|
I'm sure Germany's just been dying to roll in another holocaust, that went so well for them last time. Pity the charismatic leader in this case is firmly pro-immigrant.
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 19:25 |
|
|
Klaus88 posted:The average poster in the Germany thread seems fairly pro-refugee but I'm not sure how representative that is of the average German's views or how Germany is gonna lean in the future. Oh I know, I'm laughing at Unknown Dyne's sureness that Germany is about to go full T4 / KZL on people when Pegida are a fringe who are often counter-protested at equal numbers. One of the ruling parties is the Christian Democrats and while they're part of the neoliberal group they actually read the Bible. Love Thy Neighbour and all that. As affirmed here: Honj Steak posted:59% of Germans are okay with the current number of refugees or even want to take more in and 33% want to take less. Also, 59% say they're not afraid of the refugee influx, 38% are afraid of problems coming with it (more are afraid in East Germany, less in the West). 81% are for giving more money to refugee projects in and outside the country, 70% for creating more legal ways of migration into the EU. Approval ratings for Angela Merkel stay around 65-70%. Germany may not be perfect (see the Greek financial situation) but its citizens are far more benevolent than, for example, my piece of poo poo jingoistic hellhole of a country. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
So, wait, is Ligur saying this situation is normal or that rather than a 'flash' it's something with longer-lasting effects?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
I think it was lmaoboy1998 who said that Saudi Arabia have taken in something like 50k (or was it 500k?) but don't class them as refugees because of the way their system works. Of course that's according to them so the number is probably a little lower at least, but suggests that they have done something.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
That's something I more than happy to be corrected on. Gegen Nazis~
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
murphyslaw posted:my left sock is monarch of all the world. Hey what you and Lizzie do behind closed doors is none of our business, Philip.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Oh why not I'll bite.PerpetualSelf posted:[1] So can someone please refute people saying that they stopped being refugees once they got outside the war torn areas? [1] Refuge is a term referring to safety. Either a place of state-of-being. Being in a 'safe' place insofar as you aren't being bombed is one form of refuge, but if that safe place is a stretch of arid land you're soon going to die. As it happens, humanity tends to build settlements in places where resources can be practically obtained. Fled a theatre of battle? Stopping at the next settlement most likely means that one will be next. In general you'll tend to go a country whose army isn't in the shitter since you'll have a better chance of physical safety as well as well-being. [2] Between the BBC broadcasting in Arabic (MSA as far as I'm aware) and the commonality of English speakers around the world, it came seem like a sensible choice. As for Germany? Since they're the most openly humanitarian country in this business (Sweden apparently a close second) it makes sense to aim for it. [3] Actually it's perfectly okay to go to Germany and get a high paying job. Germany strongly believes in the free movement of people around the EU, and they're not stingy about the rest of the world either. [4] That limit is not going to be reached that easily. In fact currently the world economy is performing under-par for the resources on offer. [5] The Germans could easily bail out the Greeks, and could afford a full debt write-off. They just don't see why they should - they see Greece's economic woes as brought upon themselves and don't see why Europe should pick up the bill for their own lovely policies. I personally disagree with Germany's hardline stance but they could easily handle Greek default. They're mostly not letting Greece default because it would shatter the Eurozone's fundamental principle of 'once you're in, you don't go out.' [6] Germany is in a position to grow its jobs market and in fact increase in a civilian population increases the number of jobs that are needed. Countries bigger and more densely populated than Germany survive just fine with their economies in worse positions than Germany. [7] They are not getting 'free money' they are getting a capital investment of humanitarian aid in exchange for a) warm fuzzies of the population b) the intention to have them become net-positives to the Germany economy and society. Greece's capital investment was their place in the Eurozone, and their previous governments fudged the figures to get into the Eurozone and also to failed to actually rebuild the economy. From Germany's perspective the refugee crisis is both a humanitarian situation and economic opportunity, and the Greek situation to them is a bad investment they're determined to make money back on. [8] Greece is not a 'secular socialist' country. It has a strong Orthodox Christian population