WrongPlanet.net
WP Members: > 80,000



Aspie Affection

New Today: 4
New Yesterday: 27

how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion     
WilliamWDelaney
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 27, 2011
Posts: 1201

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:08 pm    Post subject: Re: how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Reply with quote

enrico_dandolo wrote:
WilliamWDelaney wrote:
What made it happen? A change in people's thinking. They realized, after the black death and various epidemics, that they could and should fight AGAINST the ravages of nature, that they were not helpless in the face of "god's wrath," and they were willing to pour in the investment of energy to combat the damage from disease and filth. This was a revolution NOT in technology but in people's habits of thinking. It's as simple as that.

No, it was a revolution in "technology", or rather science.

People in the Middle Ages and before were not that dumb, you know.
It wasn't a matter of being dumb. Their views made sense at the time, considering their cultural heritage.

They were not kidding around about their religious faith. They might not have been entirely knowledgeable in it, nor are religious people today; however, people really and truly believed that their fates were in the hands of God. They MEANT IT.

If someone got sick from disease, God willed it. If there were an epidemic, it was the wrath of God in retaliation for general sinfulness on the part of the populace. It's easy to dismiss this as stupidly superstitious, but you wouldn't think so if it had been your upbringing. In that time period, you would have been just as determined to live a life "free of sin" as you presently are to be intelligent and educated. All of your mental resources would have been geared toward it, and you wouldn't have been kidding around about it.

If two men got into a sword fight and one of them died, God willed for the victor to survive; therefore, the victor was in the right. This belief persisted well into the modern age! It's only been a century and a half or a little over since dueling has been outlawed! We're not talking about something believed by backward savages. We are talking about people who lived in a world not all that much less technologically advanced than our own!

If you walked across hot coals and didn't get burned, it was because God protected you from harm. If you had grown up during the time, you WOULD have believed this. You would have been considered to be a "weirdo" if you had expressed any doubt about it.

They were not kidding around in their beliefs. It wasn't that they were stupid. Far from it. They were every bit as intelligent as modern people are. They just didn't have sufficient background on which to overturn the beliefs they had.

However, when the plagues came...when the plagues struck down millions of innocent people...people could no longer believe that the will of God was behind it. They grew some balls...not because they had some renaissance of character but because their lives had just been scarred by one of the most horrible tragedies in history. They chose to fight because they had no choice but to fight.

I think that the real revolution was not a scientific one at all. It was a really a revolution in how people viewed their relationship with the natural world.

Also, this is extremely tenuous. If zealots were to rise to power, they could take it all away.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/17/world/asia/pakistan-taliban-polio-vaccine/index.html

We could go back to dying of treatable illnesses. It's really that easy. We would just have to let a militant group of zealots take hold...to strangle out modern enlightenment...to relegate our perception of nature to being a product of divine edict...and we could go right back to the dark ages.

In the end, all of our technological marvels are just tools. What matters is the fact that we believe, in our hearts, that they are worthwhile. We believe that it is worthwhile to spend money on developing them. We believe that it is worthwhile to use them. This is not a permanent or irreversible state. Barbarity would welcome us readily into its arms.

But we could also move in the other direction. We need but to realize that we can, and we could do it. We could approach the realization that, if we were to throw enough reckless lunatic savagery into trying to do so, we could overcome death itself.

However, could we survive doing so?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aspie_Chav
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 07, 2006
Age: 41
Posts: 3059
Location: Croydon

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your HisDivineMajesty. Instead of all of these complexed socialist programs, I recommend something simple. Law taxes. So a man can have enough money to feed his family. And let market forces and nature take its natural course. If birth rate is low but economy is good, migrants will find their way. If most of those immigrants are Muslim, so be it. Don't need to waste money re-creating Islamic qualities in non-Muslims when the Muslims already have those qualities.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
HisDivineMajesty
Carolingian Emperor Extraordinaire
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 01, 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Planet Earth

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:40 pm    Post subject: Re: how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Reply with quote

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
They were not kidding around about their religious faith. They might not have been entirely knowledgeable in it, nor are religious people today, but people really and truly believed that their fates were in the hands of God.


The sources we have from those times are heavily biased. Who wrote them down? Almost exclusively monks. Estimating it, religion would probably have played a larger role in communities, but not an all-consuming one. Most would have gone to church obediently, and might have studied some verses for various reasons, but apart from that, religion was more of a political thing. Church leaders were known to openly have wives and children, and for much of the Middle Ages, European monarchs were fighting both the pope and each other over the right to appoint their own religious figures, usually family members.

