EPTTo me it seems self-evident that a centralised ideology produces greater or lesser anarchy in proportion to the complexity of the population on whom it is applied. Complexity in turn has some correlation to size.
European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 274
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
To me it seems self-evident that a centralised ideology produces greater or lesser anarchy in proportion to the complexity of the population on whom it is applied. Complexity in turn has some correlation to size. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 10 2015 05:20 REDBLUEGREEN wrote: Could anyone of you list some historical examples when big immigration waves had negative effects on the country? Considering how concerned the masses are I am sure they must exist but all the immigration waves that I can think of right now seemed to have had extremely positive effects often leading to a golden age in the country. Good-faith immigrants are generally a good thing for any nation not struggling with overpopulation (no European nation is there yet). The problem is what I call malicious immigrants, the kind that have no interest in becoming a part of the new society but rather come to force their own agenda (in the modern era, sharia law and jihad tend to be the name of that game). Chechnya is a good example of a region that was severely damaged by the influx of (jihadist) migrants, and to some extent many European nations are struggling with the same. In that light, a ban on Muslim immigration as invoked by some nations seems rather reasonable. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 11 2015 09:52 LegalLord wrote: Good-faith immigrants are generally a good thing for any nation not struggling with overpopulation (no European nation is there yet). The problem is what I call malicious immigrants, the kind that have no interest in becoming a part of the new society but rather come to force their own agenda (in the modern era, sharia law and jihad tend to be the name of that game). Chechnya is a good example of a region that was severely damaged by the influx of (jihadist) migrants, and to some extent many European nations are struggling with the same. In that light, a ban on Muslim immigration as invoked by some nations seems rather reasonable. So like straight up Islamophobia? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Perhaps, instead of dropping buzzwords, you should try arguments with real substance. Evidently you're not interested in backing your buzzwords with substance, so there is really nothing more to add here. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 11 2015 09:58 LegalLord wrote: Perhaps, instead of dropping buzzwords, you should try arguments with real substance. I just call it like I see it. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On September 11 2015 09:58 LegalLord wrote: Evidently you're not interested in backing your buzzwords with substance, so there is really nothing more to add here. Sorry but calling a "ban on Muslim immigration" reasonable is pretty Islamophobic in the literal sense of the word. Chechen Muslims and Syrian war refugees aren't actually comparable groups of people just because they're Muslims. Also the Chechen violence has about as much to do with religion as the Uyghur terrorism in China or IRA terrorism in Ireland. It's all nationalist/independence struggles that you have going on in hundreds of places, you could as well hold the common language responsible. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 11 2015 10:16 Nyxisto wrote: Sorry but calling a "ban on Muslim immigration" reasonable is pretty Islamophobic in the literal sense of the word. Chechen Muslims and Syrian war refugees aren't actually comparable groups of people just because they're Muslims. Also the Chechen violence has about as much to do with religion as the Uyghur terrorism in China or IRA terrorism in Ireland. It's all nationalist/independence struggles that you have going on in hundreds of places, you could as well hold the common language responsible. Someone asked if immigration can be a bad thing - there is an example. Though I do agree that the two groups are not equivalent, I also see that it's reasonable to feel that Muslims specifically might be a problem group, while Christian refugees are a better choice. On September 11 2015 11:51 Nyxisto wrote: It's way more than a technicality though. In many Eastern European and Scandinavian countries politicians play on the fears of the population for months now for political capital, using lingo along the lines of "being overrun", "cultural endangerment", "asylum critics", "concerned citizens" and so on. For quite some time now that version of "soft"-racism/xenophobia has become so fashionable and is being adopted into mainstream society that just calling someone out for what they are is being interpreted as being a "SJW" or the German equivalent, a "gutmensch". And in turn, in West/Central Europe, it's fashionable to call people "racist" simply for disagreeing with a naive interpretation of the potential threat of uncontrolled immigration. And to be perfectly honest, I think "SJW" would be a perfect description of what is going on in this situation. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:02 LegalLord wrote: Someone asked if immigration can be a bad thing - there is an example. Though I do agree that the two groups are not equivalent, I also see that it's reasonable to feel that Muslims specifically might be a problem group, while Christian refugees are a better choice. And in turn, in West/Central Europe, it's fashionable to call people "racist" simply for disagreeing with a naive interpretation of the potential threat of uncontrolled immigration. Its fashionable to be Islamophobic in a country that has a influx of Muslim refugees. And then requets for bans on all Muslim immigrants sound reasonable in that environment. Then you take the defensive stance that anyone who disagrees with your assessment of hundreds of thousands of people as "naive". You are literally parroting the claims made during every influx of immigration throughout history. Fear of the new and other. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:25 Plansix wrote: Its fashionable to be Islamophobic in a country that has a influx of Muslim refugees. And then requets for bans on all Muslim immigrants sound reasonable in that environment. Then you take the defensive stance that anyone who disagrees with your assessment of hundreds of thousands of people as "naive". You are literally parroting the claims made during every influx of immigration throughout history. Fear of the new and other. Yeah ok, we've already had this discussion before. Not interested in repeating the same thing again and reading the same responses in return. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
