Comments by "red. river65" (@red.river6575) on "Johnny Harris" channel.

  1.  Royal Bengal Tiger  Mexico is racist, starting with the Spanish/Indian conflicts and caste system. And before that tribe against tribe. Even today, Mexicans boast about their whiteness, others of their Indian blood. There would have been no African slaves if African merchants had not sold their own to other nations. Slavery in Africa was a booming business centuries ago. Racism in the United States is not what it was 150 years ago. Not all were slave owner's, in fact the nation went into the Civil War over freedom for slaves, segregation helped the Black to develop themselves to independence setting their own businesses, etc in their own communities, Civil Rights, and today they have every right under the law as any other American. In the US, any racism that still exists is politically motivated and racism works the other way around. Can't be that bad as immigrants of all colors are pouring into US borders.
    353
  2.  @Dhksksjjsjjs  Why would people from what is today Mexico want to be in what is today the United States want to in the US today. Had colonization not happened there would have been the Apache, Navajo, Yaqui, Comanch, Ute and a host of Indians from California to Florida to contend with. Indians were warriors , hated each other and if the northern tribes fought amongst each other, killing, slaving, and taking away resources they sure as heck would fight off those from the very distant south. The Comanche tore Chihuahua to pieces once upon a time... And Mexico after independence never conquered the SW Indians. In fact the SW Indians never did accept Mexico in their lands... Utopia, it's all in the mind so dream on... Conquest happens and life goes on. And it's past time Mexicans start making a better nation for their people instead of looking north. Show the United States you can do it instead of crying over conquest.. Mexico claimed the SW for only 25 years, big deal. If Spain had not abdicated the SW, Mexico would never have claimed the territories. Give Mexico an inch on SW history and they take a mile. But it's not Mexico, it's some Mexican factions that make all the senseless noise..
    75
  3.  Mr. Common sense  Upon US conquest, the annexed territories were populated by unconquered northern Indians, Navajo, Apache, Ute, Kiowa, Comanche, Yaqui and other CA Tribes who did not accept Mexican nationism as they knew their lands, and were in control of the territories. During the Mexican Period these Indians were at war with the new Republic of Mexico. Mexico never conquered them. To later come under control of the United States and were appropriated reservations and are tribal members and owners of their sovereign nations or lands. Tribes get goverenment funding into the millions annually. Spain did not steal the many territories that became Mexico in 1821. Spain conquered through war, battles between the Spanish and Indian. The conquistadors have been called so for centuries because of their conquests. Conquest being the winner of the war. Wars have existed forever worldwide. Victor always takes the spoils.
    35
  4.  @jac6547  A nation with mixed races/language becomes more complex. That was also one of the reasons the US did not want to annex Mexico. Smart.
    24
  5. He just put together a one day web search and pulled out sections to do a biased video.
    9
  6.  @BeeJayyDaDon  Adopted homeland, American Indian phenotype is obviously Asian. Asians who migrated to new lands along with their DNA and not always here. Nope, not the homeland, rather immigrants like everyone else. "Native". Not really, as American Indian's did not originate in America. We all know this. Indians may have been considered native in the 1500s to the European because the Indians were already here. Where they came from was never questioned... Just as a newcomer to any area can consider the inhabitants natives, even though the "native" had come from somewhere else and consider themselves native to the area after many years.
    6
  7. 13treces Dump as part of a banana republic whose goverenment would have trashed lands that the United States conquered and developed as part of a great nation. You know the banana republic whose citizens are always looking north.
    5
  8. The annexed territories were part of Mexico as a provinces for barely 15 to 25 years. They had belonged to Spain for almost 300 years. Had Mexico not gained independence, Mexico never would have claimed the SW and CA. They were too far in the frontier to be of any real interest to Mexico. USA is fully entitled as Mexico was conquered, and the US paid for territory it wanted at the tune of fifteen million dollars. Your invasion is not justified.
    4
  9. Thats right, don't blame the United States. It's human history.
    3
  10. It's easily forgotten because Texas became part of Mexico from 1821 to 1836. 14 years is hardly worth remembering. Also Just briefly part of France, and briefly it's own Republic; and part of Spain and part of the US for about the same, part of these nation's, for well over a century for each.
