EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 632
| 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. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
The left can fume and run around this fact for as long as it wants but reality doesn't care about your moral high ground. I'm afraid I have to side with Testie on this one. They can have their religious state and live there, and we need to leave them the fuck alone and stop interfering and bombing, but if they want to come here and live among 21st century Europeans they need to keep their religion private like I keep my drugs. And they need to do their absolute best to assimilate. No forced clothing, no forced rituals, no public displays of religion, no special rules, no special sexism, no hermetic sectarianism. No alahu akbar, no daily prayer regimen, none of that bullshit. Go to a religious state and be a fundamentalist there or come here and act like the Europeans do. And shave your fucking beard while you're at it. There is no middle ground and this will be proven time and again until it is addressed with sobriety. Because they do not want to be like us It took several centuries, a whole lot of burning at the stake and absolutely massive paradigm shifts to get Christianity on board with a secular state, and I still wouldn't mind cancelling it altogether. A massively rich international pedophile network of underfucked shizoid proto-patriarchs isn't something we should be supporting with taxpayer money. Organized religion isn't faith, it's mind control. It has nothing to do with faith proper, since real faith comes from inside, from the human experience, from love and pain, and it can't ever be picked up from some dusty-ass book. Until the left understands Islam is a serious problem no sane moderate wants to be dealing with there will be no productive discussion, just a silent and steady slide of public opinion to the right until you get more Trumps and Orbans. Given the current state of Islam, you do not want to absorb people whose identity rests on their belief in Allah. And we CERTAINLY don't need more mosques anywhere in Europe. These people are othering themselves, a rather nasty self-perpetuating phenomenon I might add, and as such will never assimilate successfully unless they are stripped of (i.e. willing to give up) their core religious identity. My girlfriend is "muslim" but wears mini skirts and gets drunk with me every Friday. That's the only kind of "muslim" (and of course also "christian") you want around in a secular, free society. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 26 2016 05:34 SK.Testie wrote: The left erasing / omitting data that doesn't agree with them? Shocked. Utterly shocked I tell you. If you're so confident in your conclusions please start collecting the data in 2017 to prove me wrong. You're not even focusing on the important overarching meat of my original post. The point of, "at what point is it a failed policy?" Instead you're focusing on a morsel and asking for the authorities to intervene. I'm not pushing that issue. I'll fight you on it if you want but I'm not pushing it. Hahaha you fail again. The law is from 1978, and it was the right governing at this time. Since you seem to know France so well, you surely remember the first article of our Constitution: “France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion.” [I underline]. France doesn't have an ethnic/racial approach of the nation. This ban also exists because there was a time where ethnic files existed—a time when the French State was deporting Jews. And the data was not “erased” since it never existed to begin with. I don't have to prove you wrong; you're the one asserting something so the burden of proof is upon you. I didn't address your main point? I'm absolutely sorry. Will you survive? When I stumble on a racist thesis in the first paragraph of a long text, I do tend to overlook what's next because 99% of the time it's in the same vein. See, I too make my own statistics. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5744 Posts
On December 26 2016 04:44 MyTHicaL wrote: I don't understand why North Americans are commenting on European issues with such vehemance... Testie seems to have moved slightly away from trolling the thread. Mohdoo seems to be weighing lives but probably voted Trump and now is attempting to justify it- I would not want to see 20 French/ger/scottish die, however 20 vs 5000; the answer is obvious. Tis a new year. Let's be less depressed than wtf happened last year. A while ago Mohdoo was calling Hillary Clinton his goddess. I am pretty sure he did not vote for Trump.  On December 26 2016 05:22 TheDwf wrote: Muahahaha nope. We don't have ethnic/religious statistics, so the actual figure is unknown. This 70% figure was abusively extracted from a 2008 Washington Post article which was based on... a single prison, with the source being... chaplains who claimed that 70% of the prisoners were Muslim. And that's it. Since then it is used by far right trolls like you to justify their racist views, with literally zero solid data to back it up since this data doesn't exist. Too bad, uh? And why did many Western European countries stop keeping such statistical data? | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On December 26 2016 06:50 maybenexttime wrote: And why did many Western European countries stop keeping such statistical data? Because French citizens are solely French. Religion and ethnicity are nothing the state recognises, they're the very definition of a civil society. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6261 Posts
On December 26 2016 06:50 maybenexttime wrote: A while ago Mohdoo was calling Hillary Clinton his goddess. I am pretty sure he did not vote for Trump. And why did many Western European countries stop keeping such statistical data? Which countries other than France don't keep such data? It's kept in NL. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5744 Posts