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
If someone got sick from disease, God willed it. If there were an epidemic, it was the wrath of God.


Certainly, those were the things written down. And it would have been a good explanation. Compared to the current day, people knew very little about the world around them. Until the early twentieth century, certain local mists were described in rural regions of Europe as spirits of elves, and said to be dangerous to encounter on your own. If you know very little, and have no clue where to start, and are surrounded by a world in which most children die before the age of twelve, you're inclined to look for a reason. If a religion offers you one, you'll pick it over complete ignorance. But again, I doubt if everyone thought of it like that. Traveling doctors were extremely popular.

Similarly, during any epidemic, people were very eager to try any solution they were offered, from putting on herb masks to massacring the sick.

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
They were not kidding around in their beliefs. It wasn't that they were stupid. Far from it. They were every bit as intelligent as modern people are. They just didn't have sufficient background on which to overturn the beliefs they had.

However, when the plagues came...when the plagues struck down millions of innocent people...people could no longer believe that the will of God was behind it. They grew some balls...not because they had some renaissance of character but because their lives had just been scarred by one of the most horrible tragedies in history. They chose to fight because they had no choice but to fight.


They had very little scientific background. All scientific background there was in those societies was concentrated in monasteries, and usually locked safely even for lower-ranked monks. Every slightly-feasible explanation would have done. The Black Plague was originally blamed by French physicians on the alignment of planets causing a bad air that infected people. It certainly wasn't just religion that was blamed.

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
We could go back to dying of treatable illnesses. It's really that easy. We would just have to let a militant group of zealots take hold...to strangle out modern enlightenment...to relegate our perception of nature to being a product of divine edict...and we could go right back to the dark ages.


Insh'allah. That's really the situation.

Aspie_Chav wrote:
Your HisDivineMajesty. Instead of all of these complexed socialist programs, I recommend something simple. Law taxes. So a man can have enough money to feed his family. And let market forces and nature take its natural course. If birth rate is low but economy is good, migrants will find their way. If most of those immigrants are Muslim, so be it. Don't need to waste money re-creating Islamic qualities in non-Muslims when the Muslims already have those qualities.


No idea what you're going on about here. I want to keep Islam out. The market doesn't regulate these people's migration. They don't usually come to Europe to supply labour. They're a burden on our society, both financially and in terms of crime. The only reason they're let in is because of artificial constructs forbidding the people of Europe to vote for immigration rules that make sense and refuse those who are known as violent, uneducated and religiously-conservative trouble-makers even in North Africa. If we let people decide, there would be more Asians and much fewer muslims coming here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DC
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Aug 16, 2011
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aspie_Chav wrote:
Your HisDivineMajesty. Instead of all of these complexed socialist programs, I recommend something simple. Law taxes. So a man can have enough money to feed his family. And let market forces and nature take its natural course. If birth rate is low but economy is good, migrants will find their way. If most of those immigrants are Muslim, so be it. Don't need to waste money re-creating Islamic qualities in non-Muslims when the Muslims already have those qualities.


Yeah, dear Aspie_Chav,

You see we tried that approach but unfortunately those lovely muslims having utterly fecked up their own countries with their barbaric sky fairy beliefs decide to flee persecution from other muslims and come over here and now they have decided that we are infidels and have started blowing up public transport, telling us that we are scum, we can not have freedom speech and raping our children.

So frankly, rather a large proportion of real, actual people instead of media cutout people are now in favour of rolling out the ovens to go final solution on the muslim problem.

This is a bad thing considering that their are 50 million muslims in Europe living under the delusional belief that they are conquering heroes and rather a lot more annoyed natives...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puddingmouse
strange little mouse
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 25, 2010
Age: 28
Posts: 9114
Location: Cottonopolis

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DC wrote:
Aspie_Chav wrote:
Your HisDivineMajesty. Instead of all of these complexed socialist programs, I recommend something simple. Law taxes. So a man can have enough money to feed his family. And let market forces and nature take its natural course. If birth rate is low but economy is good, migrants will find their way. If most of those immigrants are Muslim, so be it. Don't need to waste money re-creating Islamic qualities in non-Muslims when the Muslims already have those qualities.


