Whatever happened in Cologne never never happened

[Chang]

Even so, I wonder how she defines racist?  People love buzz words but nobody likes to define anything in modern times.

 

The modern liberal would define the term "racist" as anyone who has doubts regarding mass immigration, multiculturalism and the benefits of diversity. The left wing liberal, like the socialist, demands free speech for themselves whilst attempting to deny it to those with opposing views.

 

They would of course vehemently deny that this is the case but one has only to listen to what they say and watch what they do to see the truth of the matter.

[Marblehead]

 The left wing liberal, like the socialist, demands free speech for themselves whilst attempting to deny it to those with opposing views.

That is the problem many Anarchists have.  Whatever we demand for ourself we must also allow for everyone else.  Deep thinking and decisions are required.

[Apech]

Her sign.  Remember that most of the refugees are religious intolerants.  To trade one bad for another bad gets one only more problems.

 

Really - how do you know that?

 

Perhaps you mean migrants.  This is the problem - there are different groups all mixed together - genuine refugees + economic migrants + terrorists + riff raff.

 

Never mind we can rely on the leaders of our western democracies to sort out this mess.

[Karl]

Her sign.  Remember that most of the refugees are religious intolerants.  To trade one bad for another bad gets one only more problems.

 

Psychologising here, but I often think this is a result of childhood 'sharing'. You know 'that' kind of 'sharing' in which it is really the adult acting like the state and removing the toy from one child to give to the other. What moral lesson does this impart to both children.

 

1. That sharing is self sacrifice. That it must be endured even though it feels bad because a moral authority with power over you demands it.

 

2. That it is fine to grab another child's toy because that is ethical sharing. The child does not have to feel bad about taking the toy, because the other child is the one who must suffer as they did in the previous example.

 

Thus begins the idea that 'sharing' must feel bad to be good and stealing can be morally condoned if it is considered to be sharing.

 

What's worse is that the child that takes the toy knows in their hearts that the other child is feeling bad and though they feel self righteous in obtaining the shared spoils, they also feel bad as a result of the action. A lose- lose situation.

[Chang]

Ayn Rand could not have put it better.

[Karl]

Ayn Rand could not have put it better.

 

That really has to be the nicest compliment I have ever received :-)

 

 

[Apech]

That really has to be the nicest compliment I have ever received :-)

 

 

If someone said that to me I'd punch them on the nose.

[Marblehead]

Really - how do you know that?

 

Perhaps you mean migrants.  This is the problem - there are different groups all mixed together - genuine refugees + economic migrants + terrorists + riff raff.

 

Never mind we can rely on the leaders of our western democracies to sort out this mess.

Well, the whole thing is talking about Muslim immigrants.  No one is talking about any Christian immigrants if there are none.  All religions are self-righteous - theirs is the only true religion.  All others are false.

 

The mass, unmonitored immigration is what is being questioned.  Exactly the same thing happened in the USA with the mass immigration of Cubans.  Nearly all of them were criminals of one sort or another.

 

If you don't ask the questions you will never get any answers.

[Marblehead]

If someone said that to me I'd punch them on the nose.

Yeah, but then, you are a contrarian so it stands to reason.

[Karl]

If someone said that to me I'd punch them on the nose.

 

I'd expect nothing less from you Apech.

[redcairo]

I would humbly suggest that the difference, for the young woman -- using the alleged original phrase "will trade racists for refugees" -- is that currently, she is not feeding, housing and clothing the racists. And their children and friends. So it is not really that she "has" the racists in order to make that trade in the first place, right.

[Chang]

The mass, unmonitored immigration is what is being questioned.  Exactly the same thing happened in the USA with the mass immigration of Cubans.  Nearly all of them were criminals of one sort or another.

 

If my memory serves me well Castro also took advantage of the United States generosity to empty the lunatic asylums at the same time.

[Apech]

Without Cubans we wouldn't have Cuban heels :

 

[Marblehead]

Maybe.  But we would still have this:

 

 

 

[futuredaze]

The modern liberal would define the term "racist" as anyone who has doubts regarding mass immigration, multiculturalism and the benefits of diversity. The left wing liberal, like the socialist, demands free speech for themselves whilst attempting to deny it to those with opposing views.

 

They would of course vehemently deny that this is the case but one has only to listen to what they say and watch what they do to see the truth of the matter.

