|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:42 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 12:35 Aquanim wrote:On December 14 2017 12:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:
Would you be content with African capital cities being flooded with White immigrants until Blacks became minorities? Based on your previous arguments regarding White Colonialism, the answer would be no. So drop your bullshit about right-wing propaganda and admit already that the reverse scenario of Europe being colonized is true. Perhaps if pressured enough, you'll concede that the West IS being conquered, but you're simply indifferent due to a pathological hatred for the White race and it's wretched "patriarchy." I've seen this pattern many times before. I'll grant you that large-scale immigration into Europe is causing short-to-medium term problems but I don't see how a bunch of poor migrants is analogous to technologically advanced colonists taking over, exploiting or straight-up exterminating the locals with their superior technology, and shipping resources back home. It seems thoroughly implausible to me that these immigrants are somehow going to take over and subjugate Europe. Causing some unrest is an entirely different question. Demography is destiny. They will replace us and subjugate Europe in time because European culture has become weak and submissive. We are the only culture that thinks demographic replacement is a meritorious act. How do you propose to stop Sharia Law when Whites are a minority in their own countries? Try convincing the Israelis to have open borders and invite the entire third world into their country like Sweden has. Surely they wouldn't mind becoming minorities in their homelands to a fatally hostile Muslim population? Diversity is our strength, after all. It's not like Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish homeland or anything . . . are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible? I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed]
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/41arpk/according_to_the_new_oecd_ranking_poland_is/
|
On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:42 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 12:35 Aquanim wrote:On December 14 2017 12:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:
Would you be content with African capital cities being flooded with White immigrants until Blacks became minorities? Based on your previous arguments regarding White Colonialism, the answer would be no. So drop your bullshit about right-wing propaganda and admit already that the reverse scenario of Europe being colonized is true. Perhaps if pressured enough, you'll concede that the West IS being conquered, but you're simply indifferent due to a pathological hatred for the White race and it's wretched "patriarchy." I've seen this pattern many times before. I'll grant you that large-scale immigration into Europe is causing short-to-medium term problems but I don't see how a bunch of poor migrants is analogous to technologically advanced colonists taking over, exploiting or straight-up exterminating the locals with their superior technology, and shipping resources back home. It seems thoroughly implausible to me that these immigrants are somehow going to take over and subjugate Europe. Causing some unrest is an entirely different question. Demography is destiny. They will replace us and subjugate Europe in time because European culture has become weak and submissive. We are the only culture that thinks demographic replacement is a meritorious act. How do you propose to stop Sharia Law when Whites are a minority in their own countries? Try convincing the Israelis to have open borders and invite the entire third world into their country like Sweden has. Surely they wouldn't mind becoming minorities in their homelands to a fatally hostile Muslim population? Diversity is our strength, after all. It's not like Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish homeland or anything . . . are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible? I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed]
Nah, he's right, they actually are called Merkel Lego.
Poland and hungary are certainly not the safest countries to visit in the EU though, not by a large margin. The only difference being that you don't need to fear a terror attack as much as simply being mugged. They're actually less safe than germany.
Which is kinda funny i guess. In a twisted way.
|
Their metrics for measurement are very weird. They seem to base on murder rate and of citizens surveyed feel safe walking at night. There are a lot of violent crimes that are not murder.
|
On December 14 2017 14:25 ShakeN_blake wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:42 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 12:35 Aquanim wrote:
[quote]
I'll grant you that large-scale immigration into Europe is causing short-to-medium term problems but I don't see how a bunch of poor migrants is analogous to technologically advanced colonists taking over, exploiting or straight-up exterminating the locals with their superior technology, and shipping resources back home.
It seems thoroughly implausible to me that these immigrants are somehow going to take over and subjugate Europe. Causing some unrest is an entirely different question. Demography is destiny. They will replace us and subjugate Europe in time because European culture has become weak and submissive. We are the only culture that thinks demographic replacement is a meritorious act. How do you propose to stop Sharia Law when Whites are a minority in their own countries? Try convincing the Israelis to have open borders and invite the entire third world into their country like Sweden has. Surely they wouldn't mind becoming minorities in their homelands to a fatally hostile Muslim population? Diversity is our strength, after all. It's not like Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish homeland or anything . . . are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible? I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed] https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/41arpk/according_to_the_new_oecd_ranking_poland_is/
And if you read the OCED study, the homicide rate is significantly higher than the nations that are subjected to attacks from trucks or peace and suicide bombings.
