the Migrant Crisis

[HertsWolf]

Oh dear Herts haha. You're meant to be the king of sarcasm on here

And I think you're the only one who it didn't come across for

Maybe...... Remember that there's a lot of people who will read that who may not have the benefit of knowing the context. I admit I was really surprised to see you write it.

But even so...my apologies for over-reacting.

 

[blade1889]

Maybe...... Remember that there's a lot of people who will read that who may not have the benefit of knowing the context. I admit I was really surprised to see you write it.

But even so...my apologies for over-reacting.

Well, aye. Hopefully most would see the post I've quoted though and work it out. Not planning on it going viral though haha

And yes there are plenty on my fb who probably would seriosuly say something like that, but at the same time as referencing BritainFirst, TheExpress or some other bullshit site...for which my signature does apply

And no worries, it's up there with my favourite 'whooosh' moments. My favourite being someone who had a go at me earlier this season on a bladesforum, I posted a blatant piss-take slagging off of Che Adams after he scored a brace and got MOTM Vs Chesterfield (followed by me saying 'for the benefit of any scouts interested in signing him') then he had a massive go at me.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Ethnic cleansing id put that alongside cultural swamping , racial Armageddon and dilution of the White race .( rivers of blood anybody ? ) . Provocative and unhelpful language which fires up those who are already racist and frightens people into believing right wing nonsense .
- the debate has moved on a bit , apologies my work wifi is crap .

Quite.

In my experience, the only people who believe in "white genocide" (which is roughly synonymous with "[white Europeans] ethnically cleansing themselves" are literally nazis.

 

[smat]

Lol. Implies someone's a monster and then doesn't close an opened bracket.

 

[Alty]

Which is the right side in the Syrian Civil War - Assad or ISIL?

Neither. It's the progressive opposition. Many of whom have fought genuinely heroically.

 

[Dr Mantis Toboggan]

nah it's the kurds

 

[spireite]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nd-others-love-them/?postshare=91441779005423

Quite a good balanced article about the economic motives for some countries.

Germany

"What we're experiencing right now is something that will occupy and change our country in the coming years. We want this change to be positive," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Monday. She was referring to a popular argument in the country's discourse on immigration in recent months: Germany is shrinking rapidly, and the trend is expected to get worse in the coming years. By 2060, there will be only about 68 million to 73 million people in Germany, according to current predictions by the country's statistical office — compared with about 81 million now.

Sweden

Such economic thinking makes Germany distinct from Sweden, which has recently taken in the highest number of refugees in Europe per capita, despite having a population that isn't declining. Its government has historically been among the world's most accommodating when it comes to refugees, which explains Sweden's quick reaction in the current crisis. Although the Swedish government allows asylum-seekers to work immediately, chances of finding a long-term job are low. Nearly half of all foreign-born people ages 25 to 64 are unemployed.

Britain

Britain is among Europe's demographic exceptions: It is predicted to become Europe's most populous country by 2060 thanks to immigration and fertility rates that are higher than most of its neighbors, according to the European Commission.

Despite Germany's efforts to attract foreigners and Britain's reluctance to do so, current forecasts predict a migrant proportion of 14 percent for Britain, but only 9 percent for Germany by 2060. In Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron has recently focused on a resettlement program for 20,000 additional refugees that would allow in some of the weakest. British commentators have said this strategy puts moral considerations over economic interests, obviously referring to Germany.

Bits on Sweden, Germany and Britain although other countries are talked through as well if you fancy the read.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Well I can't fault anyone who tries to make a better life for themselves and their families if they're prepared to work.

A minute ago you were calling me a cretin for suggesting that they might be risking their lives for benefits (which I didn't actually do) because it would be so unthinkably irresponsible... but now you can't fault someone for doing it? Interesting.

Quite.

In my experience, the only people who believe in "white genocide" (which is roughly synonymous with "[white Europeans] ethnically cleansing themselves" are literally nazis.