and is diverse country. The secularity of the constitution* (and current government) is irrelevant. Likewise Islam under the second Caliph, Umar, was one of the earliest examples of a welfare state that would put many modern democracies to shame. [9] You don't get to choose the make-up of a democracy. Humanitarianism should transcend personal politics. [10] Solidarity is about banding together as people for the common good. Leaving people to starve because they aren't 'the right kind of people' is not solidarity, it is barbarity. e: *Well, actually Eastern Orthodoxy is the official state religion, it's just not forced on the population Tesseraction fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Sep 9, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I don't know man. The Somalia warzone has been debunked a billion times. Nobody is leaving there because of that. Or very few. They are out to make money. Which is fine. It has? I mean I just literally searched 'Somalia war debunked' and all the results cross out 'debunked' in the results due to lack of them. Do you have something to back this up?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
Ligur posted:Might be their foreign minister is bullshitting right here, not saying that. Might be he is not. Okay, that top one clearly has him saying that the war is easing up and is more him trying to prevent population decline as opposed to saying 'war over' - which does not mean that he is trying to argue against a false perception of war, but this is by no means a debunking. The second one is about Somaliland, a country far to the north of where the allegedly-debunked war was taking place. There's a massive buffer zone between the two regions. Look, I'm not acting like the War in Somalia keeps me up at night but I'd be drat happy to believe it was over, especially with close family in the region of conflict (although far enough away from the violence for now). The situation is slowly starting to improve but that does not mean the war or refugee situation is over.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Because the West spent most of the 20th century suppressing democracy. To back you up, a few examples: Belgium (and the CIA) contributing to the execution of the DRC's first leader, Patrice Lumumba CIA aid in deposing the popular Prime Minister of Iran in favour of the Shah, who was so hated he led to the Islamic Revolution loving Pinochet Hell just read Killing Hope by William Blum. A long list of times America (particularly the CIA) directly subverted democracy in foreign nations.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
That's his gimmick.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:There were a lot of fuckups that added some stupid years in there, but the post-surge environment where progress was finally being made needed a few more years of tlc when Obama came into office. Even so, I'd say the premiership of Maliki was the key to a lot of the problems then and now. Not to say without him it'd be peachy, but he seemed to be a walking gently caress-up generator at every step.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 10:06
|
|
|
Yeah I remember Bush picking him based on Maliki claiming he knew the plight of Iraq despite having not been there in like 30 years and with little-to-no contacts among the actual populace. I think it was in Al Franken's book where even after Maliki had been picked to be installed Bush had to be explained the difference between Sunni and Shia, and in fact the consultant had despaired that when he was asked to explain the difference it was because Bush didn't realise there was a difference or that the terms existed.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
What is the point in linking to a document or site in another language without a contextual translation of a relevant point? I mean if that's kind of effort we can get away with I'm just going to machine translate Galtse and Mein Kampf into a language the person I'm debating with can't speak and then claim it backs me up 100%. Maybe I'll throw in a copy of Nate Silver's book for any stats I need to fudge.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Finansavisen is not just a 'financial newspaper' it's an openly ideological right-wing paper. At least be honest in where you're sourcing things. Now, being right-wing doesn't make it wrong, per se. But it also might suggest they might be being unkind with the numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Pretty sure you're saying that to a Finnish supremacist so I don't think that argument will hold weight.