Yeah, dear Aspie_Chav,

You see we tried that approach but unfortunately those lovely muslims having utterly fecked up their own countries with their barbaric sky fairy beliefs decide to flee persecution from other muslims and come over here and now they have decided that we are infidels and have started blowing up public transport, telling us that we are scum, we can not have freedom speech and raping our children.

So frankly, rather a large proportion of real, actual people instead of media cutout people are now in favour of rolling out the ovens to go final solution on the muslim problem.

This is a bad thing considering that their are 50 million muslims in Europe living under the delusional belief that they are conquering heroes and rather a lot more annoyed natives...


You're exaggerating the numbers of radical Muslims. I don't think they're a tiny minority, but they're still a minority of that 50 million. I don't like Islam full stop, but liberal Islam is certainly more palatable than the type you are describing. Even mainstream Islam isn't that bad. I worry about the growing influence of Islam on our society and the sense of entitlement that faith has, but I know even the most blindly devout Muslims are not that hateful. They all might theoretically believe I'm an infidel, but in a sense I'm still a human being. A few of them will see me as scum, so I return the favour there - but it's not the majority.

You're also exaggerating the level of unrest in the native populations of European countries, with that 'final solution' talk. I'm a poor white person (non-chav) and I come from the north of England, so I know some very Islamophobic people, but they're not hateful enough to want genocide (or religicide, or whatever).
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puddingmouse
strange little mouse
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 25, 2010
Age: 28
Posts: 9114
Location: Cottonopolis

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:56 pm    Post subject: Re: how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Reply with quote

HisDivineMajesty wrote:
They don't usually come to Europe to supply labour.


I don't know about the Netherlands, but when the first Pakistani and Bengali immigrants came to Britain, the came here with jobs already there for them. That's the whole reason why Oldham and Bradford are half Muslim because of the mills. Somewhere along the line of importing spouses and industrial decline, the work ethic was lost amongst subsequent generations. There aren't enough jobs in the high-density areas they live in, and the white people in those areas are also often unemployed. I don't think being unemployed and claiming benefits is encouraged in their cultures, it's just something that's grown from living in crowded areas with lots of industrial decay and poor education.
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HisDivineMajesty
Carolingian Emperor Extraordinaire
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 01, 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Planet Earth

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for the genocide talks, I don't think we've reached such a point, and I don't think we'll reach one in the near future. However, there is a lot of resentment, and there is a lot of protest, and there is one slightly-worrying thing I noticed - Serbia's new premier, chosen by parliament in the past few days, is a former wartime spokesman and assistant for Slobodan Milosevic. Now, Serbia's president is a far-right nationalist, and their premier is a former assistant for a man who died during his trial for involvement in war crimes, many of them against muslims.

puddingmouse wrote:
I don't know about the Netherlands, but when the first Pakistani and Bengali immigrants came to Britain, the came here with jobs already there for them. That's the whole reason why Oldham and Bradford are half Muslim because of the mills.


The first generation came here to work, expected by people here to return after accumulating enough money here to live comfortably in their countries of origin. This worked for the Spanish and Italian people we had as labourers just after the war, but somehow not for the tens of thousands of Moroccans and Turks who came after them. The second generation, fueled quickly by family policies in favour of bringing their wives and children over from their country of origin, turned into the most criminal group in our history. The third generation, and now the fourth and the fifth, have shown very little improvement and even a turn for the worse in many cases.

puddingmouse wrote:
There aren't enough jobs in the high-density areas they live in, and the white people in those areas are also often unemployed. I don't think being unemployed and claiming benefits is encouraged in their cultures, it's just something that's grown from living in crowded areas with lots of industrial decay and poor education.


For the groups living here, mainly Moroccans and Turks, it is very much encouraged to farm as many benefits as they can. Occasionally, there's some more outrage when it turns out we're paying thousands a month in child benefits to children born here but now residing in Morocco. Or people from Morocco and Turkey, who have a second house in their country of origin where they spend most of the year while they're claiming unemployment benefits here. Then, of course, there is the slight problem of state-funded islamic schools, which aren't closed that often while having the worst results in the country.

Certainly isn't pulling them out of the mindset when state-funded islamic schools teach students to categorically reject western values, to respect only islamic role patterns in relationships, and that non-muslims are dangerous. In fact, several state-funded islamic schools are known to preach that homosexuality is unnatural, referring homosexual students to religious counselors.