In my experience, people who use association fallacies are people who can't muster a coherent counter argument. If the native population's birthrates are below replacement levels, and you continue to bring people in from elsewhere en masse, then the native population will be displaced. This would happen even if minority birthrates were level with ours, which they're not, they're much higher. This rationale has no ideological bias, it's simple numbers. Though when Sam Harris said that we were in a perilous position when we surrender a truth to the fascists, this is the kind of thing he was talking about. You can't dismiss a reality just because the nasty racists think it's true too. Yes their "50 years" projections are utterly moronic, but it'll happen eventually if we don't readjust our current course, assuming it's something we want to avoid.

 

[Red]

Why are they "illegal immigrants"? Do you understand the concept of living in a camp or ruined city which is being shelled by artillery or bombed? Or perhaps where roving gangs execute people for various random reasons?

Are you really comparing people who can "barely afford to go to centre parks" with refugees from war zones? Really? Are you hearing yourself?

Are you living your signature? (I have wondered if you are being ironic, but if you are, it doesn't really come across like that tbh)

Yeah bk

A minute ago you were calling me a cretin for suggesting that they might be risking their lives for benefits (which I didn't actually do) because it would be so unthinkably irresponsible... but now you can't fault someone for doing it? Interesting.



In my experience, people who use association fallacies are people who can't muster a coherent counter argument. If the native population's birthrates are below replacement levels, and you continue to bring people in from elsewhere en masse, then the native population will be displaced. This would happen even if minority birthrates were level with ours, which they're not, they're much higher. This rationale has no ideological bias, it's simple numbers. Though when Sam Harris said that we were in a perilous position when we surrender a truth to the fascists, this is the kind of thing he was talking about. You can't dismiss a reality just because the nasty racists think it's true too. Yes their "50 years" projections are utterly moronic, but it'll happen eventually if we don't readjust our current course, assuming it's something we want to avoid.

It doesn't bother me what the colours of people's faces are or how many of them there here are so long as they abide by our laws.

 

[Aber gas]

A minute ago you were calling me a cretin for suggesting that they might be risking their lives for benefits (which I didn't actually do) because it would be so unthinkably irresponsible... but now you can't fault someone for doing it? Interesting.



In my experience, people who use association fallacies are people who can't muster a coherent counter argument. If the native population's birthrates are below replacement levels, and you continue to bring people in from elsewhere en masse, then the native population will be displaced. This would happen even if minority birthrates were level with ours, which they're not, they're much higher. This rationale has no ideological bias, it's simple numbers. Though when Sam Harris said that we were in a perilous position when we surrender a truth to the fascists, this is the kind of thing he was talking about. You can't dismiss a reality just because the nasty racists think it's true too. Yes their "50 years" projections are utterly moronic, but it'll happen eventually if we don't readjust our current course, assuming it's something we want to avoid.

The use of the phrase " ethnic cleansing " has massive connotations beyond your perfectly reasonable post about changing demographics and is provocative .
You argue that eventually the native population will be displaced but how do you define the native population ? Are you including people who migrated here in the 60's ? Where's the cut off point between native and immigrant ?
Your argument also relies on the notion that current birth rates will continue at the same rate going forward and doesn't take into account any variables such as economic conditions , rising affluence in immigrant populations or relationships such as marriage between " native " people and " minorities "
It's impossible to rationally predict that something in the future is inevitable when you are not in full knowledge of any events that might occur so every prediction of future events is subjective and open to political agenda and bias . It's not simply a numbers game .

 

[Aber gas]

Not sure this guy is subscribing to #refugeeswelcome

 

[Red]

Not sure this guy is subscribing to #refugeeswelcome View attachment 1782

Wow! He is very disturbed

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

The use of the phrase " ethnic cleansing " has massive connotations beyond your perfectly reasonable post about changing demographics and is provocative .
You argue that eventually the native population will be displaced but how do you define the native population ? Are you including people who migrated here in the 60's ? Where's the cut off point between native and immigrant ?

I'm not sure that it's possible to create a cut-off point, but I don't see that as cause to invalidate the term. If we had a more civic nationalist society we mightn't even need it, but unfortunately multiculturalism encourages people not integrate fully and to hold on to foreign cultures instead.

