|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
posted January 29, 2014 10:37 PM |
|
|
|
I mean he has no arguments, is about who swears louder. That's not a way to put secular religions down.
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 03:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Check this out,
...............
I chuckled at how they actually subtitled the cockney.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 06:32 AM |
|
Edited by Baklava at 06:42, 31 Jan 2014.
|
Quote:
in 19th century once Ottomans were gone it was a christian country with 10-15% Muslims (slavs who converted)...100 years later it was 45% muslims and there you have it Bosnia is a muslim country
So many issues with a sentence so small. Some of it's misinformed, some taken out of context.
If anyone's interested, here's how it went.
Christian country / Muslim country
Bosnia was not a country between the middle-ages and the '90s. It was an administrative region in various countries, and never had the sovereign power an independent country would. In the middle-ages, it was a kind of a bastion of religious diversity; this led to the Bogomil heresy (perceived as dangerous by both orthodox Serbia and catholic Hungary), expelled from surrounding countries where it was perceived as dangerous, to spread there (and being embraced even by the Bosnian rulers). This caused Hungary to call for - and declare - a few, largely unsuccessful, crusades against Bosnia.
As much as we romanticized the middle-ages, they were about feudal relations of lordship and vassalage, not nationality; that's why we have conflicting sources of whether medieval Bosnians were Serbs, or Croats, or descended from a different Slavic tribe altogether. They didn't really give a shyte back then. This became a problem later, when national ideas were born, as it left a sense of historical right to independence and both religious and cultural diversity, but little proof of a separate ethnicity.
Aggressive Islam
The Ottoman Empire, with all its pros and cons, was far from instilling conversion of any sorts. The Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks preserved their Orthodox confessions throughout several centuries of Muslim rule; and the seat of the ecumenical Patriarch (the first among equals in the Church - the highest Orthodox position of authority) has remained in Constantinople (Istanbul) to this very day. The Jews expelled from Spain by Isabella of Castille were called to settle in the Ottoman Empire. These Turkish Muslims vastly valued practicality over zeal at all points.
What the huge, Sunni Muslim, Ottoman Empire did was not convert the unbelievers, especially not aggressively - but profit from them. Medieval Christian countries they defeated were at first left alone as independent vassals (Serbia was one for a long while after "falling" under the Turks, and was only integrated into the empire 70 years later, by Mehmed the Conqueror). To those directly part of the empire, they levied extra tax, including the highly controversial right to forcibly take away a number of children to be trained as elite Janissaries - this put on pressure, certainly, but for a medieval-to-colonial-age empire, the Turks were far more open than their Western colleagues (until the later days of stagnation, decomposition and clinging to their possessions which, coupled with a natural loss of control, led to things such as the atrocity against Armenians and only made the Empire fall more rapidly).
Conquering through breeding
The challenge brought upon by belonging to an empire of a different religion - no matter how tolerant compared to others in that time period - could be overcome by a powerful Church with strong authority and stubborn believers, such as the Greek, Serbian and Bulgarian ones, but Bosnia, divided between Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Bogomilism, with a history of religious open-mindedness, was far more susceptible to this culture that brought you advanced technology, enforced stable rule (with a harsh justice system) and levied less tax if you assimilate.
By the period of Ottoman dissolution, after about four hundred years of Turkish rule, the Muslims numbered some 35 to 45 percent of Bosnia - this included the Turks themselves, as well as Slavs who converted. The Turks, well, they knew what they were, no issues there. The Slavs, however, were faced with assimilation by the Austrians, who won the right to de facto govern Bosnia, and aimed at shaping it into a colony. Now, the medieval ages were one thing, but as of the end of the 19th century, romanticized ideas of nationhood swept over Europe, and the awakening of national sentiment in Serbia and Croatia, as well as Austrian pretensions, didn't spell a nice political climate for Muslims in Bosnia. I already mentioned the lack of hard evidence for a Bosnian nation and ethnicity, which was gleefully embraced by the neighbours; so, having been left behind as an island of Islam on the boundary between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, these people had taken to clinging on to their faith as their nationhood, something that, indeed, made them different and ensured their identity.
For now, the common cause of the Serbs, the Croats, the Slovenes and the Muslims was ensuring independence from Austria; so, after its defeat in the Great War, the Serbian king Alexander I, the Unifier, agreed to the proposals of uniting the Slavic peoples of the Western Balkans into the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, later renamed Yugoslavia.