Today, there were two announcements from Belgium. The first was about Salafism which, according to their head of state security, is the largest threat to Belgian democracy and society. According to him, they're building a parallel society where values we consider basic are categorically rejected, and where democracy is looked down upon. He said: "They have founded a parallel society and reject modern society. In their parallel society, they have their own values, their own banks, their own justice system, their own healthcare system and their own education system." He also added that people were afraid to tackle the problem, because "that would have them branded racists".

The second story was about a female student who had recently moved to Brussels. Noticing that a very large amount of mostly-foreign men were making rather disturbing remarks, she had herself filmed while walking on the busy streets of Brussels. I've yet to find the documentary, as it's not properly been released yet, but the part I've seen shows what many women report they've experienced - being approached, refusing that, then being called a whore at best and having her path blocked at worst.

In those respects, and considering that most immigration to this country is still from those countries and largely for arranged marriage partners, immigration is not at all a desirable solution for population growth. According to cautious estimates, because full-scale research is called racist and not allowed, immigrants from islamic countries cost more than they bring into our economy, and that is a situation that's been that way since the second generation. If durable growth and tolerance are what we want, it might be a lot better to close borders to poorly-educated and religiously-conservative immigrants, allow only immigrants we need rather than are forced to accept, and try to grow the part of the population that has a stable, optimistic outlook.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
enrico_dandolo
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Nov 21, 2011
Posts: 866

PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:04 am    Post subject: Re: how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Reply with quote

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
If someone got sick from disease, God willed it. If there were an epidemic, it was the wrath of God in retaliation for general sinfulness on the part of the populace.

That must explain why they knew and applied a decent number of remedies for certain illnesses (including herbal ones) and why they enacted what could be called basic prophylactic measures (quarantine, cleaning the streets from excrements, washing or burning clothes, etc.). Even though they didn't necessarly know why it worked in detail, they knew it did. "God wanted it!" has the same place as the modern "Death doesn't make sense!"; it is a spiritual answer to death, not an actual, practical response -- about which the main difference in time has been accumulation of knowledge, not greater openness to experience.

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
If two men got into a sword fight and one of them died, God willed for the victor to survive; therefore, the victor was in the right. This belief persisted well into the modern age! It's only been a century and a half or a little over since dueling has been outlawed! We're not talking about something believed by backward savages. We are talking about people who lived in a world not all that much less technologically advanced than our own!

If you walked across hot coals and didn't get burned, it was because God protected you from harm. If you had grown up during the time, you WOULD have believed this. You would have been considered to be a "weirdo" if you had expressed any doubt about it.


There are two things here: dueling on the one hand, and ordeal on the other. The first was about honour, not about God, and indeed ended relatively recently. The second, which included the judicial duel, was used relatively rarely, and only in cases where it was impossible to determine which of two parties was in the right, and when they couldn't reach a private agreement themselves. I don't really know when it stopped being used (not that is was ever very popular), however.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puddingmouse
strange little mouse
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 25, 2010
Age: 28
Posts: 9114
Location: Cottonopolis

PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 7:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HisDivineMajesty wrote:

The second story was about a female student who had recently moved to Brussels. Noticing that a very large amount of mostly-foreign men were making rather disturbing remarks, she had herself filmed while walking on the busy streets of Brussels. I've yet to find the documentary, as it's not properly been released yet, but the part I've seen shows what many women report they've experienced - being approached, refusing that, then being called a whore at best and having her path blocked at worst.


Oh, that happened to me when I was at university. It was mostly North African men doing it. I went to a mostly Pakistani school and my sister and I got groped in the corridors. Some of them would talk about white girls in the most disgusting ways within earshot of us. When I was 17, I had one middle aged Pakistani guy drive up to me, ask for directions and then unleash and erection. That shit seems to have died down now that I'm in my mid 20s. I remember going on a family holiday to the Canary Islands when I was 15 and the North African men kept blowing kisses at me.

I used to get middle aged white guys buying me meals and drinks when I was in my teens just for talking to them, then they'd sulk when I wouldn't sleep with them (but they didn't get threatening). I also used to get West African guys randomly proposing marriage/a serious relationship at train stations. I'm quite average looking, but what I think was the main factor was that I was young (underage in some cases) and alone. Now I'm too old for those pervs. The only ethnic group I haven't been sexually harassed by is East Asians (though if I went to Japan when I was a teenager, I'm certain it would have been different). I will say that men from Muslim cultures have been the most threatening towards me (particularly North Africa and Pakistan). Their religion doesn't help because it tells them that they're superior to women in general and infidel women in particular.

