism and ideological control instead? just like how the "elites" impose there beliefs for your well being. with the illusion of a shared interest with the object goal to erode the autonomy of the masses shaming the dissident.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan k. fascist authoritarian who thinks he knows best from 92% of the rest of the population.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan History is more complicated than a 20-minute YouTube video. If we're debating the facts, let's compare primary sources, congressional records, and historians not treat one YouTube creator as the definitive source.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan Johnny Harris is one commentator—not the final authority on Puerto Rican history. His videos are useful introductions, but they present an interpretation, not the entire historical debate.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan There are legitimate criticisms of U.S. policy ncluding limited self-government, economic inequality, and the Insular Cases but those criticisms don't prove every policy was designed to dispossess Puerto Ricans or enrich outsiders.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan Puerto Ricans continued to own property, elect local officials over time, and eventually gained U.S. citizenship in 1917. The island also developed its own legislature, constitution, and elected governor. Those developments don't fit the claim that the goal was to remove power.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan es, the United States changed Puerto Rico's governing system after 1898. That's what happens when sovereignty changes. But saying the U.S. "changed the rules to push Puerto Ricans out and give power to colonialists" ignores important facts.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan claim that corporations owned 45% of farmland by 1930 doesn't necessarily prove illegal ownership or deliberate government favoritism. Large landholdings can result from mergers, leasing arrangements, subsidiaries, and changing agricultural economics.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan while enforcement was inconsistent, land concentration wasn't caused solely by federal inaction. It was also driven by global demand for sugar, economies of scale in sugar production, investment by both U.S. and Puerto Rican interests.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan extremist just means it is extreme to one side or the other. while most remain in the center. if 10% want something and the rest don't that is extremist by definition.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan changes occurred including the rise of large sugar corporations those developments were driven by a combination of global sugar markets, investment patterns, local land sales, and Puerto Rican landowners voluntarily selling property. Many sugar estates existed before U.S. rule.

[scripts @scripts145]

@YankeeAlfaro @HimesStan United States did not conduct widespread confiscation of individual farms or homes. Puerto Rican property rights continued to be recognized under American law, and residents retained the ability to buy, sell, inherit, and litigate land ownership in U.S. courts.