    3
  11.  @13treces  blah, blah, blah. My response was much more intelligent than yours "dump as your brain you mean?" However my comment did not deminish any one. My comment just supported what Anonymous Duck commented on, who is right on; Mexico was conquered, the United States apologizes for nothing, and the area (CA, NM, TX) be a complete dump if still part of Mexico. That's history as it happened. A banana republic is what it would be , just like Mexico, had the United States not conquered the entirety of Mexico, given land back to Mexico, payed Mexico $15,000,000 for annexed land. All negotiated under a Treaty.
    3
  12.  @13treces  I'm not getting into the BR political science here, but BR has bee applied to all of Latin America for impoverished countries with exploitive goverenment functioning poorly for it's citizens while benefiting powers that be, even though it's origins were applied to exploitation of bananas and such by other countries. I'm no expert, but I'm neither illiterate or am I ignorant of SW history. Or am I trying to compensate by discrediting others as the subject was not individuals but a country, which as Trump says, sends us it's worst. Believe me, I wish for Mexico to develop it's citizens for a better life, after all were are living beings with needs in this world. And am aware and satisfied that Mexico has come a long way as I hold nothing against Mexicans and have good Mexican immigrant friends. Except for those who corruptly abuse our borders, fraudulently use our US system, parents who abuse their children, putting them in the hands of smugglers with no guarantees for their lives. If I offended you, sorry about that, we after all do live in an angry world because of corrupt goverenments, the USA included.
    3
  13. They feel cheated that the designated border was too far north, excluding them as Americans. Always looking north, coveting the neighbors government, its not the land itself. Stolen land is just an excuse for getting cheated out of the prosperous side of the border.
    3
  14. You're got a chip on your shoulder for failure of the mexican goverenment to support it's citizens and nation. Wishful thinking but will not happen. Superpower, guess is China will crush the west as the United States breaks down with liberal open borders leader's as the US will not have a nation.
    2
  15. Whites people are no more racist than blacks or browns. People are just people, many times partial to their own. Called human nature.
    2
  16. BOTOBOP To begin with, the annexed territories or Texas for that matter were not historically Mexican except for 25 years at the most. Only because of Mexican independence did Mexico claim the land. The indigenous SW Indians never recognized Mexico and were at wars with Mexico for trespassing their lands. Mexico never controlled the land or conquered the SW Indians.
    2
  17.  @billdipperly1573  you must be a liberal snow flake. Stolen lands is just to get attention for established norm of conquest to try to justify oppression through loss of land. Nothing more than history revsion indoctrination. Mexico knew what it was getting into, fought the fight, executed Americans as was standard back in the day, the war in their home court and outnumbered the Americans. Mexico is a western nation established itself as such -polically, independence, it's constitution, it's name, Estados Unidos Mexicanos. It accepted western norms - war, conquest, a Treaty, peace, land purchase, change of borders. It's is Mexican factions such as Chicano movements, not Mexico, promoting hate and stolen lands.
    2
  18. Is that why many Mexicans prefer America and don't want anything Mexico.
    2
  19. Take over or sale of fifteen million was no big deal or lots of money for Mexico. Mexico claimed California and SW territories for barely 15 to 25 years, easily forgotten except the negotiated border between both nations was too far north for many Mexicans to take advantage of American citizenship. Always looking north, never south -- some of those lands had belonged to Mexico too.
    2
  20. Yes, more woke cult propoganda.
    2
  21. The Thirteen Colonies under British rule. The United States became independent from Britain, 1776 no longer under it's yoke and free to rule itself. Bye, bye Britain, hello United States of America, two different entities. .
    2
  22.  @kymanibrown8039  says who...
    2
  23. I'm not guilty, my family's been on the American continent for over 400 years. That's pretty native by now...
    2
  24.  @bambinazo123  MX may be powerful in faces but not in brains. Although...with the far left liberal "powers that be" in DC nowadays, brains are in very short supply.
    2
  25.  @bambinazo123  Depends on the internet sources and how issues are interpreted.