However, it's not all of them. I know plenty of Pakistani and North African` men who have a decent level of respect for women. It's not just a show, either. I think some men just naturally have a certain level of respect for women, whatever their culture tells them. I don't know if they see women quite as equals, but it's workable. That's why I'm in favour of discussing the sexism in immigrant cultures frankly. I don't want to brand the whole lot of them as misogynists. We have to be prepared to say things that aren't PC, but at the same time there is no need to see these attitudes as innate and denounce whole groups of people.
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DC
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Aug 16, 2011
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

puddingmouse wrote:
DC wrote:
Aspie_Chav wrote:
Your HisDivineMajesty. Instead of all of these complexed socialist programs, I recommend something simple. Law taxes. So a man can have enough money to feed his family. And let market forces and nature take its natural course. If birth rate is low but economy is good, migrants will find their way. If most of those immigrants are Muslim, so be it. Don't need to waste money re-creating Islamic qualities in non-Muslims when the Muslims already have those qualities.


Yeah, dear Aspie_Chav,

You see we tried that approach but unfortunately those lovely muslims having utterly fecked up their own countries with their barbaric sky fairy beliefs decide to flee persecution from other muslims and come over here and now they have decided that we are infidels and have started blowing up public transport, telling us that we are scum, we can not have freedom speech and raping our children.

So frankly, rather a large proportion of real, actual people instead of media cutout people are now in favour of rolling out the ovens to go final solution on the muslim problem.

This is a bad thing considering that their are 50 million muslims in Europe living under the delusional belief that they are conquering heroes and rather a lot more annoyed natives...




Ok, that post was a bit inflammatory and poorly explained, let me elaborate a bit see if that helps.

Quote:

You're exaggerating the numbers of radical Muslims.



I don't believe I put a figure on it mentioned, defined 'radical' muslim or even mentioned the 'radical'. Do you define a radical muslim as a terrorist who kills people or as a person who rejects any notion of freedom of speech, female equality, gay rights, human rights or the supremacy of British law?

Rejection of gay rights by muslim in Britain in 2006 was 100%, rejection of freedom of speech that has the potential to offend religious belief was 66% and there were 85 sharia councils operating in Britain in 2009 - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16522447

Leaving the religious bit out of the equation, any group that had a violent paramilitary wing, reject a huge swathe of social norms and set up parallel legal and education systems in a country would be defined as 'radical' by anyone. Most people would go further and define this group as 'dangerous radicals', subversives, revolutionaries or terrorists.

So how do you define radical and how many muslims when openly asked do you think would support those attributes?

Quote:

I don't think they're a tiny minority, but they're still a minority of that 50 million. I don't like Islam full stop, but liberal Islam is certainly more palatable than the type you are describing. Even mainstream Islam isn't that bad. I worry about the growing influence of Islam on our society and the sense of entitlement that faith has, but I know even the most blindly devout Muslims are not that hateful. They all might theoretically believe I'm an infidel, but in a sense I'm still a human being. A few of them will see me as scum, so I return the favour there - but it's not the majority.



I don't quite understand how you can post this and then two posts later inform us that in your experience you suffered years of sexual assault at the hands of many different individuals in multiple countries and formed the opinion that religion played a large role in explaining their behaviour.

For both of your posts to be coherent, muslim perverts from around the world must have been seeking you personally out the same way that nutters stalk world famous celebrities.

Perhaps you would like to pluck a figure out of thin air and inform us from your personal experience and belief and tell us what proportion you think is about ballpark for the number of muslims not fully onboard with the equal rights agenda?

And how many non-religious liberal campaigners cut their own wife's head off when she ask for a divorce?
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-02-16/justice/buffalo.beheading_1_police-station-new-york-tv-station-orchard-park?_s=PM:CRIME

Why is it acceptable to lambast white skinned conservatives for unpleasant views but brown skinned religious totalitarian fascists are above reproach?

Quote:

You're also exaggerating the level of unrest in the native populations of European countries, with that 'final solution' talk. I'm a poor white person (non-chav) and I come from the north of England, so I know some very Islamophobic people, but they're not hateful enough to want genocide (or religicide, or whatever).


The final solution talk should have been explained more thoroughly, I apologise for how trivially I threw it in there.

A lot more people today vote for the BNP than voted for Mosley before WWII and today it is pretty much impossible to be under any illusion about the association between fascism and genocide. That is what I mean by people supporting a final solution approach.