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I think I remember back in 2005 someone linked to a purportedly "right-wing" paper which in turn quoted some University study and people dismissed it out of hand. I can't even how that works. Ok you're saying you're not doing that outright but anyway. Disingenuous. You quoted a paper doing its own research, you're whining about an academic paper (that may not have been peer reviewed). I thought Finland had higher education than credulous twits who believe everything they read that says 'darkies = bad.' Your source dislikes immigrants. That doesn't make it wrong, but as I said, it could be unkind with numb-- OH LOOK Main Paineframe posted:There's no need to caat vague doubts on the source when the numbers are clearly being skewed in an unkind way. The article is very careful to cherrypick numbers and data sets to fit the arguments it wants to make. For example, it focuses almost exclusively on people's employment status one year after completing the training programs. So when it tries to imply that only 50% of immigrants are net contributors, what it actually means is that 50% of immigrants who had finished their job training less than a year before the article was written were already so gainfully employed that they were paying taxes and completely off state support. That's not half bad! I am shocked, SHOCKED that my suspicion was in fact correct. Ligur posted:You don't have make any guesses or be "pretty sure". You can just directly ask me if I think Finns are somehow superior over others, and I can answer honestly. I'm not guessing. I was curious as to why you kept linking Nordic articles so I clicked your post history and found you in the Finnish Politics thread whining about 'SJWs' and using deliberate misspellings like 'gub'mnt' and 'neolibrulsm' as parodies of people you disagreed with. You're definitely right-wing, which doesn't dismiss your opinion, but it does come across as funny that you're acting like you're some neutral from on high, discussing this in purely academic terms.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Sadly it is. Explains why Sunni Daesh were somehow more popular with portions of the population than the Shi'ite death squads. Somehow.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
So you're just genuinely concerned the darkoes are going to ruin your economy, okay fine, not a concern troll, just loving obsessed with something pointless.Ligur posted:edit: I'm "right-wing"? I think those two terms are getting a bit old by now, I think it's more, like, uhh. I'll perhaps post more about it later. But I'm economically so left-wing the Democrats in USA would call me a communist. I'm also for gender equality and LGBT rights but probably an ideoligical "conservative" otherwise closer to classical liberalism than anything else after the economic slant. But labeling people either left- or right-wing in the traditional terms is soon a thing of the past. My point was you were acting like you were some grand concerned entity on the realistic economical issues with accepting refugees (and potentially 'economic migrants' *dog whistle blows*) without accepting that actually you're more than a little bit xenophobic if not outright racist and cherry picking your data either to show that migrants are just ~totally lazy economic drains~ or ~totally taking our gr8 Suomi jobs~ depending on whether you're trying to look concerned or 'unbiased' when called on your targeting of non-white immigrants. I mean you've complained about Sweden's immigration policy when asylum seeking/refugee policy is absolutely different and ruled by EU-wide treaties and Swedish immigrants are such a significant portion of your population (and vice-versa with Finns in Sweden). If you were touching on Norway your point would be less "loving DARKIES" and more about how uneven policy distribution was making problems. You're ignoring the Dublin Agreement with the skill of /pol/. And as for the Democrats theoretically calling you a communist, that's because the Democrats are a centrist party with centre-right leanings in the establishment. In any country with a realistic Overton Window you're right-wing, and the fact you don't think so is testament to Finland's worrying shift towards its far-right fringe more than an indictment on calling you right-wing. I mean if you're as classic liberal as you claim I'll revise it to centrist to centre-right. Either way, your opposition to asylum on economic grounds is one of the most horribly anti-humanitarian or anarcho-capitalist outlooks as it's demanding that people fleeing warzones should only be welcome if they dust off the blood of their lost loved ones and immediately start becoming a net tax contributor. What do you think these people do if they don't have a job? Walk around stealing your white women?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
You know one of the things that strikes me strongly here in Britain is that those who served in World War 2 (or shortly after like this wonderful man) are the kind of people who tend to abhor violence and show genuine compassion for their fellow humans.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I, too, believe that groups celebrated by society share my views. Aimed at me? I don't think that at all. 'ARE TROUPS' is used all the time and despite WW2 veteran MPs being anti-war, modern veterans who served in things like the War on Terror tend to be masturbating on camera as they discuss the methods to drone strike Syria. I don't support veterans uncritically, I just find that those who saw the horrors of war in the mid-20th century tend to be a lot less ridiculous about the human costs. This is by no means a suggestion that a) WW2 veterans (in general) share my views; or b) people of that generation don't have awful views. I mean you can simplify it that way if you want, but I wouldn't recommend doing so if you're capable of toddler logic or* higher. e: *or, not of Tesseraction fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Saros posted:So... what? USA admitted 70,000 refugee's in 2014. Germany alone is set to take in 12x as many to a country not even 1/5 as populous. Is that meant to be a criticism of America's cold asylum policy or...?