Polishboos and weeaboos once again proving that they like to cherrypick.
Also, Japan is not self-preserving in regards to their culture, any Japanese nationalist will tell you about the dying and sick culture that they live in.
|
On December 14 2017 14:25 ShakeN_blake wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:42 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 12:35 Aquanim wrote:
[quote]
I'll grant you that large-scale immigration into Europe is causing short-to-medium term problems but I don't see how a bunch of poor migrants is analogous to technologically advanced colonists taking over, exploiting or straight-up exterminating the locals with their superior technology, and shipping resources back home.
It seems thoroughly implausible to me that these immigrants are somehow going to take over and subjugate Europe. Causing some unrest is an entirely different question. Demography is destiny. They will replace us and subjugate Europe in time because European culture has become weak and submissive. We are the only culture that thinks demographic replacement is a meritorious act. How do you propose to stop Sharia Law when Whites are a minority in their own countries? Try convincing the Israelis to have open borders and invite the entire third world into their country like Sweden has. Surely they wouldn't mind becoming minorities in their homelands to a fatally hostile Muslim population? Diversity is our strength, after all. It's not like Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish homeland or anything . . . are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible? I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed] https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/41arpk/according_to_the_new_oecd_ranking_poland_is/
Did you read what you linked? This is not remotely close to helping your argument.
|
On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too?
i basically totally subscribe to our south african friend's argument. just respond to him. it matters less that japan had whatever you want to call a national identity and more with the fact that they had a fully modernized economy with trained workers, integrated markets, and financing options, all under the aegis of the US military.
|
On December 14 2017 14:38 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:25 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:42 ShakeN_blake wrote:
[quote]
Demography is destiny. They will replace us and subjugate Europe in time because European culture has become weak and submissive. We are the only culture that thinks demographic replacement is a meritorious act. How do you propose to stop Sharia Law when Whites are a minority in their own countries?
Try convincing the Israelis to have open borders and invite the entire third world into their country like Sweden has. Surely they wouldn't mind becoming minorities in their homelands to a fatally hostile Muslim population? Diversity is our strength, after all. It's not like Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish homeland or anything . . . are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible? I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed] https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/41arpk/according_to_the_new_oecd_ranking_poland_is/ And if you read the OCED study, the homicide rate is significantly higher than the nations that are subjected to attacks from trucks or peace and suicide bombings. Polishboos and weeaboos once again proving that they like to cherrypick. Also, Japan is not self-preserving in regards to their culture, any Japanese nationalist will tell you about the dying and sick culture that they live in.
It's also really easy to see, if you just fucking look at japan. They're partially more american than america. They make better bourbon, even.
edit: sidenote, i'm not bashing japan. I actually quite like japan, it's just not the holy grail of culture preservation. I'm also not chinese, that helps (not judging).
|
On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too?
Japanese people don't really have a national identity and most people, especially young people are very apolitical. Shinzo Abe is a bit of a nationalist but nowhere near as nationalistic as he is made out to be and when it comes to support for him, its very rarely out of national pride and more so about him being a professional politician.
On December 14 2017 14:42 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:38 Shiragaku wrote:On December 14 2017 14:25 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 14 2017 14:16 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:09 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 14:05 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:On December 14 2017 13:59 ShakeN_blake wrote:On December 14 2017 13:22 IgnE wrote:
[quote]
are you doing your part to save the white race and having as many white children as possible?