Now what do I mean by 'large proportion'?
Well polls put nationwide support for the BNP at around 7% and they regularly garner 5.3%-9.8% of the vote in elections. In strict numbers this means that the fascists probably slightly outnumber the muslims in this country.
And we are the good guys remember. So that is still a low number right? No problem you say.

The thing is support for far-right or fascist parties is considerably larger in other European countries and in a lot of case they are far, far nastier. The BNP behave like saints by comparison to Golden Dawn or Jobbik. Read this about Germany and then tell me I'm wrong:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/article-on-neo-nazis-in-eastern-german-state-of-saxony-a-838231.html

Concerning or not concerning? Is there anywhere in Britain, even when we have the occasional race riot where things are that bad? Let's not forget that that is happening in a Germany that is part of Europe and has a very healthy economy. If Europe breaks up do think nationalism will go up or down, how do you unite around a European or global banner when Europe rips itself apart? If Europe doesn't split apart and we end up with a decade or two of economic stagnation, very high unemployment and continue with unprecedented levels of immigration seen in the last decade do you think anger and resentment will go up or down?

I am kinda getting tired of having to point out on this forum that I'm leftwing not right and I do not look upon these developments favourably but we can't carry on ignoring the real world situation that people find themselves in because we are sleep walking into a repeat of the 1930's.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tequila
Meh
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 29131
Location: Lancashire, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:38 am    Post subject: Re: how falling birth rates will get fixed in the end? Reply with quote

HisDivineMajesty wrote:
refuse those who are known as violent, uneducated and religiously-conservative trouble-makers even in North Africa.


That's the point that you want to get across - that a lot of the types that are flooding into European countries are considered to be scum and undesirables by their own people in their own countries.

The only reason why countries in Europe receive these people is because the electorates of European countries have been and are continuing to be ignored on immigration policy by their 'betters'.

When the will of the people becomes unavoidable (for instances in countries like the Netherlands and Finland), hopefully we'll see change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tequila
Meh
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 29131
Location: Lancashire, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DC wrote:
The BNP behave like saints by comparison to Golden Dawn or Jobbik.


Can you tell me some more about Jobbik? The exploits of Golden Dawn are well-reported, but Jobbik seems to be a mystery.

The other thing is that, yes, it's infuriating when lefties scream "racism!" at the drop of a hat. When serious neo-Nazis come along, no-one will really care as they've smeared that many people with that tag for that long that the insult has been devalued.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puddingmouse
strange little mouse
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 25, 2010
Age: 28
Posts: 9114
Location: Cottonopolis

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DC wrote:

I don't believe I put a figure on it mentioned, defined 'radical' muslim or even mentioned the 'radical'. Do you define a radical muslim as a terrorist who kills people or as a person who rejects any notion of freedom of speech, female equality, gay rights, human rights or the supremacy of British law?

Rejection of gay rights by muslim in Britain in 2006 was 100%, rejection of freedom of speech that has the potential to offend religious belief was 66% and there were 85 sharia councils operating in Britain in 2009 - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16522447

Leaving the religious bit out of the equation, any group that had a violent paramilitary wing, reject a huge swathe of social norms and set up parallel legal and education systems in a country would be defined as 'radical' by anyone. Most people would go further and define this group as 'dangerous radicals', subversives, revolutionaries or terrorists.

So how do you define radical and how many muslims when openly asked do you think would support those attributes?


Sharia law isn't that much of an issue, since I can't supersede national law. It's no different to the Beth Din courts in the Jewish community. Sharia law in Nigeria is a different matter, but were talking about a different beast here.

The main issue with Islamic schools is that they suck. Most people don't have any problem with Catholic schools because they normally have high educational standards (although some are very shit and just live off the reputation). There's a reason why most Muslim children (shudder at that phrase) go to state schools, or get into church schools. Personally, I question the need for all faith schools, but that opens a can of worms because people get pissed off with me when I make this argument. Plus, I currently work in Catholic sixth-form college (there aren't that many secular sixth forms where I live), so the church system dominates education in some parts of the country. You can't whinge about Islamic schools without being prepared to dismantle this whole faith school system.

Just a clarification, are you saying Muslims 100% reject gay rights nationally (which would hardly surprise me) or just within Muslim community? What about LGBT Muslims? I have no problem admitting that Islam is as homophobic as the other two Abrahamic religions, but I've not completely made my mind up about the adherents. I've heard a lot of them say things like 'homosexuality doesn't happen in our culture', but I think they just say that rubbish unthinkingly in a pious way - the same way some of the say 'inshallah' after every other sentence. I think they're scared of their own thoughts and of thinking the wrong thing. I've never met one who actually seems to hate gays.

