Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

Palomar · 2005-08-12 06:07:46

*Hi Shaun. Yeah, that seems to be the crux of the matter: Should empowered persons be allowed to destroy the very thing which empowers them?

It's hypocritical for certain elements (Islamoterrorists) to continually play the Guilt Induction Card. [Yes, Westerners have done wrong; crimes (slavery, genocide of Native Americans) have been committed; mistakes made. Those things were WRONG. And plenty of Anglos/whites admit and owe up to it. Now to move forward; we can't go back in time and change what happened.] Their motive is to continually guilt induce while seeking to do themselves the very things they accuse/denounce others of.

It's hypocritical. And dangerous.

I just hope enough Westerners aren't stupid enough to willfully self-destruct while their manipulators (who unscrupulously play any guilt card they can lay on the table -- things which they themselves are guilty of; can we say Sudan/Darfur? Arabs butchering black Africans or any African who isn't "Arab-looking" enough) are maneuvering to take control.

Guess we'll find out. I wonder if human nature in this regard will be true to form, i.e. stupid and blind until it's nearly too late.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-12 06:34:19

How far does one take democracy? Is the democratic process to be defended right up to the point where its very implementation is instrumental in its own destruction?! Do you allow an election to proceed, knowing the result will bring about the cessation of democracy in your country and the imposition of a theocracy?

No, we don't.

The prudent course would of course be to control who comes into the country to assure that the cultural foundation of the nation isn't eroded away. But then we have to take where people are coming from into account, we'd be favoring immigrants from European countries, and we all know that Westerners can't stand to be called "racists" even if unwarranted.

More likely, some "extra-legal" actions will rectify the situation.

Again, we in the West have allowed ourselves to be so guilt-induced about past wars and genocides that we're enacting policies which virtually guarantee a repeat.

But then again, I look back on American history; all that taking of land from the natives, taking land from other colonial powers, remaking a continent. And I'm not sorry. I also can't blame others for wanting to do the same to us for their own benefit.

But that doesn't mean we have to let them. The future can be whatever we decide to make it. We just might have to break some stuff in the process.

clark · 2005-08-12 07:13:35

It's hypocritical for certain elements to continually play the Guilt Induction Card. [Yes, Westerners have done wrong; crimes (slavery, genocide of Native Americans) have been committed; mistakes made. Those things were WRONG. And plenty of Anglos/whites admit and owe up to it. Now to move forward; we can't go back in time and change what happened.] Their motive is to continually guilt induce while seeking to do themselves the very things they accuse/denounce others of.

I guess that would explain why all those Native Americans are trying to give poor white people blankets diseased with Small Pox's, or forcibly moving them from their land. Or, perhaps it explains the African American population that continually tries to make white people their slaves.

But by all means, everyone, please continue. You are all certifiably nuts. - Message from one nut to the next.

I sometimes imagine what would happen if we did some of the things talked about here...

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-12 19:36:55

Cindy:-

It's hypocritical for certain elements (Islamoterrorists) to continually play the Guilt Induction Card.

Never a truer word uttered.
And, without wishing to carry on flogging the rotting horse carcass beneath us (!), those "certain elements" include the non-Muslim termites within our democracies, too, of course - particularly those in our media. (And, perversely enough, these same 'termites' are the ones who claim to be staunchly behind women's rights.)

-- And yes, we certainly can say Darfur, Sudan! And isn't it just the ultimate hypocrisy that the same people who whine incessantly about the evils of the West, especially America, aren't out in the streets screaming about the Muslim-mediated butchery there?!!
-- Some of us here have raised this issue on several occasions but the usual suspects gloss over it and continue with their favourite hobby-horses instead. After all, white anglo-saxon Christians aren't involved in the genocide, are they, so who cares .. right?

CC:-

The prudent course would of course be to control who comes into the country to assure that the cultural foundation of the nation isn't eroded away.

This may or may not be practicable, though I understand its logic and sympathize with it to some extent. However, my main concern was, and is, for those countries whose Islamic populations are already large and growing fast. In these cases, as we've discussed before, controlling the Muslim intake can only delay the inevitable. And I think it's entirely unfeasible, either politically or in a practical sense, to even contemplate the deportation of enormous numbers of people to solve the problem. As we've said before, parallels drawn with the Nazi deportation of Jews in WWII would open a spectacularly unmanageable can of worms. The results of something like that would be as bad as the civil war we can probably expect in places like Holland and France as the non-Muslim population finally sees the swift approach of an Islamic theocracy. :?

