Anti-Semitism vs. Anti-Zionism

Post Reply New Topic

I will also point out that as far as I know the author (who comes across as fairly liberal) does not represent any political or religious group, although his book has now been picked up by some "right-wing" and Islamic sites. I will not link to those though. You can download the book from 4shared.com - http://www.4shared.com/document/jtoHCL1 ... _by_C.html But only if you are prepared to be challenged. If you are not, I recommend avoiding the book altogether.

I don't take exception to anyone coming to live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that exists peacefully, does their bit for society, does not want to force their ideology upon me, and generally leaves me alone. But that's because I'm a classical liberal and ethnic nationalists like yourself don't like our kind.

National membership has to be based on something more than law-abidingness. If the basis of membership is just peaceful co-existence, then you have no grounds for opposing massive demographic change. Subcontinental Asians could outnumber the English in their own country 10 to 1, and you'd have no problem with it as long as they conducted themselves peacefully. But then England would look completely different. It would transform into an Indian nation. If you wouldn't want England to become an Indian country, then you're an ethnic nationalist.

The problem with Pakistani Muslims is not that they're violent. Glaswegian schemies are violent too. The problem with Pakistani Muslims is that they're part of another nation. The only immigrants the UK should accept are Anglo-Celtic immigrants from Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

Hitler also had similar beliefs. Lets hope the U.K. does not become Nazi Germany.

Reductio ad Hitlerum is no more than guilt by association, a form of association fallacy. The fallacy claims that a policy leads to—or is the same as—one advocated or implemented by Adolf Hitler or the Third Reich, and so "proves" that the original policy is undesirable. For example: "Hitler was a vegetarian, so vegetarianism is wrong [because the things Hitler did were wrong, or because it could lead to results ideologically or morally aligned with Hitler]." Used broadly enough, ad Hitlerum can encompass more than one questionable cause fallacy type, by both inverting cause and effect and by linking an alleged cause to wholly unrelated consequences. Hitler was fond of dogs and children, but to argue that affection for dogs and children is wrong on this basis is not logically sound.

Various criminals, controversial religious and political figures, regimes, and atrocities other than those caused by Hitler, the Nazis and the Holocaust can be used for the same purposes. For example, a reductio ad Stalinum could assert that atheism is a dangerous philosophy because Stalin was an atheist for most of his life.

The fallacious nature of reductio ad Hitlerum is easily illustrated by identifying X as something that Adolf Hitler or his supporters did promote but which is not considered unethical, such as painting, enjoying classical music, or owning dogs.