In this kingdom, Muslims were recognized as a religious group, but not as an ethnicity, so they created a movement which tried to change that. Yugoslavia came to be regarded as Serb-dominated; indeed, it was united under the Serbian king, Serbs were the ones who carried the brunt of Entente-side fighting in the Balkans, and the Serbs were, by a solid margin, the most populous ethnicity in the country, causing a sentiment of approval among the Serbs, but inciting the first notions of inner discord among other constituent peoples which felt left out (ironically, much like in Austria-Hungary, from which Yugoslavia inherited these lands; with the exception that only Austrians and Hungarians were the constituent peoples in there). At any rate, even with certain political grants, such as a united Croatian administrative region within the country, squabbling continued to fester, culminating in the forming of the ultra-nationalist Croatian Ustashe movement, which continued to assassinate the king in 1934, and later on to collaborate with the Germans and wipe away over half a million Serbs and 80% of Bosnian and Croatian Jews in World War 2.
Now, this is related because it further tipped the demographics of Bosnia toward the Muslim side - when the satellite state of Croatia was set up in WW2 (it included Bosnia), the general hate was directed at the Serbs, Jews and Roma, but not the Muslims, who were to be integrated peacefully. After the war, the balance was about one-half Muslims, one-third Orthodox - things pretty much remained like this today.
In communist Yugoslavia, Bosnia was once again established as a pot of multi-cultural fun, and for a while - other than most Muslims declaring themselves Muslims even in the not-quite-religious communist climate, there was no notion of separatist nationalism or political discord. In this period, Muslims didn't try to take over anything, didn't "breed" excessively, and didn't explode. The Bosniaks were accepted as an ethnicity, as well as the Macedonians. When things started heating up again, due to communism losing its grip (horrid overall as it is, it did an amazing job at convincing people they're all Yugoslavians) and cheap nationalist rhetoric taking a hold among the masses, civil war broke out. This war, terrible as it was (impossible to get accurate numbers, but about 25-30 000 Bosniak civilians were killed against 4-7000 Serbian ones only in Bosnia, as well as 30-40 000 Bosniak soldiers against 15-20 000 Serbian ones), it all did more to reshuffle the demographic than change it. The internationally mediated peace enforced separating the country into the Bosniak and Serbian parts, which keep bickering politically over the Serbian part's autonomy, and that's that.
All in all, any baby booming wasn't related to religion, and wasn't disproportionate in favour of the Muslims.
It was disproportionate in favour of the Albanians in Kosovo, for instance. Now those people can make some babies. And they immigrated a lot, both legally and illegally. And paid good prices for real estate. And once that the remaining Serbs realized they're getting outnumbered hard, and that these people were going to push for independence, with Albanian majority, it was too late. So Milosevic sent in the troops and aimed to forcibly displace them and the Kosovar leaders formed terrorist groups and wanted to displace the remaining few Serbs and it all went to ****. But that had nothing to do with religion, and neither does your problem - although it'd be a good idea to learn from the Kosovo issue.
tl;dr
What you're afraid of has nothing to do with religion nor race. Culture, that can be argued, to a certain point; but calling it Muslim (or, as I've seen Sal say to describe people he wouldn't want as neighbours, negroid) culture is wrong, as the mentality you have a problem with pertains only to some cultures that embraced Islam; as well as some that didn't (like them Mexicans hopping across the border over to the USA; or, hell, pure American welfare leeches).
Recognizing things for what they are and defining the root of the problem is the only way to solving this. You're in the Western bloc, you can afford a certain level of ethnic cleansing without repercussions (like Sarkozy shipping those Roma off to Eastern Europe to become someone else's problem) but you still need to be reasonable with this. You can't foster stubborn intolerance and blame everything on something that isn't the root of the issue, such as Islam, or them having darker skin, or them having a higher than average concentration of facial hair per capita.
I mean, you can, if you want to end up like Yugoslavia.
And sure, it'd be good to do something about illegal immigration while keeping the system open for useful immigrants who work hard and learn your language, but spare us the helter skelter bull. The end is not coming and the Muslim / black man is not out to annihilate the white race / Western culture / whatever you call it today. You just need to keep calm, chill with the paranoia, get your **** straight and solve the problem at the root.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 06:50 AM |
|
|
If Bosnia wasn't a country in the Middle Ages, then what's this?