Clark:-

I guess that would explain why all those Native Americans are trying to give poor white people blankets diseased with Small Pox's, or forcibly moving them from their land. Or, perhaps it explains the African American population that continually tries to make white people their slaves.

Back to the usual guilt treadmill, as described by Cindy above, eh Clark?
(-- Don't you ever get tired of it? I know some of us do.)

clark · 2005-08-12 20:18:25

...

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-12 21:54:32

Hmmm.
Thanks for the "lesson", Clark. The abusive language certainly helped to clarify your position .. or at the very least it shone a clear light into the very unpleasant workings of the 'superior mind' we're dealing with when we converse with you.
-- My apologies for our mental midget status, by the way, which someone of your intellect must find so frustrating to deal with.

Another point we've seen clarified by your foul-mouthed outburst is where your convoluted moral relativism has led you. It is now patently clear you cannot grasp the enormity of a religious totalitarian state. I strongly suspect this failure on your part stems not only from a minimal acquaintance with history and the horrors of 20th century totalitarianism, but also from a lack of imagination and from the self-inflicted chaos of your favoured brand of moral sophistry.

-- So, since you "haven't shut [my] little brain down with talking down to [me] yet", let me try to rise above the handicap of my inferior mind, Clark, and point out something pertaining to the latter part of your following statement:-

A majority faced with becoming a minority within a democracy has two choices, to either continue to enfore their control beyond their majority status through the dissolution of the basis of their democracy to ensure that their "rights" will outlast their majority status; or, they can f*cking wise up and enshrine their rights in a fair and equitable system that makes it near nigh impossible to undo those rights.

-- Brand new totalitarian states have a habit of dispensing with the previous regime's framework of citizens' rights. This may be a novel concept to you, Clark, but let me assure you it is the case. If you don't believe me, look it up in a history book.
-- You see, people who run totalitarian states can't be reasoned with by the likes of you, Clark, however persuasive you imagine your shouted profanities to be. They'll just shoot you .. because they're bad people.

That's the gist of my argument, you see? Once power is democratically handed over to totalitarianism, democratic rights cease - for good - unless reclaimed by force.
-- Now. That wasn't so hard to understand, was it?
-- Even being the cretin you recognize me to be, I seem to be able to comprehend it all right. I'm surprised your higher consciousness is having so much trouble with it??? :shock:

clark · 2005-08-12 22:21:34

..l..

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-12 23:05:26

Clark:-

I think you've said it all, Clark. A fascinating and illuminating glimpse into your unusual psyche.
Thank you.

clark · 2005-08-12 23:16:30

...

BWhite · 2005-08-13 12:14:28

Folks, please meet Maryscott O'Connor.

Quite the flamethrower. :shock:

= = =

Maryscott O'Connor (orphaned by a senseless war) and Cindy Sheehan who lost her son in war started on account of lies will be the avenging angels that will cleanse away the followers of Republican Jesus.

clark · 2005-08-13 14:53:41

...

Josh Cryer · 2005-08-14 02:38:59

More NewMars drama I see.

PS gone for the rest of the weekend, just locking this so it doesn't potentially esclate while I'm gone.

If you guys keep this hostility crap up politics on NewMars is going to go away. Seriously. And I don't want anyone pointing fingers, because I can dig up posts on all of you where you're being extremely negative or condecending to others here.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-15 07:24:14

At the risk of being labeled a subversive element, ostracised and stripped of moderator priveleges, I'm unlocking the thread. If we can't carry on civil discussions of topics we disagree about then no amount of policing and censoring is going to solve the real problem. And it isn't just politics, a few discussions in "Human Missions" have gotten out of hand as well if memory serves.

That said, I like the sig Shaun.

Palomar · 2005-08-15 07:33:07

At the risk of being labeled a subversive element, ostracised and stripped of moderator priveleges, I'm unlocking the thread. If we can't carry on civil discussions of topics we disagree about then no amount of policing and censoring is going to solve the real problem. And it isn't just politics, a few discussions in "Human Missions" have gotten out of hand as well if memory serves.

*Cobra, you are so cool and awesome.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2005-08-15 10:13:10

Wow, one of my moderators actually took initiative! Granted, it was opposing what I did, but wow, something got done. I am proud.