Would Europe preffer to agree on a plan on how to spread and integrate those people or preffer them to struggle and then get massed up in some areas ? Like Greece which like time I checked was not doing too well without the migration problem. Which is the most likely to lead to future problems in Europe ? | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
Would Europe preffer to agree on a plan on how to spread and integrate those people or preffer them to struggle and then get massed up in some areas ? Which is the most likely to lead to future problems in Europe ? There is no Europe in this crisis; I think that is self-evident by now. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:45 MoltkeWarding wrote: I thought the point was that he was Islamophobe; so on that basis he should only be parroting the claims of societies faced with the influx of Muslims throughout history, but since I cannot think of any historical precedents for a Muslim mass influx into non-Muslim lands not accompanied by military conquest, we are in fact facing something completely novel in world history. Is that a sophisticated way of implying that you're buying into the silly "racewar" narrative? We've had millions of Muslims coming into our country barely half a century ago and I'm not wearing a turban yet, our culture isn't threatened. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:45 MoltkeWarding wrote: There is no Europe in this crisis; I think that is self-evident by now. Hey sure, politically it is divided. There should be though. Europe is too entangled to ignore problems of other members. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:49 Nyxisto wrote: Is that a sophisticated way of implying that you're buying into the silly "racewar" narrative? We've had millions of Muslims coming into our country barely half a century ago and I'm not wearing a turban yet, our culture isn't threatened. How do you know? Turks and Syrians do not wear turbans. Let us not pretend that this millennial generation has a "culture" beyond an eclectic succession of fads and Zeitgeists. Culture implies strong rootedness; we belong to the generation where alienation is the norm. Mass immigration is just another one of those things for us. From the immigrant's perspective, it is quite different. Most of them lack our nihilism. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:53 rezoacken wrote: Hey sure, politically it is divided. There should be though. Europe is too entangled to ignore problems of other members. Unfortunately it would probably just be Germany imposing its will upon strategically positioned nations that are in no position to refuse. Nations which are poorer and generally have more experience with Muslim immigrants tend to be less friendly than Germany to immigration. Problem with a politically united Europe is that the strong will impose their will on the weak. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
Many people here want to take in 50,000 refugees, and it appears to be gaining traction. The right wing government, and me included really don't want this to happen. I was born in Slovakia, and honestly, if you live in a country like that, you will see that most of the problems stem from this kind of immigration. Gypsies in Slovakia are a HUGE problem, I know not surprised that the Eastern European countries are so against it. And the media here makes it sounds like the people in Hungary are bad, and have no empathy. The fact that there is a pretty strong anti-Muslim sentiment here, plus that many can be potential terrorists, most are uneducated, completely different culture where women are treated like trash, unavailable infrastructure, poor economic conditions in Canada at the moment are all strong arguments for why to not bring them in. The case for bringing them in... Universal human rights, which is complete bullshit in the first place. Where was everyone for the first 4 years of the Syrian Civil War? I've been following this conflict for a long time, and why do people magically care now? We always choose when we want to help, and when we don't, just like we chose during the Rwandan Genocide. I don't see a single solid argument for bringing in the refugees. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On September 11 2015 12:49 Nyxisto wrote: Is that a sophisticated way of implying that you're buying into the silly "racewar" narrative? We've had millions of Muslims coming into our country barely half a century ago and I'm not wearing a turban yet, our culture isn't threatened. Just don't be naive or ignorant is all. A lot of the time the majority that is the best off doesn't say much, until they become the ones discriminated against. Feminism in some western countries is a prime example, I know this facebook page is a bit biased, but just do give some examples: https://www.facebook.com/TheMensRightsInitiative?fref=ts Just remember, when being white was a huge advantage... And then we all went for equality. Who benefited from that, who lost from that? It isn't a coincidence that almost all the parties fighting for these movement in Canada are usually Islamic and Indian. Because it benefits them more than anyone. These "takeovers" if you will, are really subtle things... The culture in Germany has changed, in Canada too in the last 20-30 years. If there's a potential change to culture, then the culture is threatened. | ||
| ||