Ignore me, I can't read. 
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 07:27 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 13:29, 31 Jan 2014.
|
A good post Baklava, are you from the Balkans also, (like 78% of this community)? And is your nick actually the dessert "baklava"?
I must say, I partly disagree with one of your conclusions though. I agree religion (especially in this age) is never enough to explain social phenomenon alone but clearing out Islam from the equation completely is a mistake. Islam DOES have theological compatibility problems with modern times, can it go through some kind of reform, nothing is impossible but it wont be an easy process if it ever occurs, that's for sure. The Islamists are in power for only ten years here (Turkey), and I might add, these are the modern, revisionist ones, not trying to establish sharia law or anything paranoid like that but still, the country is polarized as never been before, their way of organizing and sense of community is completely based on nepotism and putting in key positions only Islamists. Your qualifications always comes second. They are in this constant delusion that their way of life is not just different but better than everyone else's, while in fact it includes a lot of repression of sex, feudal traditions which should have been obsolete by now, finding menace in this art work or that science project... They are, in a way, like the opposite of what they dream they are: Not peaceful and surrendering to their God, on the contrary and paradoxically, since the only thing they have left is the religion because they cant adjust to anything else because of that same religion, they cling to it more with an aggressive obsession. Right now, the two major Islamic groups in Turkey, the AKP and the Gulen Movement are fighting within each other because they can't share the cake, as they keep on attacking each other with hidden camera sex tapes, embezzlement charges, bugged phone records etc etc, we learn (not so surprisingly) that the very basic organs of the state such as courts, police enforcement, bureaucracy were turned into outposts of an expansion. "Gülen's prosecutors" file case after case against AKP, under normal circumstances this would have mean politicians resigning but nooooo, instead the prosecutors are exiled to distant assignment locations by the government. Nobody even imagines about believing in the impartiality of the courts anymore... 10 years and the very foundation of democracy, the separation of powers is ruined beyond recognition. You can say this type of corruption is not specific to Islam but there is something, a language, a mindset, a way of configuring society in it that is specific to Islam, I just don't know how to put it to words exactly, yet.
Religious people have a tendency to excuse or clear of blame all religions, since they think the tradition itself is a good, at least innocent thing. I'm afraid you're making the same mistake. It is not true. Religions (and especially Islam) can be damaging and harmful to social consensus. I'm tired of listening to Muslims telling me about how wonderful and open to progression "the real Islam" is, when every historical context since the last 250 years disapproves of them.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 02:13 PM |
|
|
And most of the growing Muslim minorities in Europe are not like the conservatives ones ruling in Turkey. So far, there has been very little Muslim opposition towards secularism, science and tolerance because most European Muslims are not the conservative fundamentalists some people in this thread seem to believe them to be.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 02:25 PM |
|
|
|
Dude, ethnically, I would be "a muslim minority" too, if I ever decide to live over there. That's not what I'm talking about. Most people are only culturally religious, they try to make ends meet and get on with everybody else along the way. If asked, they say they believe, but it's a family tradition and they don't give it that much thought. The doctrine of Islam itself shouldn't be taken lightly though, remember cultural middle ground is determined by meeting in the middle and Islam lowers the bar dramatically about that in many aspects. I don't want to waste my time arguing IF it is proper to make a film about Muhammed, you don't like it, don't watch it, or protest it peacefully, say it sucks, make a parody... Don't try to convince the rest of the non-muslim people, how evil that movie is and it should be banned immediately. That debate shouldn't even be on the table, you know what I mean?
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 02:37 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 14:39, 31 Jan 2014.
|
I'm saying most European Muslims are way more like you than conservatives throwing a fit over Muhammed being depicted in a film. The bar to the middle ground won't be lower because generally, European Muslims don't follow "the doctrine of Islam" very closely. They're increasingly becoming more like European Christians where the only encounters with religion in a year is during Christmas and Easter. And even then, the traditional aspects of those holidays are vastly overshadowed by santas, easter bunnies and other secular cultural additions.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 03:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If Bosnia wasn't a country in the Middle Ages, then what's this?
That there is you not paying attention, MVass.  I said it wasn't a country between the Middle Ages and the '90s.
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 04:25 PM |
|
Edited by Baklava at 17:02, 31 Jan 2014.
|
@artu
Serbian here, and as for the dessert, what gave me away? It was the profile pic, wasn't it?