BWhite · 2005-08-15 11:12:31

At the risk of being labeled a subversive element, ostracised and stripped of moderator priveleges, I'm unlocking the thread. If we can't carry on civil discussions of topics we disagree about then no amount of policing and censoring is going to solve the real problem. And it isn't just politics, a few discussions in "Human Missions" have gotten out of hand as well if memory serves.
*Cobra, you are so cool and awesome.
--Cindy

Cobra, check your wallet.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-15 11:26:20

Cobra, check your wallet.

<opens wallet> Ten bucks. Canadian. <closes wallet>

Is that a UN peacekeeper with binoculars on the reverse? <shakes head>

And before we set a precedent of two mods and an admin going off-topic, how 'bout that changing Europe eh? Hell of a thing.

BWhite · 2005-08-15 12:22:20

Cobra, check your wallet.
<opens wallet> Ten bucks. Canadian. <closes wallet>
Is that a UN peacekeeper with binoculars on the reverse? <shakes head>
And before we set a precedent of two mods and an admin going off-topic, how 'bout that changing Europe eh? Hell of a thing.

An international Mars mission? Nah.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-15 13:10:56

An international Mars mission? Nah.

Since this can actually be sort of on topic. . .

Read the article and it makes some good points.

But it doesn't really apply to what I'm suggesting. Rather than creating a new international agency to explore and colonize Mars I'm of the opinion that the best approach would be for the United States, who would by resources and experience be the senior partner in any regard, simply decide to go forth with the project and ask the Australians, British and Canadians if they want to participate. If they opt in, work out the relationship in the context of our alliance rather than imposing a new agency. Military forces from those countries cooperate all the time within a mutually agreed upon framework, no over-arching supra-national body required.

The four nations in question share a strong and unparalled cultural bond. While America could do it alone, the four of us could do it better and in the process ensure not only that Western Civilization will set the course of humanity's future beyond Earth but specifically the linguistic, cultural and political heritage of the free peoples descended from the British Empire. I can think of no better historically proven template.

Rxke · 2005-08-16 08:42:17

Want an European knee-jerk reaction to that proposal?

Here it is:

If this would really happen, kick the UK out of EU. Honestly folks, how long will we have to keep up with that kind of behaviour from them?
They work more with the 'rivals' than with the EU.

Thanks to them largely the consrtitution went down (which is a good thing but for the wrong reasons)

OTOH: Mmmmmm, Marrrrrrrzzzzz Mission Aglglglglglglgl!! *salivates*

Palomar · 2005-08-16 09:20:00

Want an European knee-jerk reaction to that proposal?
Here it is:
If this would really happen, kick the UK out of EU. Honestly folks, how long will we have to keep up with that kind of behaviour from them?
They work more with the 'rivals' than with the EU.
Thanks to them largely the consrtitution went down (which is a god thing but for the wrong reasons)

*Eeeep. Should I comment?

Having never been anywhere but Canada and Mexico, here goes anyway: It must be rough on the Brits, being caught up in this perpetual tug-of-war between Europe and US, and of course there are geographical location and native language issues in the mix. We have a closer cultural bond with GB and shared language; I'm not sure how much influence GB has on Europe or vice versa.

Based on what I've read/seen/heard, many Canadians would prefer to be next-door to Europe instead of the U.S. Australia's off "over there" by itself.

No one except Canada is close to the U.S.

Weird situation.

It'll be interesting to see how the EU pans out. I don't wish them any ill luck, but just saying...

--Cindy

P.S.: Is the West stronger because we are geographically spread out? Would we be weaker and at each others' throats if we were physically closer together?

Rxke · 2005-08-16 11:37:16

Eeeep

Disclaimer: I said knee-jerk reaction, so this was not a balanced view.

But it *is* an issue. For a lot of people the Blair Government is sabotaging the EU efforts in various ways, and his being chummy with GWB raises a lot of eyebrows.

One of the major player in the EU w/o having the Euro as currency, for instance, it all comes over as a bit... Strange, even suspicious.

Stormrage · 2005-08-16 13:58:33

You guys are just speculating. What makes you think that the "west" will be turned into "another rouge arab state". Have you ever wondered why they come immigration? If i wanted to live in a country which was under strict islamic law i would be on the first airplane out of here.

