Possibly because Americans as a general group are more diverse than any other country and so run into the “doesn’t look like me, might be scary” conflict more often…

That being said, every country has this. From France giving their black players a whole bunch of racist shit, to the Greeks killing refugees that don’t look like them through negligence, to the Germans who still shit all over the Romani people for having a different appearance/culture.
It’s not a unique feature to the US.

As for using colors to describe people based on their skin tone… Every language does it as far as I can tell. I don’t understand why you find that odd. It can be a useful descriptor and if you want to be shade specific, you’re more than welcome to.

…and that’s when I bought the horse a prostitute.

Least I could do?

And I was noting that the USSR had a tendency to shift their ethnic populations around to wipe out (still don’t understand how you took that term to mean anything other than killing local populations, it’s “wipe out” as in “erase”) other local ethnic populations. We saw the numbers increase until the USSR splintered and then fall off because there was no longer a system to support that shifting of ethnic populations. This crowd should know about it unless they only believe in or talk about the beneficial parts of communism and ignore the ugly parts that regularly get implemented.

I notice you’re not going after OP for his vague title with picture, but I’m fair game.

To make it abundantly clear (which you can infer from the other chart posted in the thread), the population change was mostly non-Latvians entering before the USSR splintered and leaving afterwards. I made a reference to habits in that region of wiping out locals and replacing them with ethnic “russians” to rebut the vague sarcastic “the decline was after the USSR splintered so communism=good” title.

Was that clear enough?

I clearly had “moved populations around to wipe out ethnic locals” in my first post. I’m sorry if you can’t understand that to mean that USSR was doing a genocide (killing) a lot of the enthic minorities and replacing them with their main ethnic group. It’s one reason why Russia today keeps saying that countries adjacent to them (who were former USSR like Ukraine) are ethnically Russians and belong as part of the Russian state.

Kindly pick up some reading comprehension.

My point was to ask for additional specific data that concerns population size/dynamics. Then I brought up a historical USSR/Russian empire move where they killed an ethnic minority population in a region and moved in “ethnic russians” to replace them for better comrade-ing.

How does emigration/immigration look during those periods? Remember how the USSR moved populations around to wipe out ethnic locals? Ukraine and Pepperidge Farms remember.

All I was doing was correcting a misconception and giving the actual path to what they wanted.

Nowhere did I say it was good or bad or whether I supported it.

Please take your words out of my mouth and keep them in yours.

He can’t because he wasn’t born here, but we could totally elect his wife and let him do the whole first husband thing while still advising if she needs it.

Depends, are we expecting the sub to survive?