Your argument also relies on the notion that current birth rates will continue at the same rate going forward and doesn't take into account any variables such as economic conditions , rising affluence in immigrant populations or relationships such as marriage between " native " people and " minorities "
It's impossible to rationally predict that something in the future is inevitable when you are not in full knowledge of any events that might occur so every prediction of future events is subjective and open to political agenda and bias . It's not simply a numbers game .

Well I did say that it was only inevitable based on our "current course".

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

A minute ago you were calling me a cretin for suggesting that they might be risking their lives for benefits (which I didn't actually do) because it would be so unthinkably irresponsible... but now you can't fault someone for doing it? Interesting.



In my experience, people who use association fallacies are people who can't muster a coherent counter argument. If the native population's birthrates are below replacement levels, and you continue to bring people in from elsewhere en masse, then the native population will be displaced. This would happen even if minority birthrates were level with ours, which they're not, they're much higher. This rationale has no ideological bias, it's simple numbers. Though when Sam Harris said that we were in a perilous position when we surrender a truth to the fascists, this is the kind of thing he was talking about. You can't dismiss a reality just because the nasty racists think it's true too. Yes their "50 years" projections are utterly moronic, but it'll happen eventually if we don't readjust our current course, assuming it's something we want to avoid.

Thought you lot were normally a bit more concise - isn't 14 words generally enough?

Also, Sam Harris is literally fascist.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Also, Sam Harris is literally fascist.

 

[Aber gas]

I'm not sure that it's possible to create a cut-off point, but I don't see that as cause to invalidate the term. If we had a more civic nationalist society we mightn't even need it, but unfortunately multiculturalism encourages people not integrate fully and to hold on to foreign cultures instead.



Well I did say that it was only inevitable based on our "current course".

I assumed you were referring to Britain and European attitudes to migration with " current course " . If you meant that everything will stay the same socially , politically , economically and culturally as it is exactly at this point in time then perhaps the situation you describe could happen at some unspecified point in the future . However the world does change , so it's impossiple for any prediction to be inevitable.
I also think it's important to your argument that that you can define a " cut off point " for migrants otherwise the use of the term indigenous has no meaning . I'm assuming ( again ! Sorry) that you you are not referring to Normans or Romans when you refer to foreign cultures .

 

[smat]

Insurance companies and educational institutions have concluded that civilisation as it is will have collapsed within 25 years anyway, so I wouldn't be too worried about some sort of brown tide.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

I assumed you were referring to Britain and European attitudes to migration with " current course " . If you meant that everything will stay the same socially , politically , economically and culturally as it is exactly at this point in time then perhaps the situation you describe could happen at some unspecified point in the future . However the world does change , so it's impossiple for any prediction to be inevitable.
I also think it's important to your argument that that you can define a " cut off point " for migrants otherwise the use of the term indigenous has no meaning . I'm assuming ( again ! Sorry) that you you are not referring to Normans or Romans when you refer to foreign cultures .

Well people tend to move the goalposts depending on what is ideologically convenient. The same people who class the Māori as an indigenous people will then turn around and call Britain an immigrant nation, for example, despite indigenous Britons having been here for thousands of years longer than the Māori have inhabited New Zealand. I don't think the term is meaningless though whether you can quantify it or not for the purposes of this discussion. It's not like you can distinguish between a third or fourth generation European immigrant who is culturally British and someone who can trace their ancestry back here hundreds of years. That's different of course for Asians and Africans somewhat in that they are overtly not an indigenous Briton, but either way it's the cultural aspect that really matters I think. As I say, if our societies were more conducive to integration rather than segregation, then this would be much less of an issue, but I don't think this passive approach to culture ostensibly in the name of being understanding to immigrants is going to yield positive results, no matter how 'nice' it seems, and much less so when we're accepting migrants at such a rate.

 

[Aber gas]

Wow! He is very disturbed

And extremely thick , he's managed to put out the entire route and starting point of the forthcoming nf March in Dover . Safe to say Antifa have seen it fs it's almost getting too easy .