    2
  26. No it's not. There's a Treaty, border, citizenship, immigration laws. Mexico claimed California and SW for barely 25 years and lost because, Mexico just barely a nation, aside from inability to manage them also was whipped in the War. Unless your ancestors were from the SW during the War, be they Indian or Spanish you are not inherent to the lands and your like any other immigrant.
    2
  27. Bilpam Jok. Just imagine, a complete continent, America , uninhabited by humans because no one left the homeland😂. Wow!
    2
  28. Just who really are the good guys... According to history...
    2
  29. In reality, he should have said that just a few years ago it was all New Spain territories, the lands owned by Spain for three hundred years. Mexico claimed the SW lands for only 25 years and were not historically Mexico's. We are moving on alright, to Marxist ideas, biased university professors studies on stolen lands, anti-colonialism, and Democratic politics reshaping the mentally of USA citizens to a Socialist government. Vote Republican and stop dwelling on anti US attitudes. 🇺🇸
    2
  30.  @cc-oo7vn  Wokes are history revionists.
    2
  31.  @mofewilkie5707  Well go ahead and learn it, but stay away from Chicano Studies revision history woke professors. While you're at it, learn Unitef States SW history, there are volumes of Spanish archival documentation in the United States; Mexico City which was the governing center for all of New Spain; and Spain...
    2
  32. It's almost impossible to understand Mexico and U.S. SW history without a good understanding that what is today Mexico since 1824 was territories claimed by Spain, to become part of New Spain. New Spain was many territories claimed in the continent early in the 1500s starting with Vera Cruz moving into Tenichitlan, renamed Mexico City by Spain, named after the Mexica Aztec whose territory was limited to the valley of Mexico (or Aztec) in the Mexico City area. Spains exploration and territorial claims took about 50 years by the time Spain opened the way to the very distant north reaching California and tierras nuevas or new lands of New Mexico/ Arizona, Texas by approx. 1550. Simultaneously the same was occurring in Florida and the Mississippi areas, more territories for New Spain. The population in New Spain, both Spanish and Indian identified the areas by location which had either Spanish or Indigeniuos names as there was no Mexico or Mexican until 300 years after Spains arrival on the American continent. Maps of New Spain prior to 1821 do not chart a nation of Mexico. The maps chart separate New Spain territories. During this era "Mexico" can take no credit for any borders because it did not exist. The political climate was Spains goverenment and rule. Mexico City was prominent because of Spains viceroy governing for the European King from this particular territory, ruling all of New Spain -- California to Florida, Cuba, Central America, today's Mexico, Caribbeans, Philippines plus more. Historians and writters confuse history by referring to New Spain as Mexico, leaving the impression that Mexico is an ancient nation, when in fact, the mestizo nation of 1824, adopted the name Mexico from the Spanish who had 300 years earlier named the city for the Mexica. Mexico is many indigeniuos tribes, not only Aztec. The United States created the first nation in America in 1776, followed by Latin America and Canada's creating their own nations after independence from the motherland. Until folks understand this, they will continue to assume instead of understand the making of American continent. America was vast lands to become territories by the European claimant, be it Spain, France, or Great Britain who were wary of the other protecting their claims.
    2
  33. Gerri577 If you're referring to those Mexican American Chicano Study professors, they are not scholars and are one of the Mexican factions pushing stolen lands. Facts are that all the north American continent was different nomadic Native American enemy tribes and were where they happened to be when the European found them. The lands were defined as territories by Europeans and each European country who were the first to explore the territory claimed it for their European country as historical events went along -- discovery, claims, wars, land disputes, treaties, purchases, border changes, independence, more claims, nationalism, more wars, conquest, negotiations, more border changes; regardless of which side of the border your historical preference is, it's basically the same.
    2
  34.  @josephruiz7233  Chicano Studies professors are Marxist history revionists attempting to make the SW, Mexico, by falsely claiming the SW had been mexico. They don't have a leg to stand on except for the very brief 25 year Mexican Period which Mexico only quasily had it's foot in the door and gone in a flash.
    2
  35. Settlers and Colonists too. And alot of squatting since before the European arrived.
    2
  36. But 65 million people from around the world would like to Immigrate here. And Latin Americans fraudulently keep pouring in.