Is it really that widespread?  I live in the U.S., I am pretty left on a lot of things, but it is really easy for me to see through the liberal propaganda as easy as it is the conservative.  I'm not that smart, maybe I am blessed with a good internal bullshit detector, but it is really hard for me to believe that the majority of liberals would adopt this view.  First of all, it is not even about race, but religion.  And to be honest, it is not even about religion as a whole, but certain sub-groups.  Is being cautious about certain sub-groups (and,  by necessary extension, the religion as a whole) racist?  Seems ridiculous.

 

Do you think this  has been changing with recent reports in the last few months?  Sure, it is one thing to say something and hold a belief, but if something powerful happens that puts this belief in question, do you really think people will ignore it?  Even if it continuously happens?

Edited February 7, 2016 by futuredaze

[wilfred]

i would say that the youth who believe in the liberal (or should we say regressive left as it's not truly liberal per se) narrative are accustomed to performing unbelievable feats of mental gymnastics to maintain what they believe to be the morally superior viewpoint. the way i see it this relates back to the current problems with society, namely the overuse of technology that is plauging our culture - the need for gratification and in the case of far-leftists it's a projection or form of social signalling to see who can be the most tolerant of widely unpopular groups of people, regardless of the validity of any concerns.

 

the problem is that these people are by far the loudest and have the majority of the media establishment on their side (outrage sells). what is clearly propaganda to a well balanced individual is more and more the reality to a disenfranchised generation who have been conditioned to live increasingly in their heads, through their viewpoints. it's intellectualism and digital cultre run amock, before we even factor in potential big picture schemes from the elites or whatever. it's very bad from the point of a view of creating a productive society. Thomas Sowell wrote some very poignant and predictive things on this topic long before the current situation came to fruition:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Vision-Anointed-Self-Congratulation-Social/dp/046508995X

[Karl]

In Europe we like nice ideas and loving everyone, being brotherly, sisterly and totally accepting of anything except those who don't agree with that ideology is par for the course. It's for the great social good don't you know, the great cosmic family. Even when there is obvious violence going on, then the hippies blame it on the circumstances the refugees have had to face-they are the victims right ? They have had to put up with Western, white, privileged make aggression that made them poor, desperate and violent. A bullet through the head, gang rape, theft is the least price that we must expect to pay for our guilt.

 

We have a society of self haters, riddled with guilt and filled with the need to assuage their inner horrors with suffering. Be it environmental transgressions, or the feeling of owning some property that deprives some other person in some undefinable way. This is the end result of altruism. A group of lemmings so completely devoid of any happiness that throwing themselves wantonly on the sacrificial pyre is better than continuing to live. The hardened middle eastern psyche and Africans must be unable to believe their luck. A group of rich idiots ready to give away everything including their lives in an attempt to assuage their awful guilt and misery.

 

I say let these nihilists sacrifice. We round everyone of these terminal altruists up and take away all their possessions, put iron around their necks and let them serve everyone else like the animals they wish to become.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Karl

[wilfred]

the problem is that many on the left are so narcissistic they would gladly give away the rights of others without doing so themselves. they fail to see the hypocrisy that underpins so many of their arguments, this video is a perfect example:

 

[Apech]

....

 

I say let these nihilists sacrifice. We round everyone of these terminal altruists up and take away all their possessions, put iron around their necks and let them serve everyone else like the animals they wish to become.

 

Does your bed have another side which you could get up from?

[Karl]

Does your bed have another side which you could get up from?

 

Im chanelling my inner Shanlung and I must say I find it rather Cathartic. It's the Rotan for them all. :-)

[futuredaze]

In Europe we like nice ideas and loving everyone, being brotherly, sisterly and totally accepting of anything except those who don't agree with that ideology is par for the course. It's for the great social good don't you know, the great cosmic family. Even when there is obvious violence going on, then the hippies blame it on the circumstances the refugees have had to face-they are the victims right ? They have had to put up with Western, white, privileged make aggression that made them poor, desperate and violent. A bullet through the head, gang rape, theft is the least price that we must expect to pay for our guilt.

 

We have a society of self haters, riddled with guilt and filled with the need to assuage their inner horrors with suffering. Be it environmental transgressions, or the feeling of owning some property that deprives some other person in some undefinable way. This is the end result of altruism. A group of lemmings so completely devoid of any happiness that throwing themselves wantonly on the sacrificial pyre is better than continuing to live. The hardened middle eastern psyche and Africans must be unable to believe their luck. A group of rich idiots ready to give away everything including their lives in an attempt to assuage their awful guilt and misery.

 

I say let these nihilists sacrifice. We round everyone of these terminal altruists up and take away all their possessions, put iron around their necks and let them serve everyone else like the animals they wish to become.