I plan to, just as Israelis should have many Jewish children as possible to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish-majority nation. Or is that somehow morally reprehensible to you? I think the morals come into play once we talk about how big said Israel should be. Sidenote, your entire japan example is worthless considering how incredibly racist japan in general is. Shown by the fact that even integrated foreign engineers speaking the language etc are not uncommonly denied service. I'm not talking about expanding Israel's borders beyond it's current state. That should not be necessary. Maintaining their current demographic foothold is another matter entirely. And I chose Japan precisely because they are a monolithic culture with self-preservational instincts, unlike the West. It is their sovereign right as a nation to restrict immigration as they see fit. Of course they can do whatever they want. But don't cite them for failed or good immigration politics if the only immigration politics they have is "if you're not japanese, you're not welcome". If you start to argue that regardless of status, foreigners should be thrown out/not let in, you're an idiot. And, well, a racist. Not even i who's incredibly critical about immigration in the EU currently would argue that contributors and people willing to integrate should not be let in. That's dumb beyond belief and only "justifiable" by white supremacy. The EU's litmus test for who they think will actually contribute to society instead of being a welfare leech or criminal has failed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Travel bans should have been in place years ago. It would have at least prevented much of the carnage France, Germany and the U.K. have faced in particular over the past five years. Meanwhile, Poland and Hungary are among the safest countries in Europe to visit. It must be nice having Christmas markets without the need for patrolling officers armed with assault rifles. Or concrete barriers on every street corner (I hear they call them "Merkel-Lego" in Germany). [Citation needed] https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/41arpk/according_to_the_new_oecd_ranking_poland_is/ And if you read the OCED study, the homicide rate is significantly higher than the nations that are subjected to attacks from trucks or peace and suicide bombings. Polishboos and weeaboos once again proving that they like to cherrypick. Also, Japan is not self-preserving in regards to their culture, any Japanese nationalist will tell you about the dying and sick culture that they live in. It's also really easy to see, if you just fucking look at japan. They're partially more american than america. They make better bourbon, even. edit: sidenote, i'm not bashing japan. I actually quite like japan, it's just not the holy grail of culture preservation. I'm also not chinese, that helps (not judging).
I am Japanese myself and I am proud to be Japanese, but man, I get annoyed when I see people mold Japan into their own image to justify their platform. I remember when SJWs used to source Japanese subcultures, especially anime and boys love to say that Japan is a social justice paradise that fights against gender norms but now, it's mostly right wingers who misinterpret what Japan really is.
|
On December 14 2017 14:43 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too? Japanese people don't really have a national identity and most people, especially young people are very apolitical. Shinzo Abe is a bit of a nationalist but nowhere near as nationalistic as he is made out to be and when it comes to support for him, its very rarely out of national pride and more so about him being a professional politician.
Regardless of its decrepit nature, I don't think that anyone would argue that the Japanese people lack cohesion in the same way that African and Arab tribes do.
|
On December 14 2017 14:43 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too? Japanese people don't really have a national identity and most people, especially young people are very apolitical. Shinzo Abe is a bit of a nationalist but nowhere near as nationalistic as he is made out to be and when it comes to support for him, its very rarely out of national pride and more so about him being a professional politician.
Nationalist tendencies are not necessarily bad. You should always try to improve the life of your people first. It's just the way you go about it, that counts.
Also, Abe looks a bit like Tadanobu Asano if you squint (heavily). That's a plus too.
I am Japanese myself and I am proud to be Japanese, but man, I get annoyed when I see people mold Japan into their own image to justify their platform. I remember when SJWs used to source Japanese subcultures, especially anime and boys love to say that Japan is a social justice paradise that fights against gender norms but now, it's mostly right wingers who misinterpret what Japan really is.
That's media for you. As you said, most people "know" Japan from animes, which generally are shaped/influenced by bushido, shonen and the sorts. Judging by that you guys shoot anchors around and fight titanic naked people, for all i know. And drive Hachirokus.
|
On December 14 2017 14:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:43 Shiragaku wrote:On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too? Japanese people don't really have a national identity and most people, especially young people are very apolitical. Shinzo Abe is a bit of a nationalist but nowhere near as nationalistic as he is made out to be and when it comes to support for him, its very rarely out of national pride and more so about him being a professional politician. Regardless of its decrepit nature, I don't think that anyone would argue that the Japanese people lack cohesion in the same way that African and Arab tribes do.