    2
  37. Montezuma's reign was limited to the Mexico City, Tenochititlan, territory area known as the valley of Mexico for the Mexica Aztec. Montezuma did not extend to even Vera Cruz, much less the distant far off unknown strange lands, tierras nuevas to the north be they California, New Mexico/AZ, or Texas.
    2
  38. Stole for fifteen million dollars...
    2
  39. Or did he mention Mexico's war with Apache, Yaki, Yuma, Navajo all which did not recognize a Mexican nation on their lands. In fact, he left out alot.
    2
  40. DiamondBright xxx The SW was not historically Mexico, except for the short lived 25 year SW Mexican Period, even less for Texas. Mexicans were not part of the SW population except for military officials and hardly anyone else who showed up after 1824. Remember, California, New Mexico and Texas were too far, isolated and in the middle of nowhere, unincorporated territories where the unconquered raiding SW Indians were ready to attack at any given moment. These were harsh and uninhabitable environments. Mexicans began migrating north to borders areas and establishing Mexican towns after the United States quelled the SW raiding Indians about 1880.
    2
  41. Similar situations in New Mexico and California, except that Americans were not provided land grants as in Texas by the young Mexican gov of 1824. During the Spanish Colonial Period all of these territories were inclusive of Spanish land grants by colonization and later American Anglo settled in NM and CA before Mexican independence followed by Republic of Mexico officials heading north to claim the territories, removing Spains flag, replaced by the Mexican flag. These territories did not fight for Mexican independence or were involved in the political theater between New Spain and Spain. After independence, all settlers, Spanish and Anglo were mandated Mexican citizenship--Mexicans . The Indian tribes to these lands inherently knew they were not Mexican, knowing their lands were not Mexico. History, clearly recorded the volumns of Spanish Period approx 250 years, documented by the Spanish government; Mexican and American gov and historians recorded the Mexican Period of 25 years and the US Territorial Period during which all citizens became American. Interesting neither the Spanish or Indian are Mexican American as they never came from Mexico, they had been in the SW before Mexico ever existed, as CA and SW predate Mexico. Immigrant Mexican American Chicano Studies and Marxist agendas promote history revision.
    2
  42. Right, the Spanish Empire was unable to colonize other than a handful of colonies in the far north of New Spain: and wanted to connect New Mexico by road to New Orleans. Because of the Comanche, Spain was unable to further colonize the southwest. Interested in SW American history, thanks for the suggested book.
    2
  43. American is greedy, but which country isn't. Man is greedy says ancient history, filled with war and conquer and no Utopia. The victor gets the spoils. Had Mexico been strong, it would have had a chance in winning the war. Shame on Mexico for starting a war it knew it could not win, was it greed...
    2
  44. Yes, 275 years. Mexico just had some luck in claiming the territories even prior to complete independence from Spain who did not surrender till about 1830. So Mexico claimed the annexed territory for only 25 years, hardly historical lands to Mexico.
    2
  45. Nonsense, the country was built on a 18th century world with 18th century accepted standards. You forgot disease, which was the real culprit.
    2
  46. These states are in the United States. Legally citizenship is by proper immigration. No exceptions. The US has laws.
    2
  47. Oh, the Likes are all those from across the border who entered United States Borders fraudulently.
    2
  48. Right, Spain was only able to control the Spanish Colonies in CA and SW in the isolated and distant frontier, this was a challenge as the territory population was by far unconquered Indians attacking Colonists, and unable to further colonize and connect NM to New Orleans. Isolation was a serious concern for Spain and who knows what would have transpired if Spain had not been separated from Mexico as Spain had ceded Florida to the US and Spain also (M Austin) granted lands in Texas for American settlements.
    2
  49. This stolen lands nonesense is political radical left wing propaganda. Promoted by factions including Chicano Studies professors history revionists. Conquest, Treaty and Sale are well documented. The annexed provinces were not even ancestrally Mexican, Mexico claimed as their domain for only 25 years. The Mexican Goverenment does not support stolen lands.
    2
  50.  @billdipperly1573  Harris misinformed. American Mexican settled Texas through land grants. They were not tenants. What caused the ruckus was Santa Anna changing the Mexican Constitution and a disunified Mexico.
    2