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Saros posted:Possibly both! What's the second half of both? Or is it open ended? Am I waiting for Godot now?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Dilkington posted:Also, secular nationalism is not a panacea. All WANA modernizers have to contend with political Islam. Most have chosen wrongly to suppress or control it. This worked for Kemal and Nasser, barely. But eventually the things you suppress will rebound on you, and you are forced to bow to it, and attempt to direct it outward (Ghaddafi, KSA). If you don't manage to do either both those things you will lose your country (Sadat, Pahlavi). I admit I've lapsed on my history of GA Nasser's premiership, but was his method to suppress/control religion or merely to focus on Pan-Arabism as a shared 'brotherhood of man' - which makes sense in the context of the Ummah. I don't think he was being manipulative in this regard as speaking as a secularist-but-raised-Christian I feel no shame in holding to the humanistic tenants of the Bible, even if I don't necessarily believe a third of the Trinity spoke those words (in Aramaic) 2000 years ago after being born of wallhacking sperm.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:Do you believe in overpopulation? Possible, but unlikely given that the United States has the physical resources to feed a much more dense population than currently exists. An example where this refugee crisis is causing overpopulation would be the Greek islands currently struggling with the sheer number of the dispossessed who have struggled to their shores. Despite this, those people were sacrificing their own resources before the international community gave a drat. Hell, our fascistic British papers were running stories about how the refugees were ruining the holidays of British tourists who wanted a nice relaxing vacation and all those foreign people crying with happiness at surviving the journey was ruining their buzz.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Dilkington posted:Nasser's government imprisoned ulema, outlawed religious courts, and put Al-Azhar under state control- that's what I mean when I say he chose to "suppress or control" religion. Ah, thanks for the clarification! Ernie Muppari posted:really there just isn't nearly enough foreign intervention in the world today Agreed, I think we should invade Tunisia those motherfuckers set up a proper democracy and we can't be having that it undermines the whole point of the Arab Spring!!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
IDK I have no trouble switching between pure ideology and accepting pragmatism. Well, unless 'gently caress it let's do nothing' is the definition of pragmatism in this case.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
I was thinking about it as I was walking to the shop and yeah I just realised that his distinction between 'ideology' and 'pragmatism' is a case of pointing at two places on a spectrum and saying 'these are the extremes' - in reality while pure ideology can be an extreme, 'pragmatism' is a woolly concept anywhere between 'okay, help some of them' through 'do not help them' all the way to 'in order to be pragmatic about our resources it would be best to carpet bomb the refugee camp to solve the problem' and worse depending on where one's 'pragmatism' might start to link with their ideology. e: speeling & granmer Tesseraction fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Leofish posted:It's also very unrealistic to ignore that humans are very often swayed or driven by emotion. On this note, I tried finding the article I read but the Graun's lovely search system has failed me, but it spoke about a study of people who had either abnormally developed or damaged amygalas (a part of the brain responsible for both decision-making and emotional-response) and while indeed they processed information rationally, it led to instances of them basically entering an infinite loop when confronted with which sandwich to buy for lunch. One could reasonably infer that it was damage to amygala that affected their decision-making, but as I recall the study could not find a single person who suffered loss of impulse decision-making but retained their emotional ability. That said, without it to hand it could have been a study of two people who both really hated BLT sandwiches.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Man tortured by Assad regime and had his teeth pulled out, trying to help refugees reach the safety of the EU tragically loses his own family during trip. Yes, I see now black people are the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
