The Gringo Go Home Movement

[Rafael Thundercat]

Well, I dont know if this is a Movement but I can see in many places in the world, mainly in Mass Turistic Places this energy from locals to say directly or indirectly to the Tourists go away. And of course there are voices that say that this contradictory because Turists bring money to the table and even people from this places are also sometimes turists in other places. So I think that the balance resides in what is healty turism and what is predatory tursim where a instant income of people disrupt the ecological and social fabric of a local and the local people. For example, near where I live there are a lot o golf courses and the region have a problem with water and dry season, when a lot of water is used to irrigate golf courses. So yes Turists bring money and bring also overuse of resouces and all this for money? What if I enter your house, shit over your table and if you complain to me my answer is : Well I deserve to to it, I am paying for it!

Some links about it for context :

https://english.elpais.com/economy-and-business/2024-03-28/gringo-go-home-mexico-citys-housing-crisis-preceds-digital-nomads.html

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

 

[Danioover9000]

@Rafael Thundercat

5 hours ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

Well, I dont know if this is a Movement but I can see in many places in the world, mainly in Mass Turistic Places this energy from locals to say directly or indirectly to the Tourists go away. And of course there are voices that say that this contradictory because Turists bring money to the table and even people from this places are also sometimes turists in other places. So I think that the balance resides in what is healty turism and what is predatory tursim where a instant income of people disrupt the ecological and social fabric of a local and the local people. For example, near where I live there are a lot o golf courses and the region have a problem with water and dry season, when a lot of water is used to irrigate golf courses. So yes Turists bring money and bring also overuse of resouces and all this for money? What if I enter your house, shit over your table and if you complain to me my answer is : Well I deserve to to it, I am paying for it!

Some links about it for context :

https://english.elpais.com/economy-and-business/2024-03-28/gringo-go-home-mexico-citys-housing-crisis-preceds-digital-nomads.html

 

   I can see the good and bad already with this movement. Obviously to me, factoring in Spiral Dynamics stages of development and other developmental modals, tourism as I view it is not just holiday/vacation time for singles or couples or family, it's another part of a soft culture war from a different culture trying to influence the native culture. Civ 4-5 had that game mechanic for tourism for example.

   However, I do see this as a racist movement towards the white portion of tourists than non-whites, and I do see valid concern of economy and income dropping if tourism is reduced or is prohibited. Indeed tourism does make more money for the country having tourist sites, for example look at the Dominican Republic compared to Haiti, although Haiti is a complex and historical and geographical issue which IMO is sad, but I can't cover it at length here, but basically on the specific point of reducing or stoping tourism the economic drop down is a valid concern.

[enchanted]

Yes we should leave the locals alone, go back to Europe, and give the continent back to the natives 😅

[Rafael Thundercat]

5 minutes ago, enchanted said:

Yes we should leave the locals alone, go back to Europe, and give the continent back to the natives 😅

Why do you think the locals would be sad with it? Massive and Predatory Tourism makes no good to local communities, no matter what benefits one can claim it gives them. 

A system just can cope with a certain amout of disruption and exploration of resources. Water for example.

[BlueOak]

You can score points socially, politically, financially, etc by identifying an enemy that doesn't vote or has no power and saying they are the bad guys.

In a right-wing world, this is just low-hanging fruit. Almost every political party is a right-wing party now, before anyone rushes to defend their favorites.

Let's all hate the 'other' is the motto, and fracture ourselves as much as possible. That's always ended well.

[enchanted]

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

Let's all hate the 'other' is the motto, and fracture ourselves as much as possible. That's always ended well.

Exactly, all conflict comes from division, therefore any policy that points to "other" will end in conflict 

[Rafael Thundercat]

18 minutes ago, enchanted said:

Exactly, all conflict comes from division, therefore any policy that points to "other" will end in conflict 

No so black and white like this. In the situation of Indogenous people in Amazon they were living in unision with the forests for Millenia, with tribal wars here and there. But the colonozisers came entitled to snatch the land like it belongs to them. 

[BlueOak]

22 hours ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

No so black and white like this. In the situation of Indogenous people in Amazon they were living in unision with the forests for Millenia, with tribal wars here and there. But the colonozisers came entitled to snatch the land like it belongs to them. 

Are you arguing these colonizers didn't hate the other? Or that sometimes fighting/hating/fracturing is understandable? It's always understandable, I can look at anyone's point of view with enough time and understand it. You can only kill someone and be okay with that if you hate them or are detached enough from them to do so.

The people in power hating the other is the point of the thread (although it can work both ways), in the analogy of a tribe in the Amazon vs an industrialized nation, that power would very much be with the industrialized people. 

Fighting has its place, I am stubborn myself and grew up fighting to survive, but I understand the limits of that and also understand things don't function that way, they only break. If the break is temporary, it can lead to a better outcome, if the break is permanent or long-term, it only leads to suffering.

Edited July 12 by BlueOak

[Danioover9000]

@Rafael Thundercat

On 2024-07-11 at 5:56 PM, Rafael Thundercat said:

No so black and white like this. In the situation of Indogenous people in Amazon they were living in unision with the forests for Millenia, with tribal wars here and there. But the colonozisers came entitled to snatch the land like it belongs to them. 