I don't think being opposed to homosexuality is more radical coming from a Muslim than it is from a Christian or a Jew. The radicalism kicks in when you start executing gays, and I don't think the majority of British Muslims want that.

So, in short, in don't believe that Sharia courts, Islamic schools or being opposed to homosexuality because your scary-as-f**k god tells you to be, make you a radical. What makes a radical is believing that all infidels must die if they oppose your faith. In my experience, those morons are in a (not tiny) minority.

As for freedom of speech, Muslims have got it also in their scripture that no-one can say nasty things about Allah and hurt his wittle feelings. This is the same reason that we have blasphemy laws that protect Christianity. The Abrahamic God is touchy. It's a sign of the daftness of religion rather than a full-scale attack on all freedom of speech.

As for female equality, similar arguments about Abrahamic religions sucking monkey balls on this issue apply. I think it is more problematic in Islam than in the other two because of passages to the effect of, 'Only one third of the people in paradise are women' and because of the relative backwardness regarding women's rights in the countries where Islam is the national religion. I won't argue that the situation isn't very bad, but I don't know how it relates to radicalism, except that truly radical Muslims go even further in oppressing women. If we're talking about Taliban-style amputations for wearing nail varnish, then I'd argue that the vast majority of Muslims in the Western world are not that misogynistic. If we're talking about denying women access to education, then only a minority are into that in the West. Most Pakistani families seem to value educated women as per Desi culture valuing education in general. The one time I came across a man denying education to a woman was when I saw a North African man tell his wife that she couldn't enrol on a English language course. Sickening, yes, but not a majority practice.

Could you please clarify what you mean by Muslims rejecting notions of human rights in the West? Most of the examples I can think of are culturally based and do not come from the religion.


Quote:

I don't quite understand how you can post this and then two posts later inform us that in your experience you suffered years of sexual assault at the hands of many different individuals in multiple countries and formed the opinion that religion played a large role in explaining their behaviour.

For both of your posts to be coherent, muslim perverts from around the world must have been seeking you personally out the same way that nutters stalk world famous celebrities.

Perhaps you would like to pluck a figure out of thin air and inform us from your personal experience and belief and tell us what proportion you think is about ballpark for the number of muslims not fully onboard with the equal rights agenda?

And how many non-religious liberal campaigners cut their own wife's head off when she ask for a divorce?
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-02-16/justice/buffalo.beheading_1_police-station-new-york-tv-station-orchard-park?_s=PM:CRIME

Why is it acceptable to lambast white skinned conservatives for unpleasant views but brown skinned religious totalitarian fascists are above reproach?


Most of the sexual harassment I experienced was in my own country. I live in inner-city Manchester.

I've met many, many more Muslim non-perverts than I have perverts. I think that maybe I just got harassed by so many Muslims because of the concentration of that particular group where I live. I was a teenage girl that walked around a busy city, alone and with lost, naive look on her face (due to autism). Unfortunately, gender relations being what they currently are in the world, that means I was almost certainly going to be sexually harassed.

Also, I said the religion was the reason why Muslim perverts were more threatening, not why they were greater in number. You can interpret Islam in such a way as to give you an excuse to treat infidel women badly, if you were that way inclined in the first place.

I'm not claiming that my personal experiences constitute some kind of reliable data; I was simply sharing them. This was much in the same manner as the woman that HDM mentioned, who videotaped herself walking around Brussels and recording the sexist remarks she heard.

Also brown-skinned fascists are not above my reproach. I was simply maintaining that the majority of brown-skinned Allah-fearing people are not of the same ilk, though a worrying-enough number of them are.
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DC
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Aug 16, 2011
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tequila wrote:
DC wrote:
The BNP behave like saints by comparison to Golden Dawn or Jobbik.


Can you tell me some more about Jobbik? The exploits of Golden Dawn are well-reported, but Jobbik seems to be a mystery.

The other thing is that, yes, it's infuriating when lefties scream "racism!" at the drop of a hat. When serious neo-Nazis come along, no-one will really care as they've smeared that many people with that tag for that long that the insult has been devalued.