It would vary. In the urban cosmopolitan communities where its more global and filled with artistic culture jamming, I am pretty sure they would be okay with immigrants, especially from other Asian nations with people from rural Japan being more skeptical and voting against such policies. The more and more I see Tokyo, the more I realize that it has much more in common with New York rather than a cyberpunk ethnostate.
|
On December 14 2017 14:52 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 14:48 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 14:43 Shiragaku wrote:On December 14 2017 14:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Now, now. Don't be lazy. I want to see where this goes. The typical response is that Japan was in an advantageous position because it had a national identity whereas the colonies did not. Is that your response, too? Japanese people don't really have a national identity and most people, especially young people are very apolitical. Shinzo Abe is a bit of a nationalist but nowhere near as nationalistic as he is made out to be and when it comes to support for him, its very rarely out of national pride and more so about him being a professional politician. Regardless of its decrepit nature, I don't think that anyone would argue that the Japanese people lack cohesion in the same way that African and Arab tribes do. It would vary. In the urban cosmopolitan communities where its more global and filled with artistic culture jamming, I am pretty sure they would be okay with immigrants, especially from other Asian nations with people from rural Japan being more skeptical and voting against such policies. The more and more I see Tokyo, the more I realize that it has much more in common with New York rather than a cyberpunk ethnostate.
That btw is really sad. I'd love to see Public Security Section 9.
|
On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 07:19 On_Slaught wrote:"Some very fine people on both sides." Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 07:19 On_Slaught wrote:
[quote]
"Some very fine people on both sides." Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists?
Now the A-team has arrived to intellectually validate you, and also remind you that the B-team hit the nail on the head, are you gonna respond to the B-team or just duck the argument?
|
On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 07:19 On_Slaught wrote:
[quote]
"Some very fine people on both sides." Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks
Eh, I'm not as sure of this as you are. I wouldn't go as far as to say colonialism was a boon, but I'm not sure post-colonial Africa was necessarily in a significantly worse state than pre-colonial Africa in terms of effective governmental institutions. For whatever reason (geography, isolation from key trade routes, etc. are notable hypotheses), Africa just didn't develop well. Blaming colonialism, given the nature its obvious atrocities, is emotionally appealing but I'm not sure there's sufficient historical evidence available conclude with any degree of certainty that colonialism is the reason.
While there were a few African civilization that rivaled other major civilizations in the 16th century (Songhai, Mali), those occupied a relatively small portion of African land compared to major civilizations in other continents. Also, keep in mind that Africa contains 60% (!) of the world's arable land. The geography ain't that bad.
Looking at the territory of modern-day South Africa for instance, it doesn't appear that there was ever a dominant and unifying civilization in the region, and that's evident today by the large number of black/native ethnicities. It's difficult to say what would have played out without European colonization, but speculating that South Africa would have unified into a developed country really has no more support then speculating South Africa would remain ethnically divided and undeveloped (i.e. similar to pre-Columbus Americas). If the latter is the case, it's not clear that the after-effects of colonialism leave South Africa in a relatively worse state today than there would have been had there been zero European contact anyway.
In no way does this excuse or diminish the human suffering wrought by colonialism though.
|
On December 14 2017 17:32 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 13:20 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 12:32 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 12:28 IgnE wrote:On December 14 2017 08:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 14 2017 08:37 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Again: Racist in the US long ago adopted the topic secret super power of saying they were not really racists. Western Culture is the new States Rights, which was the new White Man’s Burden. A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Its fucking super hot there and its hard to grow crops. The same with some regions of North America pre colonies, except harsh winters were the real killer. Civilizations advanced at different rates depending on the environment they existed in. That super dope regions where Greece and Rome started, prime early civilization real estate. That land by the river in Egypt, also prime early civilization real estate. On December 14 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2017 08:29 xDaunt wrote:On December 14 2017 08:22 Plansix wrote:On December 14 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
A quick look at the current state of post-colonial Africa suggests that Kipling may have had a point. At this point this post by you doesn’t even shock me. And if we hadn’t spent well over 200 years fucking with Africa, I might agree. But imperialism leaves it mark. So how would you explain away the shittiness of pre-colonial Africa? Like compared to the Dark Ages of Europe? The dark ages were super shit. People overlook that era and the 20 crusades just to export warlords and assholes to the south. I don't think xDaunt thinks Egypt counts as Africa. That or he doesn't believe the Code of Hammurabi was a big deal. babylon isnt really in africa though? Excellent, the A-team is finally here. Would you mind making the proper counter-argument for all of these lost leftists? actually i thought our south african friend did a fine job of doing that, which i appreciate because i dont find your arguments here to be worth taking seriously. i mean come on man. saying post war japan had it worse than postcolonial africa? complete bollocks Eh, I'm not as sure of this as you are. I wouldn't go as far as to say colonialism was a boon, but I'm not sure post-colonial Africa was necessarily in a significantly worse state than pre-colonial Africa in terms of effective governmental institutions. For whatever reason (geography, isolation from key trade routes, etc. are notable hypotheses), Africa just didn't develop well. Blaming colonialism, given the nature its obvious atrocities, is emotionally appealing but I'm not sure there's sufficient historical evidence available conclude with any degree of certainty that colonialism is the reason. While there were a few African civilization that rivaled other major civilizations in the 16th century (Songhai, Mali), those occupied a relatively small portion of African land compared to major civilizations in other continents. Also, keep in mind that Africa contains 60% (!) of the world's arable land. The geography ain't that bad. Looking at the territory of modern-day South Africa for instance, it doesn't appear that there was ever a dominant and unifying civilization in the region, and that's evident today by the large number of black/native ethnicities. It's difficult to say what would have played out without European colonization, but speculating that South Africa would have unified into a developed country really has no more support then speculating South Africa would remain ethnically divided and undeveloped (i.e. similar to pre-Columbus Americas). If the latter is the case, it's not clear that the after-effects of colonialism leave South Africa in a relatively worse state today than there would have been had there been zero European contact anyway. In no way does this excuse or diminish the human suffering wrought by colonialism though.