On December 26 2016 07:11 Nyxisto wrote: Because French citizens are solely French. Religion and ethnicity are nothing the state recognises, they're the very definition of a civil society. No, they're the very definition of a naive society, one that thinks pretending a problem does not exist makes it go away. If e.g. a certain minority has a culture that makes it more prone to criminal behavior, then this approach will prevent any chance of addressing the problem at its core. On December 26 2016 07:19 RvB wrote: Which countries other than France don't keep such data? It's kept in NL. I've read that Sweden (probably other Scandinavian countries as well) and Germany don't. Perhaps they don't take it to the level of France. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5599 Posts
On December 25 2016 07:34 Mohdoo wrote: Your argument does not account for the impact on the local population. Whether or not the problem is real refugees or not is irrelevant. The issue is the underlying policy. Let's say 100 Germans died for every 10 refugees. Would you still support the current system? An exageration, I realize, but my point is that none of these lines of thinking you guys suggest give any consideration for the native population. There *IS* a point at which you would be uncomfortable with this, but you aren't there yet. 100 dead germans for 10 refugees...? Surely even you must know that there are hundreds and hundreds of dead refugees for every victime of a terrorist attack in Europe? So the question should be put the other way around: how many innocent people would you sacrifice to save the life of one aryan er... I mean german? | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 26 2016 07:25 maybenexttime wrote: No, they're the very definition of a naive society, one that thinks pretending a problem does not exist makes it go away. If e.g. a certain minority has a culture that makes it more prone to criminal behavior, then this approach will prevent any chance of addressing the problem at its core. Lol, not having ethnic statistics doesn't prevent at all the State from flooding popular areas/suburbs with cops who harass young males of color. The French society is not naive, it is hypocritical; it pretends to be color-blind, but does see color in practice. The proclaimed “universalism” is in direct contradiction with the way Arabs/Blacks/Muslims/Roms are actually treated by the State. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
On December 26 2016 07:25 maybenexttime wrote: No, they're the very definition of a naive society, one that thinks pretending a problem does not exist makes it go away. If e.g. a certain minority has a culture that makes it more prone to criminal behavior, then this approach will prevent any chance of addressing the problem at its core. I've read that Sweden (probably other Scandinavian countries as well) and Germany don't. Perhaps they don't take it to the level of France. Don't trust all that you read. Denmark keeps much better data than almost any other country in the world. Google: "When the entire country is a cohort" and you might begin to grasp how incredibly wrong you were. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5744 Posts
On December 26 2016 08:57 Ghostcom wrote: Don't trust all that you read. Denmark keeps much better data than almost any other country in the world. Google: "When the entire country is a cohort" and you might begin to grasp how incredibly wrong you were. According to this document the following countries do not collect information on ethnicity/nationality in their official statistics (I excluded the countries that collect information on the country of origin of parents): Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Lichtenstein and Luxembourg. This is from 2007. It might not be up-to-date. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
On December 26 2016 07:34 Elroi wrote: 100 dead germans for 10 refugees...? Surely even you must know that there are hundreds and hundreds of dead refugees for every victime of a terrorist attack in Europe? So the question should be put the other way around: how many innocent people would you sacrifice to save the life of one aryan er... I mean german? May want to back up that slight allusion to white supremacy there. Not everyone who asks questions has a hood and Nazi memorabilia at home. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
If all those people who made a chaos in their native lands gonna run away to a much better Europe - they will make Europe as bas as their previous lands, cause they are directly responsible for what happened in their homelands, their chaos is their fault. Terrorism at this moment is purely from Islam, so letting any refugees from such unstable and agressive region, letting brainwashed people with violant behavior towards any other culture behind the word of REFUGEE is a slow suicide. If they cannot make a good place to live in their lands with their own hands it does not mean we must let them in our home respecting their culture/religion, it is they who must respect our rules, because it is our home. It's really hard to belive that nation which fails to establish their own society due it's stupid ideology will be useful for western world, that's just my imo after all. Sacrificing your own safety and safety of your children/relatives is not an option when it comes to helping refugees. | ||
|
Yuljan
2196 Posts
On December 26 2016 09:25 maybenexttime wrote: According to this document the following countries do not collect information on ethnicity/nationality in their official statistics (I excluded the countries that collect information on the country of origin of parents): Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Lichtenstein and Luxembourg. This is from 2007. It might not be up-to-date. In Germany people started to collect the crimes of immigrants separately from police report information. Mainly crimes committed by muslims, refugees and blacks. The official line from the government is still that refugees commit less crimes though. https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_rNT3k2ZXB-f9z-2nSFMIBQKXCs&hl=en_US&ll=51.07216925464745,10.935786086621192&z=4 | ||