Jobbik is the political party founded in 2001 attracting 17% of the votes and they have repeatedly set up uniformed, vigilante para military groups with names like 'The Hungarian Guard', 'The Hungarian Civil Guard' etc etc as each one gets deemed illegal they just change the name the next day and carry on.

They do all the marching, dressing up in uniform stuff and fighting training that you would expect, they harrass and threaten any anti-fascists that speak out against them, attack jews and gypsies etc. For the nastier stuff there are plenty of murders and they have done things like occupy entire villages for months at a time with hundreds of uniformed members who form uniformed vigilante mobs to protect the villages from 'persecution by roma'. At one put it ended up with the red cross bussing out a load of roma in fear of their lives. There were also acid attacks on gay pride marches and Jewish events.

This is two of the founding members of the Hungarian Guard:
http://thecontrarianhungarian.wordpress.com/2011/04/02/murder-on-trial/

"Their most famous crime shook what there is to remain of a civil society in Hungary. Early in the morning in February of 2009 in the small north-eastern village of Tatarszentgyorgy, an SUV stopped in front of a house on the outskirts of the village. It is well-known in such villages that the few houses on the border belong to the Roma, a minority under fierce and unmasked racist attack in today’s Hungary. The passengers of the SUV threw a Molotov-cocktail into the house. The inhabitants wanted to flee the house when gun-fire opened on them from the SUV outside of their door: a 5-year old child and his father died in the attack, several other family members were injured.
As it turns out, two of the four men on trial for these murders were founding members of the Hungarian Guard who were quickly disillusioned by the organization. Instead of limiting themselves to the intimidating tactics for which the Hungarian Guard is known by now, they decided to take its mission to a new and more concrete level.
All in all, they executed eight similar attacks between July of 2008 and August of 2009. They attacked on nine locations, threw eleven Molotov cocktails and shot 78 bullets. Six fatalities resulted, five persons sustained life-threatening injuries. Another 55 person were placed at risk of serious injuries due to their activities."


Apparently the typical jobbik supporter:

'is male, under 35, rarely unemployed and the holder of either a trade or secondary-school degree. Early last week, the British think tank Demos and the Budapest-based Political Capital Institute released a study based on the results of a survey of over 2,200 Facebook fans of the Jobbik party. The survey found that the typical respondent has "very low levels of trust in all major social and political institutions" and is "more likely to think that violence is justified if it leads to the right outcome." Likewise, the Internet-based service index.hu, Hungary's best-read online news website, summed up the average Jobbik voter as: "Very young, very Hungarian, very ill-tempered."'


The Institute for Race Relations released a fairly decent report on the problems around Europe the whole thing is sobering reading and page 18 is has a bit on Jobbik. Tequilla & HDM probably won't like the report because it lists UKIP & PVV as 'far right' parties but Canadian moderators would be well served by reading the whole thing. If this was happening in Canada don't you think it would be worthy of discussion instead of censorship?

http://www.irr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/PedlarsofHate.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tequila
Meh
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 29131
Location: Lancashire, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whatever the likes of UKIP are, they aren't far-right. Black, Asian (inc. Muslim) and other candidates play a considerable part in UKIP and there's very little evidence for the "far-right" claim. UKIP is also the only UK political party to actively ban members of various actual far-right groupings like the BNP and EDL from becoming members. The Guardian and other left-wing organisations used to try to smear UKIP with the "far-right" claim but it's becoming less and less common, mainly because it's nonsense. UKIP and the BNP for instance could hardly be more different if they tried.

As for the PVV, I like some of their policies, and I agree that elements of Islam and mass immigration are definitely big problems in Europe, but some of their policies are very illiberal and actually worry me.

As for that paper - LOL. They list a lot of conservative parties in there too (Danish People's Party, the True Finns, Norway's Progress Party, the SVP) so, frankly, I can't take them seriously.

Also, first page. They can't even be bothered to refer to Northern Ireland by its official name, calling it by the old republican standby "da Narf af Ahland".


Last edited by Tequila on Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:02 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion   
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  

 
Read more Articles on Wrong Planet



Wrong Planet is a Registered Trademark.
Copyright 2004-2014, Wrong Planet, LLC and Alex Plank. Alex does public speaking for Autism.

Advertise on Wrong Planet

Alex Hotchalk / Glam 

Alex Plank  Aspie Affection 

Terms of Service - You must read this as a user of Wrong Planet | Privacy Policy

Subscribe: RSS Feed  Wrong Planet News  Wrong Planet Forums




fine art