|
|
|
|
|
by kadenshep
3133 days ago
|
|
I like how you blatantly just google'd this and didn't even take the nominal effort to research anything further let alone think about your response, because literally none of it has anything to do with economic/business regulation. 1. Indians weren't citizens. I mean I could stop there, but it's also pretty hilarious that you think the actions taken at the time were somehow not without popular public support. Government as an entity had nothing to do with the expansions, to put it lightly. 2. Yeah, like when we stopped the government from enforcing such laws and gave more protections to people (via the government), all exclusionary practices totally vanished. Totally wasn't a societal problem at that point either. It took the power of the government to alleviate unjust practices, but the power of government wasn't needed to keep them as "virtues" within the society that implemented them in the first place. Something something government, right? I mean for 3 and 4? Really? You're going to try to use Constitutional powers as an example of the government having too much power? And no, please don't go on with an aggravating lack luster response like the one you've decided to put on display, I've only responded for the people reading this thread so as to not fall into such disingenuous misdirection. |
|