For most of the 14th century the Mali Empire was bigger than the modern countries of France, the UK, and Italy combined.
As to how Africa would be doing without colonialism, in some ways it's impossible to say, but one thing is reasonably safe to presume, they wouldn't be one of the wealthiest continents (natural resources wise) but one of the poorest peoples. Without the massive exploitation by colonialists there simply wouldn't be a sensible way to extract so much wealth (outside the country) while leaving so little for the land's occupants.
Speaking to how colonialism impacts modern Africa here's something that speaks to that a bit.
The combination of staggering wealth, rampant violence, and abject poverty in DR Congo is no coincidence, but part of a pattern causing devastation across Africa, according to Financial Times investigative journalist Tom Burgis.
In a new edition of his book The Looting Machine, the author probes the paradox of "the continent that is at once the world's poorest and, arguably, its richest."
Burgis, a former correspondent in Lagos and Johannesburg, finds a wide variety of kleptocrats and rackets over his travels through dozens of resource-rich countries. But a common thread is that the wholesale expropriation of resources during colonial times has barely slowed through the post-independence era, albeit with new beneficiaries.
"Western governments are not supposed to wield commercial and political power at the same time, and certainly not to use one to benefit the other," says Burgis. "In colonial states...The British or Portugese would cultivate a small group of local people who would fuse political and commercial power to control the economy."
"When the foreign power leaves, you are left with an elite that has no division between political and commercial power. The only source of wealth is mines or oilfields, and that is a recipe for ultra-corrupt states. Somewhere like Nigeria, an 'extractor elite'...wanted to draw to itself the rent that oil and mining resources generate."
Burgis cites another colonial hangover in the continued presence and power of oil and mining firms.
"The multinational companies hold enormous economic and political power in post-independence African countries," he says. "In this way, there is a pretty straight line from colonial exploitation to modern exploitation."
The growth of offshore banking in the late 20th century created new opportunities for resource tycoons to cover their tracks, a practice laid bare in the Panama Papers.
Israeli businessman Dan Gertler was an early pioneer. After forging a close friendship with DR Congo President Joseph Kabila, he was granted a near monopoly on exporting the nation's diamonds, and quickly became a billionaire. Gertler routed the cash through an elaborate network of offshore accounts in tax havens, keeping the details of controversial deals secret.
"In the case of African resource deals, offshore funds have been shown to conceal questionable transactions," says Burgis. "In the 1980s, bribes were literally cars full of cash and you handed the key to the official you were trying to bribe."
"Bribery now is much more sophisticated, and has become harder to define as bribery if it's (through) offshore transactions or people being given equity shares in offshore companies...You have to crack open a lot of offshore secrecy to see the conflict of interest that lies at the heart of them."
Source
What Africa would look like is reasonably mysterious, what isn't, is whether colonialism fucked them over, it did.
And while it might not be your intention, what you said most definitely diminishes the human suffering wrought by colonialism.
|
On December 14 2017 14:49 m4ini wrote:
Nationalist tendencies are not necessarily bad. You should always try to improve the life of your people first. It's just the way you go about it, that counts.