Yes, the very Turkish delight dating back perhaps to Assyria itself, the only uniting factor for all of the Balkans and the Middle East, the sweet, sweet nectar from the cradle of civilization, Baklava's the name, Tulumba's the game and Tufahije are all the same.
We need to understand the sociopolitical problems behind the chaos of closed, backwater thought. Looking at some illegal nationalist Serbian organizations of today, or Croatian mobs breaking public signs in the Cyrillic alphabet because "Serbian letters insult their war heritage", it's clear that the Islamic culture, through which Arabs were once one of the most progressive forces in the world, and later on the Ottomans, is now in its sorry state because of the amount of war, instability and chaos that it saw.
Arabian and Persian Islam was never the same since the age of the crusades and the invasion of the Il-Khanate, when the West had the luxury of adopting Islam's good sides, while Islam went defensive, with the harsh Mameluk regime taking over in the Arab regions, and later falling under the Sunni Turks and being their subjects for a long while, then afterwards getting occupied after WW1 by the British. It was an f-ed up climate that curbed prosperity as they knew it; the same happened to the Turks in their own period of decay later, at the turn of the 19th century. It also happened to many parts of Russia, during the decay of the Tsardom, and then the Soviet Union later.
Like you said, everything is possible; when the Ottoman Empire plummeted, Ataturk managed to institute reforms that revolutionized Turkish culture, westernized it, and dragged it back on the European stage among the civilized countries - but harsh times still saw a rise in Islam's conservatism, whose descendants seem to be in power today. Communism found Yugoslavia a war-torn federation of bitter, wary little ethnicities that were just done with trying to exterminate each other, and for a while, it prevented it from returning there (it would've been smarter in the long run to just split it up there and then, perhaps; but at the time, it did what it did best) and it actually became a pretty prosperous country.
It's the circle of life, with cultures/systems/ways of life being born and dying - never a pretty sight. A culture's life can, however, be prolonged, and its dying pains minimized, with proper care and understanding - just like with people. But without this understanding, failing to recognize the cause of the disease or prescribing the wrong medication is often worse than not doing anything at all. That's how I look at it.
Oh, and
Quote:
their way of organizing and sense of community is completely based on nepotism and putting in key positions only Islamists.
we've had this particracy for so long in every aspect of our country, we're pretty much unable to ever function differently. Everything in Serbia's going over the party lines, from ministerial positions and the justice department, over directorship of state-held companies, to privatization. And everything's so thoroughly corrupt that it's lost any sense of guilt, or need to hide behind a religion or ideology. Again, trust me, this has nothing to do with religion, though these people never refrain from using it for their own goals.
There was an initiative by several "patriotic" "businessmen" to enforce tax exemption on goods that are exported to Kosovo, as humanitarian aid to Serbs living in severe poverty and enclaves over there. Hardly any of it reached them, of course, because as soon as the goods checked on the Serb side of the Kosovo border, they turned around over some hidden passages in the hills and got back to Serbia, to be sold at regular price or exported. They didn't even feel the need to hide those fiscal records, and no legal process has even been started yet.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 06:46 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It's the circle of life, with cultures/systems/ways of life being born and dying - never a pretty sight. A culture's life can, however, be prolonged, and its dying pains minimized, with proper care and understanding - just like with people. But without this understanding, failing to recognize the cause of the disease or prescribing the wrong medication is often worse than not doing anything at all. That's how I look at it.
I totally agree.
Quote:
Arabian and Persian Islam was never the same since the age of the crusades and the invasion of the Il-Khanate, when the West had the luxury of adopting Islam's good sides, while Islam went defensive, with the harsh Mameluk regime taking over in the Arab regions, and later falling under the Sunni Turks and being their subjects for a long while, then afterwards getting occupied after WW1 by the British. It was an f-ed up climate that curbed prosperity as they knew it; the same happened to the Turks in their own period of decay later, at the turn of the 19th century. It also happened to many parts of Russia, during the decay of the Tsardom, and then the Soviet Union later.