I think if a country has a muslim majority population it would just stay the same. There maybe few laws changed by nothing controversial. Anyway if your so worried you got two choices. 1: Stop immigration and force out muslims 2: Breed like rabbits to counter act the balance.

Arabs butchering black Africans or any African who isn't "Arab-looking" enough) are maneuvering to take control.
--Cindy

What people don't know is that the JEM and SLA attacked the government in Dafur. The government troops got oblitrated and the buildings destroyed because they weren't prepared. Arab viligarers in defence created Janjaweed. The fighting went on for a while until Janjaweed got the upperhand.

Also what isn't reported by many is the fact that the policy of Janjaweed if to drive out no kill. Most of the dead died becaused of the conditions they lived in after they ran away.

Yes people it is tragic but let us not fool ourselves here. Janjaweed was created to defend the arabs beign attacked by the JEM &SLA.

If this would really happen, kick the UK out of EU. Honestly folks, how long will we have to keep up with that kind of behaviour from them?
They work more with the 'rivals' than with the EU.

Lol there are groups campainging to get the UK out of the EU. Frankly i think we should stay. It makes visiting france easier.

Edit: I like to add the reason the hostilites began was because the British thought the less developed south were savages and sent christian missonaries while they helped the arabs. That was the start of the hostilites. The Belgians the Tutsis more often then they helped the Hutu which lead to the genocide. This is all caused by people who can't give up hate.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-16 17:52:39

Stormrage:-

I think if a country has a muslim majority population it would just stay the same.

This assumption has all the hallmarks of "What If ..?" discussions about past history we've been engaged in elsewhere at New Mars lately, except this stuff is in the future and theoretically we may be in a position to do something about it (?).

It's not possible to be sure exactly what would happen in a European country, like Holland or France, in the event that Muslims became the electoral majority. You "think" it would "just stay the same".
My opinion is that it wouldn't.

Are we prepared to take that risk, given the situation in nearly every Islamic state in the world - feudalistic oligarchy, subjugation of women's rights, and consequent economic difficulties (you can't deprive a country of the creative input of half the population, females, and expect it to prosper)?

Anyway if your so worried you got two choices. 1: Stop immigration and force out muslims 2: Breed like rabbits to counter act the balance.

We've already dealt with these 'solutions' and found them wanting:-
1. You can stop immigration but that doesn't have any effect on the demographic timebomb ticking away in the Muslim populace already residing in a country.
2. Forcing out Muslims is not practicable without resorting to the kind of draconian totalitarianism we're trying to avoid.
3. You can't force people to "breed like rabbits". And, even if you could persuade people to do that, where does it stop? When we're all cheek-by-jowl in a Western version of China .. standing room only? That is its own disaster in many different ways - both socially and environmentally.

No. It seems apparent to me that European countries may well find themselves part of an experiment in politics in the not too distant future; an experiment in which the fate of the country lies in the goodwill, or otherwise, of an erstwhile ethnic minority which has now become the majority. (Somewhat like Fiji.)
However, that ethnic group, in this case, is known to combine church and state, routinely.
Everything we Westerners know about the combination of church and state rings very serious alarm bells because we know where that leads.

I think we could be in for a very tumultuous mid-term future .. and/or an Islamic long-term one! :?

Stormrage · 2005-08-16 18:54:37

Alright. I'll rule France and Netherland in 30 years, I will even throw iun Belgium and Sweden.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2005-08-12 06:07:46

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#177 2005-08-12 06:34:19

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#178 2005-08-12 07:13:35

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#179 2005-08-12 19:36:55

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#180 2005-08-12 20:18:25

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#181 2005-08-12 21:54:32

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#182 2005-08-12 22:21:34

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#183 2005-08-12 23:05:26

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#184 2005-08-12 23:16:30

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#185 2005-08-13 12:14:28

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#186 2005-08-13 14:53:41

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#187 2005-08-14 02:38:59

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#188 2005-08-15 07:24:14

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#189 2005-08-15 07:33:07

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#190 2005-08-15 10:13:10

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#191 2005-08-15 11:12:31

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#192 2005-08-15 11:26:20

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#193 2005-08-15 12:22:20

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#194 2005-08-15 13:10:56

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#195 2005-08-16 08:42:17

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#196 2005-08-16 09:20:00

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#197 2005-08-16 11:37:16

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#198 2005-08-16 13:58:33

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#199 2005-08-16 17:52:39

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#200 2005-08-16 18:54:37

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

Board footer