There is a lot of historical precedent for an alliance between nationalist and left-wing movements as a force for good, because most people construct their identity primarily by tribal factors such as religion, nationality, ethnicity. So any political movement that cares about attracting voters must appeal to groups of people based on one of these factors. And often your ethnicity or nationality is the primary reason you are oppressed.
For instance, virtually any democratic political movement in the Middle-East has to certainly include Arab nationalism, Islamism and anti-western sentiment, because many people care more about such things than about any technocratic pitch about increase in living standards and improvement of the economy.
I think there are three benefits of allying with nationalism rather than Islamism. First, in most autocratic Muslim countries there is an established power base of clerics that espouse an extremist form of religion, and you'll inevitably empower these people. Second, religion is much more totalitarian and less concerned with improving economy and more with oppressing women and so on, whereas nationalism is more grounded in political reality and concerned with secular notions of progress such as living standards and education. And finally, to some extent it bypasses the endless Sunni vs Shia conflicts and replaces it with a possible antagonism against outside countries, where the government will have less power to actually influence anything.
|
Colonialism was for sure not a net positive for africans and drawing borders willinilly imho was a crime that made things way worse for sure.
Creating a tiny local elite that had no problems exploiting/even selling its own people and then leaving said elite alone was also an obvious reciepe for disaster.
But acting like it was or would be this awesome place that would have no conflicts if not for colonialism is a bit ridiculous too. Iirc no one here argued that, but i have heard people arguing this in real life.
|
On December 14 2017 14:21 Plansix wrote:
Isn't Poland in the middle of a struggle against the ultra right nationalist government they elected? I seem to remember them almost causing riots by trying outlaw abortions.
Lol no. Poland isnt in a middle of struggle against government. The current government has a support of majority of population. The oposition is in a struggle yes. And they are losing badly. Granted that PiS have made many controversial things and mobilized large part of population against them. Still if they keep 500+ and not accept any refugees they are safe coming into next election.
|
On December 14 2017 11:34 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2017 10:53 Danglars wrote:On December 14 2017 10:46 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On December 14 2017 10:40 Danglars wrote:On December 14 2017 10:32 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
I don't actually think I can express my opinions on the shit xdaunt has said in the last few pages ("gifted"... fucking hell) without breaking\ my laptop... but... wow.
I really wish there was a block feature, I like a fair portion of the discussion here, but when 3 pages disappear to arguing with a literal white supremacist my blood pressure doesn't do too well trying to sift through it. Blocking or banning the kind of trolls that think other ideas are white supremacy would save time and pages of scrolling. If you want to put this quote in the "other ideas" basket and defend it as such, you are no better. The Dark Ages were certainly a bad time, too, but the point is that Europe got past them. Africa never did, in spite of being essentially "gifted" with all of the know-how of how to do so during the colonial period. I'm not in favor reestablishing colonialism in Africa because I don't think that you can forcibly "civilize" a people (just look at all of the disasters of American "nation-building"), but it doesn't change the fact that Kipling was onto something with his poem. This is really your stopping off place for white supremacy? An opinion on civilizational low points between locations? It’s a wonder you think anything is worthy of debate, or that you’d survive in society thinking so many are practically Nazis surrounding you. But this does illustrate internet tough guy memes, when you actually behave less absurd in your own bubble. Your refusal to see subtext, narrative or implication in daunt's statements (which deliberately omit huge amounts of context and history to make that narrative work) doesn't mean it isn't there. Your blindness or deliberate ignorance of racism and white supremacy doesn't mean it isn't there. To give you totally undue benefit of the doubt, I'll make an example of what I mean, and if you can't see why his statement is clearly white supremacy, that's on you. Here we go, the one chance I'll give you, because I don't have the energy for this crap ------------------------------- I'm South African, so I know the context here a lot better than most of you arguing about it academically. I LIVE this place every day, and interact with people affected by it regularly. Apartheid only ended in 1994, the "born free" have barely entered tertiary education and the workplace. ~90% of the population was heavily disadvantaged by multiple generations of deliberately crap ("Bantu") education. Major cities have had populations moved back and forth, with people of colour being packed into slums and losing all established property time and again. So collectively wealth distribution is totally screwed up, with a substantial amount of the money generated by industry and natural resources immediately leaving the