I think it would be anachronical to pick some "golden ages" from Islam history and use it as an example to suggest some incompatibility problems are completely independent from religion. If you think of historical conditions as the operating system of a computer and religion as a default application, saying Islam worked perfectly under Windows 95 doesn't mean much when people are complaining it keeps giving a blue screen under Windows 8. Take the issue of women for example, this naturally didn't cause any problems back in the time of Abbasid Caliphate or Mehmet The Conqueror because all of the world was very patriarchal, anyway. Or something more casual, washing your body parts five times a day before prayer can even be thought of as a perfect health policy in medieval ages with all the disease and no antibiotics but the same tradition can cause inefficiency in the industrial age of early 20th century when you're a factory worker on the clock. (This kind of daily stuff changes and adjusts relatively much easier, people start to only go to Mosques on Friday etc etc, yet the ideological stuff like the women issue cause bigger problems, Christian cultures handled it by secularizing more, because there, religion becomes a dead end.) Anyway, I can give more examples but I guess you get my point. I have explained why I think Islam itself, most of all the Abrahamic religions, has some compatibility issues with our age apart from reasons caused by the historical context, in other threads such as Questions about religion and Muslims Causing Trouble, so I wont repeat it here, again. Obviously, I'm not suggesting to discriminate against Muslim immigrants, yet to ignore the theological issues and to pretend religion itself is completely off the hook seems unrealistic and political rather than observational to me.
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 09:57 PM |
|
Edited by smithey at 21:58, 31 Jan 2014.
|
@Artu, off topic, are things in Turkey going as "bad" as we're led to believe or is it more of a Western propaganda ?
When I say bad I mean whether the "future Turkey" is on a path of being closer to middle east orientation (religion is the only way to go) or is it more like 50% 50% chances of it going either way ?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 11:11 PM |
|
|
|
Depends on what the average Westerner imagines when he/she hears "things are going bad." AKP is becoming more authoritarian, there's polarization and tension between Muslims and secular Turks but we don't kill each other on the streets. We will not abandon secular law or anything but the conservatism is becoming suffocating for non-muslims and I'm really tired of 10 TV debates a week discussing is this or that against Islam. The orientation to Middle-East thing is a matter of debate among the Turks as well, some say that the young nation-state built by Ataturk right in the middle of the two world wars was xenophobic and hostile through all our neighbors, (the rhetoric was Arabs betrayed us in WW1, Persians were our historical enemies, Russians were communists and historical enemies also, Greeks and Bulgarians hated us, etc etc) and now that enough time has passed, turning that around and establishing productive relations with the periphery of the ex-empire territory and states is a natural and healthy thing to do. It is tuning it back to the way it should be. Others say, it is a cultural policy of AKP to Islamize us more. I think the latter theory is not completely cuckoo but rather than hitting the bullseye, it exaggerates a secondary aspect of the situation.
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted January 31, 2014 11:30 PM |
|
|
Well, I assume an average dude sees it more simple (we dont understand all aspects as you do)...
Turkey was going towards being more modern, closer to the west, tolerance, equality , freedom or whatever but lately that it has shifted towards "old ways" and is instead getting closer to arab countries which means less tolerance towards freedoms, rights, etc... maybe less tolerant isnt the correct phrase, its becoming more strict is maybe a better way to put it ?
Basically, well I dont know which side you're on nor am I going to ask that coz its your bizz, but the main question is whether people who arent religious oriented get to live the way they want or are they being deprived of some liberties (on a small scale like "I cant drink in a certain place" or "people will mess me up if they see me eating a doner kebab on the street during Ramadan" stuff like that)
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 12:10 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:12, 01 Feb 2014.
|
Well, you can eat during Ramadan, maybe in rural areas or small towns they will give you the bad-eye but most probably no one will beat you up or anything. But the thing is, a business man who's about to enter a contract bidding by the government may not prefer to be seen eating during Ramadan these days.
And about "my side", being an atheist naturally I don't support the conservative Muslims and I wish with all my heart they lose in the elections. (It doesn't seem likely though.)I thought that was a no-brainer. I don't fully agree with the Kemalists either, overall, I have no problem with Mustafa Kemal when it comes to his Westernization except some stuff in detail but it was the 1930's. However, I am not a nationalist and most Kemalists are. Basically, I stand somewhere between the non-nationalist leftists and the liberals but I try to evaluate each incident individually rather than taking sides. So my political stance corresponds to something like 5 to 10 percent of the country.
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 12:21 AM |
|
|
You're an underdog then, nice 
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 12:11 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 12:14, 01 Feb 2014.
|
artu said:
Basically, I stand somewhere between the non-nationalist leftists and the liberals but I try to evaluate each incident individually rather than taking sides. So my political stance corresponds to something like 5 to 10 percent of the country.