Seems like a defeatist view.  Do you think recent events are not having some effect on the way people think in Europe?  Do you think if things stay as they are or get worse that people will still think the same way?

 

It is easy to have lofty beliefs, but people can change really fast if they feel threatened.  Sure, some might cling to these beliefs even with a threat, but most people care way more about survival than ideals no matter how much they might like to think otherwise.

 

Guilt is a luxury, survival is a necessity.  No matter what our beliefs are, this is generally the case.  Perhaps in time, the "progressive extremists" will eventually be revealed to be just as dogmatic and anti-life as Muslim extremists, only less violent.  And many people will change their view, since they realize that altruism is good, but only to a logical extent.  Extremism seems to result from people who do not learn from nature and/or logic and get caught up in concepts and words that are detached from reality and fueled by emotions that make them feel good.

 

I'm not going to pretend I will know what will happen, but I do believe that when enough people have had enough of any situation, they will do something about it.  I also believe that people can change their opinions quite quickly when reality does not synchronize with their idealism.

Edited February 7, 2016 by futuredaze

[Chang]

Im chanelling my inner Shanlung and I must say I find it rather Cathartic. It's the Rotan for them all. :-)

 

Shanlung would have them singing Kumbayah with gusto whilst they were being thrashed.

[Karl]

Shanlung would have them singing Kumbayah with gusto whilst they were being thrashed.

 

He does make me laugh at times. I know his style- like mine-can wind people up, but I like his different sense of expressing outrage. You cannot imagine more right wing western media to come out with Kumbayah.

[Karl]

Seems like a defeatist view.  Do you think recent events are not having some effect on the way people think in Europe?  Do you think if things stay as they are or get worse that people will still think the same way?

 

It is easy to have lofty beliefs, but people can change really fast if they feel threatened.  Sure, some might cling to these beliefs even with a threat, but most people care way more about survival than ideals no matter how much they might like to think otherwise.

 

Guilt is a luxury, survival is a necessity.  No matter what our beliefs are, this is generally the case.  Perhaps in time, the "progressive extremists" will eventually be revealed to be just as dogmatic and anti-life as Muslim extremists, only less violent.  And many people will change their view, since they realize that altruism is good, but only to a logical extent.  Extremism seems to result from people who do not learn from nature and/or logic and get caught up in concepts and words that are detached from reality and fueled by emotions that make them feel good.

 

I'm not going to pretend I will know what will happen, but I do believe that when enough people have had enough of any situation, they will do something about it.  I also believe that people can change their opinions quite quickly when reality does not synchronize with their idealism.

 

Altruism isn't good at all. That's the problem. It comes from the same place as duty, sacrifice, obligation. That's why I hold no hope at all. Unless the philosophy is radically altered we will be plunged into bloody revolution. This is why we are beginning to see the rising of more extreme political parties, but they are extreme because we judge them from a fallacy of the misuse of the mean. It isn't that we should choose a place to sit in the carriage of the train we are currently travelling on, as much as we are on completely the wrong train on the wrong track. Anything we do is going to built on the same underlying philosophy leading to the exact same outcomes. Build on sand and the quality of the building will always be related to that foundation.

[futuredaze]

Altruism isn't good at all. That's the problem. It comes from the same place as duty, sacrifice, obligation. That's why I hold no hope at all. Unless the philosophy is radically altered we will be plunged into bloody revolution. This is why we are beginning to see the rising of more extreme political parties, but they are extreme because we judge them from a fallacy of the misuse of the mean. It isn't that we should choose a place to sit in the carriage of the train we are currently travelling on, as much as we are on completely the wrong train on the wrong track. Anything we do is going to built on the same underlying philosophy leading to the exact same outcomes. Build on sand and the quality of the building will always be related to that foundation.

Dictionary.com definition of altruism:

 

1. Unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness.

 

I agree that altruism, carried to its extreme, can lead to bad outcomes.  Whether that is just preaching or acting in a naive self-righteous way that, ironically, leads people to get harmed.  I think that the people we both find problems with are those who use altruism and multiculturalism as dogmas and chess pieces in their own selfish desire to appear "holier-than-thou" or perhaps more "politically-correct-than-thou."  One can even argue that these are not even true altruists, but rather "patrons of altruism" who are actually selfish in a more obscure way than most others.

 

Altruism is a good thing, but true altruism would look at the refugee crisis in regard to how it effects other citizens in their country just as much, if not more, than helping others from outside.  Helping others is only good if we help ourselves and those we are close to first, otherwise it is hypocritical and dangerous.

Edited February 7, 2016 by futuredaze