country, or going to mining magnates and such, without it ever influencing local economies (in large part due to colonial history, having a system set up where half your potential economy gets siphoned away is not a gift) Further, due to intense crowding after population redistribution in rural areas, a lot of farm land has been destroyed by overgrazing. So again, you can't use any of that "imperial wisdom" or whatever the fresh fuck daunt is talking about, because you literally can't use much of the land as a direct result of colonial policies. Back to the education thing, the situation is that people of colour (again, 90% of population) have been forcibly denied a usable education (with varying degrees of this depending on "how far from white" the group in question was deemed to be). How can a country be expected to use all that "colonial knowledge" when that is not at all what the population was given? There was no trade, no way in which the interference of colonial powers gave back, none of that was imparted. It's not even that no attempt was made, the population was deliberately, across generations, denied any chance to seek that. And then, when apartheid ends, the new ruling party comes into a system with a totally uneducated majority population, spread across a huge country with terrible rural infrastructure. With no existing government structure in place, and a population that is incredibly susceptible to populism (and incredibly poor), no shit corruption wins out. Every possible check and balance either doesn't exist or has been actively torn out by the previous colonial system. It's like letting go of a whole arrangement of glassware 10 feet above the ground and crapping the system out for not catching it all with two hands. ------------------------------- So given that, when daunt talks about how Africa just didn't recover despite having access to some or other aspect of western culture or whatever, and deliberately ignores WHY, and then follows it up with this: Show nested quote +I'm not in favor reestablishing colonialism in Africa because I don't think that you can forcibly "civilize" a people The only conclusion that makes any sense, putting the pieces together daunt has very very very clearly laid out (his opinion on those in Africa as being uncivilized + his observation that Africa did not economically recover after colonialism) is racial / cultural supremacy. And given the fucking huge spread of different cultures and societies in Europe and Africa, and the very common practice of racists to hide behind arguments of culture, I see no reason to give any benefit of the doubt. The quote I put above, for example, is so disgustingly callous. The reason he doesn't think Africa should experience colonialism again (responsible for some of the worst atrocities of last two centuries) is not because of the people's lives it will destroy (if he considers the people it would affect people at all) but because those people can't be civilized.I really hope that that helped spell it out for you. I'm not doing so again.
Thanks for this post, good stuff, particularly with all the racist cowards trying to use SA and Zim as perverse Birth of a Nation fodder.
|
You can't assimilate into European culture without renouncing Islam. The two are entirely incompatible for reasons nobody should have to explain. Sure Christianity was also abominable like 500 years ago, sure the golden age, Sufi, Avicenna, Ulugh Beg, bla bla, yes I know. There used to be dinosaurs on Earth, too, so I can't decide how that's relevant at all.
I have a lot of personal experience with moderate contemporary muslims since they used to frequent our gym, like 20 of them. I say used to because across the span of ten years or so, all of them either became regular dudes who act and behave normal and have completely cut ties with "practicing" muslims (who constantly attempt to ostracize them), deciding to associate with locals and other normal people instead and relax a little in life, or they became ostensibly radicalized to a point they had to be kicked out of the gym by their own folks because they kept peddling atrocious bullshit like trying to ban girls from the gym, trying to ban alcohol from gym parties, being morose and nasty-tempered most of the time - which personally struck me as especially repulsive, and attempting to convert kids with their disgusting propaganda.
I don't know how these things work in the US which is a completely different ecosystem, but it has become my clear belieft there's no such thing as a moderate muslim in Europe because the "real" muslims don't want moderation and will radicalize anyone they can get their hands on or try to pressure them into self-alienation.
If your core identity rests on a conviction Western culture is decadent and wrong, our women are "whores" (literally) and we are all infidels destined for reeducation, you should never be welcome to cohabit with us. Ever.
Mosques are literally factories for the self-othering of these people where they band together to reinforce one another's cancerous faith, because Allah. I have zero problems with taking in migrants who admire the destination country's culture and want to be part of it and all the problem in the world in accommodating a self-propagating virulent pathology hellbent on the destruction of its host.
Also, being a grumpy unpleasant prick who needs to observe all kinds of special rituals and doesn't believe women are autonomous human beings and gays should be executed (heard all these with my own two ears) isn't too good for integration or handy things like getting a job (omg discrimination!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