Not to mention it's clearly in his redtitle. I wasn't sure how more obvious a reference I could make without writing a "... for Dummies" guide.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Narciss posted:his father was an economically-motivated opportunist, and not the desperate "gotta get my family to safety that's all I care about" saint that we might like to assume he is. So was he routinely just keeping his wife and kids in his lucrative-business smuggleboat for ballast or something?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I love attempted character assassination. Especially when said person has literally lost everything he loves and holds dear. But can we be sure this MUSLIM did not actually use his dear children as a disposable flotation device to get himself ashore?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Hey man, no-one said economic migrants just migrate to a better economy. Maybe he was sick of all that lucrative tent real-estate he was cramped up in and wanted to play a game of Refugee Roulette to double or nothing his tragedy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:So, it was just "take your child to work" day? Can we even be sure it really was his/a child? Perhaps it was several adult economic migrants in a trenchcoat? This man has questions to answer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Ethnic cleansing? I don't agree. We live in a world where resources can be moved to people. People should have the right not to be uprooted or displaced. *pushes glasses up nose* I'll have you know that we in the Austrian School believe that if one provides infrastructure that eases the transport of commodities then it disincentivises the locals from trying to profit from their local endeavours. For more on this see the works of our profit prophet Dipshit von Miser.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Over here in the UK our current opposition party just elected its new leader. Two of the candidates were strongly pro-refugee but our winner, Jeremy Corbyn, announced in his acceptance speech the first thing he'd do is join a mass demonstration in the capital to pressure the government to accept more refugees. He's always been pro-refugee and happily takes part in demonstrations but here's just a glimpse of his speech at the demonstration in parliament square: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/sep/12/jeremy-corbyn-addresses-crowds-refugee-rally-video
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Typo posted:Yet South Korea, whatever it's democracy or lack-thereof, delivered material prosperity to its people from the 1960s onward, whereas Egypt failed. Nasser and Sadat had multiple decades under both Socialism and Neoliberalism to deliver the goods and legitimize their rule through economic prosperity but distinctively failed. Given Nasser's popularity and Sadat's causing of riots over his economic policy, isn't this disingenuous? Feel free to correct me on my perception as I've admitted in this thread I've only gotten touches on the history of Egypt during this period. At the same time, South Korea is doing well but it also crushes unions and has banned the leftist opposition over bullshit charges of being North Korea sympathisers (their actual policy is unification). If it's such a paradise then why does it feel the need to silence freedom of speech if said speech doesn't agree with the government?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Honj Steak posted:I stopped debating Hungarian politics with Hungarians long ago. You will either get someone who downplays the extent of far-right extremism in the country or someone who outright supports it. When I touched the topic of Jobbik using symbols of the fascist Arrow Cross Party you mostly heard something like "It's an old Hungarian tradition and it's good there are people who uphold it". When I said Jobbik and Fidesz politicians were openly talking about "the world's jewry destroying the integrity of our state" I heard "Well, there is some truth to that statement". I know a Hungarian actually who has national pride but says he's despairing for Hungary because of its fascistic nationalism. He is proud of his country's cultural heritage and laments the diaspora of the annexation of Hungary by the surrounding countries, but he doesn't believe they should try and take back those areas and he hates Jobbik and the current government. He absolutely does not play down the far-right extremism. Mind you he also doesn't have a knee-jerk reaction to communism/socialism despite having grown up in the Hungarian People's Republic. He's critical of the implementation as opposed to the ideals of communism. He's a nice fellow.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 19:25 |
|
|
This is-it-ideology thing seems more like a cross-talk thing. Typo says the problem is distribution channels as they can't account for assholes nicking all the stuff. The others, I believe, are saying that the assholes nicking all the stuff are the problem which should be solved first. Honj Steak posted:Austria just introduced border controls, too. Oh good. The sad thing is I have a feeling that when a crisis of this scale comes around again as it inevitably will, the same stupid mistakes will be made.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 12:29
|
|