Where are the liberals?
Looking at Wikipedia, Turkish politics seem split between conservatives, social democrats and nationalists.
edits: It says on Wikipedia that the CHP are also social liberals. Still part of the Socialist International though=P
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 09:38 PM |
|
Edited by kayna at 21:49, 01 Feb 2014.
|
It is my firm belief that immigration serves the interests of the people that governs us. I don't live in Europe though. I live in Quebec, but still...
When someone crosses and entire ocean or country to live somewhere else its usually someone that has an active survival instinct, and the survival instinct is often about yourself first, others after. It's something that you can learn by studying Quebec's political situation. We try to separate ourselves from the English Canadians, which are the lackeys of the Americans. Most ethnic people here dislikes American politics ( wars ) greatly, yet most of them votes to remain in Canada during the referendum. Why is that?
When snow hits the fan, people usually starts isolating people that are different from them and use it as an excuse to rob ressources or just straight up unload frustrations on these different people... ethnic minorities, gay people, etc etc... consciously or unconsciously. It's why it's always better to hang out with people that looks like you the most, family ties, skin color, habits, life style, etc etc... it is for that reason that I will usually not be interested in befriending someone of another race than mine unless we share a lot of other things together. Really just to protect myself more than looking to abuse of others, even if my way of thinking can be called out as racist.
My guess is that governments likes immigrants because their survival instinct makes them side with whichever side is the strongest ( the government ) yet at the same time often talks crap about the present government, which is even better because it obfuscates the whole control master plan of the government ( remember that talk is cheap ). I also guess that governments might use the whole multicultural aspect as an excuse to facilitate future wars, because to justify a war to the people, you must show that we are the good guys and they are the bad guys. Look at the recent wars in the middle east. We are multicultural, they are mostly Arabs and Muslims, obviously we are the good guys, right?
It's so sad how many right wing agendas are hidden and protected behind left wing values propagated throughout each country's media and school controlled collective brainwash.
The other advantage of having ethnics is to keep us busy with that whole racist theme. If we had no problems to solve, we might focus on the people that governs us and solve "their problem". Something they don't want. So instead, you might encounter racism along your way, you will call out that racist person, point your finger, then feel good tonight as you rethink about it before going to sleep, making you feel like you've done a good change to the world.
Like tossing a bone to a dog to keep him preoccupied.
It also increases the general quality of the population... in general. Mixing genes gives healthier kids. People learn how to live together and be more tolerant ( those that don't fall in the racist category anyways ). That increases the intelligence of the population, and you might think, hey, governments that wants control over a population wants a dumb population, right? Well, fear not! Just toss a few "violence never solves anything" and "you can change the world with peaceful means" slogans in your collective left wing brain wash and voila, you have a population may be smarter, but all you have to tell them is "NO" to whatever the citizens asks and they ll take it like a "man" and will not rebel against the government. Only whine.
So yeah, making the people better and smarter while keeping them as docile, and keep them preoccupied with this whole racist thing, why not?
I'm not sure if what I just wrote is applicable to the "islamisation" of Europe, but I can tell you, where I come from, the people that governs and dominates us are very, very smart indeed. And if I may add something, I'm jealous that you Europeans can talk about ethnicities without ending burned on a pike like a witch lol.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 09:45 PM |
|
|
"The government" is an amorphous & large body of people with continuously shifting power. They aren't capable of following through with Hollywood-esque plots such as keeping the public preoccupied with ethnicity in order to serve some higher goal. Governments usually like immigrants because they're over the age of 18 and instantly ready to work and spend. They'll often take them even if there's sociological risk attached. The backlash is that individual natives might not like having these people injected in the workplace, especially if these immigrants have been raised and psychologically adapted to be more easily content and not as picky, compared to the more frail psychology of a 1st worlder. This can be intimidating in a roundabout way, which is why you will universally find a message of "We are being threatened" in any kind of highly protectionist political platform in a country.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted February 01, 2014 10:00 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Mixing genes gives healthier kids
This is not true. If your family is devoid of hereditary faults breeding with your siblings will keep it pure. Mixing genes with others will bring in hereditary faults.
Quote:
People learn how to live together and be more tolerant ( those that don't fall in the racist category anyways ). That increases the intelligence of the population
Also not true. Intelligence is independent of tolerance.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
