EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 764
| 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. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 08 2017 15:38 xM(Z wrote: there's a quick and easy fix to this refugee/(im)migrant problem - bring them all in rich/semi-rich countries then settle them in rich/upscale neighborhoods; i guarantee you won't see plebs revolt and the rich will be to few to matter(as far as votes go) if they won't agree with it. Yeah, until you realize you are not in a planned economy and buying property in rich neighbourhoods costs "the plebs" billions in tax money. Hardly anything is as profitable for the rich as a state that forces itself to buy or sell at a specific date. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Furthermore - at least I - don't see the difference between a Le Pen and an Erdogan in their stance. "My religion and culture and nation are all good, yours is bad. I want to fight yours." It's pest versus cholera. If you are a liberal we can talk, if you mention defending "the nation", "christianity", "Western culture", "our traditions" or other things of that kind your a dishonest scumbag. Obviously you can't say that publically, because it is not PC. Also a quick tip about things that are not PC: They are the things people actually hardly talk about, not the things that broad movements tell you that others don't want oyu to say. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7884 Posts
On April 08 2017 09:36 a_flayer wrote: How many Muslims in Europe follow a more-or-less Salafist ideology, do you reckon? Because if you go by the Turks in Europe that support Erdogan, there seems to be a majority (about 70% according to this random website I found). The majority of European Imams also seem to follow some kind of Salafist ideology, and it's been often cited to be the fastest growing movement on the planet. So perhaps using broad strokes with regards to some of this isn't entirely unjustified? While it's true that following such an ideology by itself isn't particularly harmful to society, I do feel that it inherently undermines some the western ideals by strongly imprinting such beliefs on children (such as that father Imam in Switzerland who instilled in his kids the idea not to shake the hands of a female [their teacher, in case] they were not related to). And some of it is quite simply incompatible, such as certain bodily modifications that I'd rather not mention, but which I also associate with that ultra-conservative ideology. And we honestly do see a lot reflexes along the lines of "you can't say that!" or "that's racist!", or being labelled a fascist nazi or something whenever it gets brought up at any level, rather than showing a willingness to engage in any discussion. I'm sometimes worried that I will get banned for talking in the way that I do about it and feel the need to preface my comments and try to be really careful in how I approach the matter. Also, many people seem completely unwilling to respond to my posts about this whenever it's brought up. Maybe that's just my own perception though, or the fact that my posts tend to be super vague because I try to be subtle, rather than just blurting out statements as they would pop in my mind. Waitwhat?!? Supporting Erdogan and being a salafist have nothing to do with each other. Supporting Erdogan for Turks is like supporting Putin for Russia. It's idiotic but he promised to enlarge his country's penis so lot of people love him. There are, according to Le Monde, 0,5 % of salafists amongst french muslim. One in two hundred. Islam is not a threat and most muslims are perfectly peaceful. I have a muslim uncle. I live in a muslim district. I have the Quran in my bookshelf. It doesn't ask you to go blow yourself more than the bible sitting next to it. How many of you saying "islam must be fought" know anything about the muslim world and islam in general. A certain version of a radicalized islam is. Wahabbism, salafism are real threats. But Islam is the religion of one human out of six and guess what, most of those people are perfectly decent. The confusion stinks a bit more when the ennemy are refugees fleeing a horrendous war. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 08 2017 16:28 opisska wrote: Big J, the problem is that you have just discarded half of the population (at least in my country) from any discussion, because you don't like talking to them. That's your choice, but it's selfish and counterproductive. I understand the strategy of marginalizing positions that are perceived as harmful to the society, it has worked well for a long time, but you can't marginalize the majority, that is simply you accepting the defeat. If you start discussions based on language and assumptions of populists you have already lost. As I said, you obviously cannot say what I said publically to gain votes, as a political party you have to be much smarter about it, you need certain apeasement to the masses and have to be willing to risk people like me voting for you. But once you accept what right-wingers want to communicate as baseline, that islam and the single muslim are the same thing, (or just any culture and the individual living in it) you cannot win anymore. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21651 Posts