 

[Aber gas]

Well people tend to move the goalposts depending on what is ideologically convenient. The same people who class the Māori as an indigenous people will then turn around and call Britain an immigrant nation, for example, despite indigenous Britons having been here for thousands of years longer than the Māori have inhabited New Zealand. I don't think the term is meaningless though whether you can quantify it or not for the purposes of this discussion. It's not like you can distinguish between a third or fourth generation European immigrant who is culturally British and someone who can trace their ancestry back here hundreds of years. That's different of course for Asians and Africans somewhat in that they are overtly not an indigenous Briton, but either way it's the cultural aspect that really matters I think. As I say, if our societies were more conducive to integration rather than segregation, then this would be much less of an issue, but I don't think this passive approach to culture ostensibly in the name of being understanding to immigrants is going to yield positive results, no matter how 'nice' it seems, and much less so when we're accepting migrants at such a rate.

Well ok , but in your original post you were presenting your views as fact with no ideological bias hence " a numbers game "
If we are now discussing subjectively then I disagree entirely with your view that Britain is not moving towards an integrated society . I'm only using personal anecdotal evidence but Britain is now far less atomised and intolerant than the Britain of my youth . Perhaps your experiences are different . I also disagree with you that there needs to be a less passive approach to different cultures , Britain has never had a monoculture and nor should it in the future imo for example I imagine that you and I have very different sets of norms and values despite both being british born white males ( again I'm assuming in your case )

 

[Red]

He's from Pakistan. Yes, intolerance has diminished a lot since I was a kid too, culturally and socially. We can thank multiculturalism for that.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Tolerance and integration are two completely different things.

 

[pontoonlew]

http://newobserveronline.com/drowne...lie-of-nonwhite-war-refugees-invasion-excuse/

One of the most despicable articles I've read in a long long time.

 

[Red]

http://newobserveronline.com/drowne...lie-of-nonwhite-war-refugees-invasion-excuse/

One of the most despicable articles I've read in a long long time.

The international collective of racists who replied to the report are even worse. Some of them prophecising the end of Europe.

 

[Red]

Tolerance and integration are two completely different things.

Whatever. Intolerance has diminished and that's a good thing isn't it?

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Whatever. Intolerance has diminished and that's a good thing isn't it?

Yes, but the point of contention was with regard to integration, not intolerance. And I'm not entirely convinced that intolerance has truly gone down across the board either, I think we have a tendency to create a false paradigm of racist white men on one side and everyone else on the other, assuming that oppressed minorities are all in it together. I would suggest though that among certain minority groups rampant homophobia in particular is alive and well, as is many other forms of discrimination.

 

[Red]

Yes, but the point of contention was with regard to integration, not intolerance. And I'm not entirely convinced that intolerance has truly gone down across the board either, I think we have a tendency to create a false paradigm of racist white men on one side and everyone else on the other, assuming that oppressed minorities are all in it together. I would suggest though that among certain minority groups rampant homophobia in particular is alive and well, as is many other forms of discrimination.

I'd agree that it's not across the board but it's a massive improvement on when I was a teenager. Sadly I don't think it will ever be across the board and I don't just mean white people continuing to be intolerant. I'd say there's homophobia in all ethnic groups and we perhaps are more aware of it when it's exhibited by people whose country of origin has problems with homophobia, or second and third generations who have learned homophobia from their elders. I think you also make an important point about minorities being in it together. There are shared experiences, but it's important to recognise differences too

 

[SUTSS]

Red and EG broadly agreeing on something? The end times are nigh!

 

[Red]

Red and EG broadly agreeing on something? The end times are nigh!

I think he'll be as discombobulated after reading it as I was after typing it.

 

[blade1889]

I'm assuming/hoping this is a parody. But just to prove Herts' point earlier about people posting BS and then others believing it a BF supporter on my fb has posted it, in absolute horror at the facts it purports.

Edit: Includes image of a corpse.

LINK REMOVED.