|
dankobanana
Croatia242 Posts
BUT, we must remember one thing. We are Europe. In the last 100 years we survived 2 World Wars that made many countries of the EU stand up against one another but we stand united today. We did not do it by closing our borders towards Germans, Austrians etc but by accepting we are all people and by standing together. If these shitty terrorist attacks scare us we've managed to forget our tough past. Because these attacks are shitty. Noone will ever be able to prevent an idiot in a truck running over people. Noone. To close our borders because of it would be cowardly and small. The best way to change the people of other culture is to accept them and expose them to our culture. Maybe you wont change them but you'll change their children or their childrens children. This fight is a long term one and should be fought by culture and not by bombs | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
On December 26 2016 07:38 TheDwf wrote: Lol, not having ethnic statistics doesn't prevent at all the State from flooding popular areas/suburbs with cops who harass young males of color. The French society is not naive, it is hypocritical; it pretends to be color-blind, but does see color in practice. The proclaimed “universalism” is in direct contradiction with the way Arabs/Blacks/Muslims/Roms are actually treated by the State. rofl you can say what you want about France but as a state it most certainly does not treat minorities poorly | ||
mustaju
Estonia4504 Posts
-First and foremost, I am shocked at how many people here and elsewhere want to condemn innocent people based on nothing but the region that they are from, and how this would affect the application in the law in the future, if this were to be the case. If we are willing to dispense with how people are presumed innocent, this opens the door for a lot of legal discrimination. If we do presume the vast majority them innocent of being terrorists ( which they certainly are), they need to be treated according to the laws that were often times a reaction to wide-spread discrimination and some cases, genocide. Hence, extraditing them immediately to their countries of origin where they could face danger would not just be morally wrong, it would undermine some principles that are literally set up to prevent another rise of fascism. - Fast rejection would have negative consequences of it's own, which could end up far worse. The Arab Spring, for better or for worse, destabilized a huge region. Europe might have an easier time if it took a more active part in the solving of the displacement crisis, because it might create even more conflicts in the countries with an already huge disproportionate burden, like Turkey or Lebanon. None of the countries in the region is particularly stable, and if Syria with it's 20 million population manages to create (at least parts of) the instability we see today, just imagine what would happen if the government of Saudi Arabia or Egypt topples from refugee related internal stresses. -The Syrian conflict specifically is incredibly violent and awful from all sides. ISIS is just the loudest of the crowd, but Assad has repeatedly targeted hospitals and schools and indiscriminately bombed civilians. The FSA never had any clear agenda and I would not put it beyond the more radical of the very splintered group to use every weapon they got their hands on against the government regime.The Kurds have a history of terrorism of their own, and there is a lot of ethnic tension between them and the Arabs. There is a reason why they mostly stay in Kurdish areas. If I were a Syrian, I would flee the country without question, and I would risk almost everything not to get sent back any time soon. Their treatment, including the words of the extreme right, could have far reaching consequences. I just hope we did enough. -It's extremely difficult to prevent terrorist attacks, and the methods we use can easily be counterproductive. I don't think people really realize what kind of society we would need to have to prevent the sort of attack that occurred in Nice or Berlin. Any madman can get in a car and drive around killing people. If it makes any headlines, ISIS just claims credit. This doesn't take a lot of planning, and is effective exactly because people are disproportionately afraid. The world is a chaotic random place, and you are more likely to get hit by lightning than die from a terrorist attack, but having easy scapegoats (the brown people) to rationalize your fear is exactly what fuels ISIS and organizations like it. - Globalization makes social stresses extremely difficult to avoid, and does not really have alternatives. The ones who are actively fighting against the symptoms by undermining the institutions that could regulate the worst parts of it are making everything actively worse. Automation and the progression of technology will destroy the job market everywhere, and there are no easy solutions what to do with the massive amounts low-skilled unemployed labor that will inevitably result from it. While I have had limited experiences with people from outside the West, I feel as if the nationalists have a fair point when they say that it is difficult to adapt to Western culture if you have no background in secular values. Islam, does indeed not have a long secular tradition. However, by stressing conforming to these values, they risk undermining other parts of the liberal value system. My concern is how easy this comes to some of them. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18845 Posts
| ||
| ||