On April 08 2017 16:28 opisska wrote: Big J, the problem is that you have just discarded half of the population (at least in my country) from any discussion, because you don't like talking to them. That's your choice, but it's selfish and counterproductive. I understand the strategy of marginalizing positions that are perceived as harmful to the society, it has worked well for a long time, but you can't marginalize the majority, that is simply you accepting the defeat. I'm with Big J on this. I don't see the point of trying to have a discussion with people who's opinion is reprehensible and cannot be changed by any argument because their mind is set. If that means I discard half the population that just means we live in a shittier world then I hoped. Guess that social progress we seemed to have made in the last ~200 years was a thin veil waiting for a crisis to happen so it could fall off. | ||
|
nitram
Canada5412 Posts
On April 08 2017 18:53 Gorsameth wrote: I'm with Big J on this. I don't see the point of trying to have a discussion with people who's opinion is reprehensible and cannot be changed by any argument because their mind is set. If that means I discard half the population that just means we live in a shittier world then I hoped. Guess that social progress we seemed to have made in the last ~200 years was a thin veil waiting for a crisis to happen so it could fall off. Maybe you can't change their minds because they are right and you are wrong? Have you ever considered that? Leftist like to think everything they do is progressive, therefore correct. You are dead wrong and need to come to terms that leftist are responsible for some gigantic social catastrophes. opisska, you are lucky. Poland is behind when it comes to these leftist progressions. When Poland wants to make any social changes, they need not but look at the outcomes of their neighbors to judge whether these social change are right for them. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21651 Posts
On April 08 2017 19:04 nitram wrote: Maybe you can't change their minds because they are right and you are wrong? Have you ever considered that? Leftist like to think everything they do is progressive, therefore correct. You are dead wrong and need to come to terms that leftist are responsible for some gigantic social catastrophes. opisska, you are lucky. Poland is behind when it comes to these leftist progressions. When Poland wants to make any social changes, they need not but look at the outcomes of their neighbors to judge whether these social change are right for them. If not judging people on the colour of their skin, the place of their birth or the spaghetti monster they believe in is wrong, then I don't want to be right. I would love to hear your list of leftist social catastrophes that outweigh the endless list of suffering cause by man's arbitrary hatred for one-another. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On April 08 2017 09:36 a_flayer wrote: How many Muslims in Europe follow a more-or-less Salafist ideology, do you reckon? Because if you go by the Turks in Europe that support Erdogan, there seems to be a majority (about 70% according to this random website I found). The majority of European Imams also seem to follow some kind of Salafist ideology, and it's been often cited to be the fastest growing movement on the planet. So perhaps using broad strokes with regards to some of this isn't entirely unjustified? While it's true that following such an ideology by itself isn't particularly harmful to society, I do feel that it inherently undermines some the western ideals by strongly imprinting such beliefs on children (such as that father Imam in Switzerland who instilled in his kids the idea not to shake the hands of a female [their teacher, in case] they were not related to). And some of it is quite simply incompatible, such as certain bodily modifications that I'd rather not mention, but which I also associate with that ultra-conservative ideology. And we honestly do see a lot reflexes along the lines of "you can't say that!" or "that's racist!", or being labelled a fascist nazi or something whenever it gets brought up at any level, rather than showing a willingness to engage in any discussion. I'm sometimes worried that I will get banned for talking in the way that I do about it and feel the need to preface my comments and try to be really careful in how I approach the matter. Also, many people seem completely unwilling to respond to my posts about this whenever it's brought up. Maybe that's just my own perception though, or the fact that my posts tend to be super vague because I try to be subtle, rather than just blurting out statements as they would pop in my mind. it's not a random website, it's the European one of the Boell Stiftung, a political think tank that is highly associated with the greens. (Heinrich Böll) Also [citation needed] as to Muslims generally being supportive of terrorism in the name of Islam. While I do agree that being confronted with foreign cultures can make you adhere to your own even stricter and enforce them to not lose your identity. Saying that xyz is wrong and should be punished can't be equated to sympathising with terrorism. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12161 Posts