   Indigenous peoples in the amazon, or in South America? Like for example the Aztec empire, and the other nearby tribes, and them living in unison via the Aztecs winning tribal wars and taking some of their people captive and live sacrificing them by taking their hearts out?

   The colonizers came entitled to snatch land like it belongs to them? Sure I partly agree some settlers were like that, as they're very stage blue in their values and these times the religious organizations were the power structures, but are all settlers and colonizers just land greedy? I don't think so, and those early European settlers still had to live off the land they landed on. What's difficult with this situation is that on one hand you had fundamentalist religious folks in charge mostly, and on the other you had some fringe native tribes, in this case the Aztecs although they're an empire and not a tribe anymore, having very different worldviews and living ways. To the Catholic Spanish settlers the Aztec's ways are immoral and human sacrifice is seen as sinful, and furthermore the Aztecs refused to stop human sacrificing, and the nearby tribes begged the Spanish for them, so what could they have done then? Unfortunately the Spanish had to help the nearby tribes in a coalition against the Aztec empire.

[Rafael Thundercat]

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Rafael Thundercat

   Indigenous peoples in the amazon, or in South America? Like for example the Aztec empire, and the other nearby tribes, and them living in unison via the Aztecs winning tribal wars and taking some of their people captive and live sacrificing them by taking their hearts out?

   The colonizers came entitled to snatch land like it belongs to them? Sure I partly agree some settlers were like that, as they're very stage blue in their values and these times the religious organizations were the power structures, but are all settlers and colonizers just land greedy? I don't think so, and those early European settlers still had to live off the land they landed on. What's difficult with this situation is that on one hand you had fundamentalist religious folks in charge mostly, and on the other you had some fringe native tribes, in this case the Aztecs although they're an empire and not a tribe anymore, having very different worldviews and living ways. To the Catholic Spanish settlers the Aztec's ways are immoral and human sacrifice is seen as sinful, and furthermore the Aztecs refused to stop human sacrificing, and the nearby tribes begged the Spanish for them, so what could they have done then? Unfortunately the Spanish had to help the nearby tribes in a coalition against the Aztec empire.

I would love to have sources and links to all this claims, real sources, I am not talking about the movies like Apocalypto (2006) Mel Gibson

By the way, is apocalipto really based in true stories?

[Leo Gura]

The GrinGo Home Movement

Huge missed branding move there.

Edited July 12 by Leo Gura

[Rafael Thundercat]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The GrinGo Home Movement

Huge missed branding move there.

Branding for what? a Product? 

edited: I got it hehe

Edited July 12 by Rafael Thundercat

[Danioover9000]

@Rafael Thundercat

16 minutes ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

I would love to have sources and links to all this claims, real sources, I am not talking about the movies like Apocalypto (2006) Mel Gibson

By the way, is apocalipto really based in true stories?

   I certainly am not sourcing from the Apocalypto movie only. I will eventually provide a list of sources to what I've said.

   However, before I give that list, I will correct myself here. I assumed the Spanish settlers and colonialists were just mostly dealing with the Aztec empire, I was wrong. They also were dealing with both the Mayans and Aztec empires. What the film did get right is their sacrificing ritual, that did happen, and that grossed out the Spanish. One thing I think the film got wrong is that scene with the girl having some kind of chicken pox or measles, but I think that occurs after the Spanish landed there. IDK maybe there could be a few diseases native to that region I don't know about, but that girl was depicted having some chicken pox or some kind of skin disease when that's definitely after the Spanish arrived. Another thing the film got right is that the Mayans are an empire. That is what an empire looks like. What the film probably missed, is the lake the Mayans or I think the Aztecs did have. See when the Spanish went to war with the Aztecs they also used ships, don't ask me how they did it but they actually managed to set boats in one of their massive elaborate lakes they designed as well.

[UnbornTao]

Haha, gringo.

Edited July 13 by UnbornTao

[Rafael Thundercat]

@Danioover9000 I will have an encouter with a Amazon Tribe Leader this month, and I will ask him about the dark aspects of their story. Yes I will ask directly from at least one who have lineage there, and I already know from an elder there that it was not all peacefull there in the past. They had their own wars among them but the Greed and destruction White Colonizers brougth was pale in comparison. One tribe reached almost extinction and many others got extinct, phisicaly and culturally. 

A small list of some tribes that disapered by colonization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinct_Indigenous_peoples_of_Brazil

The Avatar Movie was actually a documentary. 

 

[Basman]

This seems to be essentially just the problem of gentrification and ethnocentrism.

The trickiness is that this kind of gentrification is like a short-cut towards wealth and productivity while possibly displacing the locals economically as a side-effect.

[Rafael Thundercat]

2 minutes ago, Basman said:

This seems to be essentially just the problem of gentrification and ethnocentrism.

The trickiness is that this kind of gentrification is like a short-cut towards wealth and productivity while possibly displacing the locals economically as a side-effect.

Oh yeah, just a side effect.  The settlers may just be using a bucket in their heads like your profile picture. For the ones having their lifes affected negatively by gentrification and all is not  "just a problem" is personal and no good at all. 

[Rafael Thundercat]

In some places like Portugal there is a Strategy to combat Population Decline with Immigration, but here from personal experience the ones who take advantage of the opening is mostly Expats:

Like is said in this video.