On April 08 2017 11:12 a_flayer wrote: Where do we draw the line? I basically asked you that very question, although not in such a direct way, I suppose. Rather than cherry picking one sentence out of my post, do you have anything to say about the whole substance of my post? I'll just have to repeat myself... I said that 70% of Turks in Europe support the politically active Salafist/Islamist Erdogan. The majority of Imams also appear to be Salafists. I've said before in this thread that, according to the Mayor of Brussels, ALL the mosques in Brussels are ran by Salafist Imams. You seemed to agree that Salafism is possibly a problem, so I'm merely suggesting that since it appears to be a majority, maybe simply saying 'Islam is incompatible with western values' isn't that far off from the truth. I personally wouldn't state it as such, though, considering that would only further divide people. As I said towards the end of my post, I always try to be subtle and preface "Salafist" or something to my mentions of Islam when suggesting that there may be incompatibilities with integrating in western society. Now, I feel I should add that Salafism in itself is quite diverse, so even saying "Salafism is bad" can be an overstatement, yet you felt comfortable more or less suggesting that. So is that where YOU draw the line? There are so many aspects in all of this, that it is incredibly difficult to determine what may be an accurate statement with regards to the ability to mix various ideologies and religions into a single culture/nation/union, or whatever entity you can come up with that needs to adhere to similar laws and societal expectations. If everyone always tried to be fully accurate in their statements about this, they'd need to list every single habit, every idea, every part of the ideology that they are personally referring to when they say "Islam is incompatible". It's impossible. Especially for low-educated rural people like me. I also wasn't trying to imply you weren't being honest with your perception of being called a "libtard" when you might bring up the need to be more discerning in certain ideologies of Islam, I was merely trying to purvey my personal perception of the suppression of being able to criticize Islam at all. "Honestly" was directed at me, not you. Listen to the first few minutes of this video if you do not already see how this might be a more widespread problem, at least equally vocal as the actual fascist nazis such as Richard Spencer or the Ku Klux Klan:+ Show Spoiler + Finally, I don't know who you think is on my side, but I'm basically a one-man party over here. I don't consider myself a right-winger, nor do I have a problem with immigration policies. I certainly don't subscribe to any religions either. I don't dislike Islam any more than I do Christianity, really, but I do see greater levels of incompatibility as a result of - essentially - history. Cherrypicking means taking a sentence out of context and making it look like you're saying something that you're not saying. In context you were saying exactly the thing that you were accused of saying out of context, which is also called "not cherrypicking". That's another accusation that I get more than once a week from people who don't know what it means, I could complain about that too. I don't. Of course it hasn't escaped me that you refused to answer the question I asked you. If there are enough radical muslims in order for us to say islam when we discuss radical islam, but not enough racist far righters for us to say racism when we discuss far right, where do we draw the line and how have you determined that this is where the line should be drawn? Do you know why so many imams are salafists per chance? It's broadly because Saudi Arabia finances mosques around the world and has them promote a rigorist ideology that is in line with their views. I'd rather we stop giving a ton of money to Saudi Arabia so that they stop this behavior, and that instead we give islam the same status we give to other european religions. For example in Switzerland it's not an official religion, and when the leftwing leader offered that perhaps "We should think about whether we want to recognise Islam as an official religion so that we don’t leave the training and financing of imams to foreign and perhaps fundamental circles", two thirds of the country thought that it was a bad idea. Much easier to say that islam can't be european than to improve the conditions for european muslims (who already factually exist) to develop an european identity, isn't it? Also, notice what you can get leftwingers to say when you use the correct terminology. I have a problem with all of salafism in that it's a very conservative religious ideology. I have the same problem with christian conservatism. I'm not going to want them all kicked out of my country but I'm not going to pretend we're friends either. If you want to target something even more specific than that, there are still words! Fundamentalists, ISIS sympathizers, terrorists... I guess wahabists can work as well? I'm not sure. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7884 Posts
Also salafists are generally peaceful if a bit disturbing; most terrorists are absolutely not salafists. It's funny how the more scared people are of Islam the least they always end up knowing about it. Let me get it straight: I don't particularly like Islam, just as I don't particularly like christianity. But to blame Islam for terrorists attacks is like blaming christianity for Breivik, the KKK and the Westboro Church, and looking suspiciously at one billion people because a tiny minority are ape shit crazy is simply idiotic. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On April 08 2017 18:53 Gorsameth wrote: I'm with Big J on this. I don't see the point of trying to have a discussion with people who's opinion is reprehensible and cannot be changed by any argument because their mind is set. If that means I discard half the population that just means we live in a shittier world then I hoped. Guess that social progress we seemed to have made in the last ~200 years was a thin veil waiting for a crisis to happen so it could fall off. Again, I am now sure how the situation is in western Europe - if people who are blindly against everything related to Muslims or even just anyone who is from a country that is perceived as "worse" than ours are still in a small minority, then it's probably best to just let them rot in their corner. But in Czech "people with reprehensible opinions" are an important mass of people, each of them with a vote. I am not even sure that something can be reasonably done now, but what I am sure of is that this situation was made much worse by the continued refusal of the "intellectuals" to listen to those people and interact with them in a way that is not condescending. You can see it on social media or if you just go to a cheap enough pub probably - there is a huge echo chamber of people who pat each other on their back for their "correct" views of the world, for not being blinded by leftist propaganda, for knowing what danger we are in. These people routinely say that we are at war, flooded by an unstopable wave of migrants invited by Merkel into Europe, that our streets are no longer safe, that migration is the most important topic and that the leftist want to invite as many migrants as possible for some unclear personal gain, or even that they are secretly allying with Muslims and want us all converted to Islam. As stupid as these ideas sound (in a country with virtually zero refugees nonetheless), this is the reality these people live in and this is how the world looks like to them and this is how they vote. So far it has had surprisingly little effect in polls for parliament elections (there weren't actual election since the whole "migration crisis" started), but already it seems that the presidental elections will be all about the migration (even though the president can do almost nothing in this respect). | ||
|
nitram
Canada5412 Posts
On April 08 2017 19:13 Gorsameth wrote: If not judging people on the colour of their skin, the place of their birth or the spaghetti monster they believe in is wrong, then I don't want to be right. I would love to hear your list of leftist social catastrophes that outweigh the endless list of suffering cause by man's arbitrary hatred for one-another. This is exactly it. You refuse to judge people based on their genetics, their culture, and their beliefs which makes you ignorant. Worse yet, you a for importing millions of people incompatible with western culture which is leading to terrorist attacks becoming a norm. The majority of people see this yet you are refusing to listen to them. User was warned for this post | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 08 2017 21:09 nitram wrote: This is exactly it. You refuse to judge people based on their genetics, their culture, and their beliefs which makes you ignorant. Worse yet, you a for importing millions of people incompatible with western culture which is leading to terrorist attacks becoming a norm. The majority of people see this yet you are refusing to listen to them. Their genetics?? Jesus, we're in 2017 and we still read stuff like that... | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
On April 08 2017 16:04 Big J wrote: come on, the state confiscates proprieties/possessions for the greater good more often than not(a pipe here, a road there, a rail on that other side etc); it costs it nothing. it could also exempt refugees from taxes just because it can. i see no reason for which it has to be more expensive. Yeah, until you realize you are not in a planned economy and buying property in rich neighbourhoods costs "the plebs" billions in tax money. Hardly anything is as profitable for the rich as a state that forces itself to buy or sell at a specific date. besides, i want to see that fabled trickle-down economics in action. On April 08 2017 16:23 Big J wrote: that fails because when you categorize said individuals, the leftists/liberals will distance themselves from those groups that, in their opinion, are miss-characterized as belonging to their group and you're left with nothing; that's not fun.You want reasons why leftists/liberals don't want to talk about "the islam problem"? Because you want to force discussions on dishonest basic assumptions. Quick tip: Make clear distinctions between individuals and groups of people, make clear distinctions between the ideas and ideologies and the people who may or may not follow ideas and ideologies. Yes, it is racist to talk in a certain tone about muslims (or foreigners), because it means all muslims but not all muslims behave in these ways. they can cherry-pick and dilute your argument into the ground. | ||
|
nitram
Canada5412 Posts
On April 08 2017 22:09 TheDwf wrote: Their genetics?? Jesus, we're in 2017 and we still read stuff like that... Yes, its the current year. Maybe we can finally start trusting science even if its uncomfortable. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On April 08 2017 22:23 nitram wrote: Yes, its the current year. Maybe we can finally start trusting science even if its uncomfortable. What does science tells us about genetic that is relevant for the fear of Muslims? Please, provide references to actual science, not random internet bullshit though. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On April 08 2017 22:23 nitram wrote: Yes, its the current year. Maybe we can finally start trusting science even if its uncomfortable. First of April is a week ago already. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21651 Posts
On April 08 2017 22:23 nitram wrote: Yes, its the current year. Maybe we can finally start trusting science even if its uncomfortable. Thank you for proving the point I was making. There is no point in trying to reason with people like you. If that means I am wrong, then so be it. | ||
| ||
