95191
Post by: godardc
Hi,
the first results of the first turn for the regional (district) elections in France have arrived.
So the Front National is now the first party in France, with about 30% of the electorate.
Despite the total bashing from all over France (employers, artists, government...), the far-right is unstoppable.
Did you even heard of the elections in France in the US (by the way, I'm sorry for you losses in San Bernardino) ?
I think the UK/Germany must be totally aware of this event.
If you don't know what the National Front is:
- they defend the Christian identity and the traditions of France (mainly against Islam),
-they want to leave / to quit the UE and they want France to have its own money.
-They want more "discipline" less laxity.
-They aren't liberal.
They are often accused to be racist and to make amalgam.
So, any reaction ? Do you think the next French President(2017) will be a Front National one ?
84405
Post by: jhe90
I have seen, rising on fear, euro sceptics and immigration crisis.
Our own far right has gained some ground but not same electoral ground they have.
19370
Post by: daedalus
 godardc wrote:
Did you even heard of the elections in France in the US (by the way, I'm sorry for you losses in San Bernardino) ?
To the best of my limited knowledge, our 24/7s haven't talked about it at all. They're too busy drumming up our own fear by spending days talking about nothing but San Bernardino. Most of the news I actively follow is internationally oriented, so I don't think it counts.
1464
Post by: Breotan
 jhe90 wrote:Our own far right has gained some ground but not same electoral ground they have.
Well, to be fair, England hasn't had as many mass terrorist attacks as France. Yes, there was that nasty attack on the Tunnel but France has had two separate events where multiple shooters attacked multiple targets on a single day. It's hard to blame people for adopting protectionist attitudes.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
The more the Extremists execute their missions the more support the front will get.
Same applies to all around the world.
84405
Post by: jhe90
 Breotan wrote: jhe90 wrote:Our own far right has gained some ground but not same electoral ground they have.
Well, to be fair, England hasn't had as many mass terrorist attacks as France. Yes, there was that nasty attack on the Tunnel but France has had two separate events where multiple shooters attacked multiple targets on a single day. It's hard to blame people for adopting protectionist attitudes.
Aye, we had the recent attack in London with a knife just this week.
We have not had same no, thankfully but still the right is louder than before.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
People are afraid, they try to feel safe by choosing extremes.
(Spoiler : This will not work and France is digging its own grave)
514
Post by: Orlanth
They might however find that like UKIP the parties labelled as far-right are less extreme than mainstream tells the populace.
People are told vote UKIP get "fascists". This is an opportunity to prove to Europe this is not true.
The right is raising not due to 'hatred' but concern for the problems facing Europe most politicians would rather pretend do not exist.
48412
Post by: treslibras
50% absentees, a 30year incapability to reform, elitarian closed political circles, encrusted mainstream politics of the ps-ump block, people looking for easy answers to complex questions...
I think it would help a lot if the FN got the chance to show their inability to govern regionally. 
The problem is just that once forces with a flawed sense of democracy rise to national power, it is usually the start of a spiral that ends outside the boundaries of a functioning democracy. See Hungaria, Romania, Turkey (debatable if they were ever more than proto-democracies but still) and starting in Poland, Italy....
89522
Post by: Dropbear Victim
Im actually surprised its taken this long. We've had 2-3 generations brought up post WW2 in a world where right and centre politics have been demonised and we've ended up with a bloated and divided left thats been increasingly showing more fascism itself. Horseshoe theory in action.
121
Post by: Relapse
If it as bad as described, do you think the French will dump them in the next election?
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Relapse wrote:If it as bad as described, do you think the French will dump them in the next election?
Hope so. But I have serious doubts about it. You know what people can do when they are afraid.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
It was on Dutch news today. It has been happening in the Netherlands as well, with Geert Wilders and his freedom party (PVV). It seems to be a reaction in a lot of European countries.
Lots of people are disappointed in the centrist liberal parties that have dominated European politics until now.
The left has the same kinds of reaction, with far-left socialists gaining more and more popularity while centre-left social-democrats lose votes.
Interesting to see if this new trend will lead to actual change, and if so, how it will work out.
95191
Post by: godardc
Relapse
Post 07/12/2015 01:16:25 Subject: The Rise of The National Front in France
If it as bad as described, do you think the French will dump them in the next election?
I don't think so, because, even if the turns out that the FN is as bad as their scared opponent try to make people think, they have one thing the other don't have:
they will try to resolve the problems the others never even tried to handle.
Orianth said: "The right is raising not due to 'hatred' but concern for the problems facing Europe most politicians would rather pretend do not exist.".
And that's true.
An example: the FN mayor of Bezier, Robert Menard, since his election, did a lot (toomuch ?^^) for the security (he gave guns to his police, curfew for the minor, canine unit, equestrian unit / horseback unit (?)), made a Christmas crib in the City Hall even if it is illegal, prohibited to let the dirty laundry dry outside.
Issues that concern people that were never correctly handled (people love to feel safe and to see their traditions respected. He listen to them, because he doesn't care about "togetherness" / living together, just the French people and French traditions.
Even if it is not incredible changes, he did things which matter for his people.
So, if the FN don't succeed to save the country, I think they can still hold, because they will make christian traditions respected. They will make people feel safer. They will try their own way, and people will see this changes really quicly, not like when the socialists came to the governement, there hadn't any noticeable change.
And, ofc, if they aren't bad,oh they will stay for long, and even warrant the other far-right party. But this isn't for this year anyway^^^
84157
Post by: DutchWinsAll
I still order Freedom Fries, so French politics aren't in my purview.
Joking. Isn't the FN leader a woman? Could she potentially be a French Thatcher? I can see some parallels between "The Troubles" of the 1970's and the "Troubles" with Islam right now.
I wonder if the hardcore social conservatives of ISIL types want a political conservative leader in their enemies or a more liberal one. I know they want which ever one will react more harshly and impetuously, but that still remains to be seen who will comply.
A lot of people instantly malign the Right with warmongering, but I don't really know if that's true, at least for the political side. Social cons are very often very violent worldwide, but political ones not so much. I find them more isolationist.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
godardc wrote:
So, if the FN don't succeed to save the country, I think they can still hold, because they will make christian traditions respected. They will make people feel safer. They will try their own way, and people will see this changes really quicly, not like when the socialists came to the governement, there hadn't any noticeable change.
And, ofc, if they aren't bad,oh they will stay for long, and even warrant the other far-right party. But this isn't for this year anyway^^^
I have the feeling they will contribute to further alienate the French Muslim population in favor of preserving our Judeo-Christian traditions (let's remember our laicity principle which applies to ANY religion).
So, sure, if they are awful a lot of people will start to vote again, and another party will get elected. But on the other hand, if they are as incompetent as everyone else (I think they will), abstention will skyrocket to unprecedented levels.
26412
Post by: flamingkillamajig
godardc wrote:Hi,
the first results of the first turn for the regional (district) elections in France have arrived.
So the Front National is now the first party in France, with about 30% of the electorate.
Despite the total bashing from all over France (employers, artists, government...), the far-right is unstoppable.
Did you even heard of the elections in France in the US (by the way, I'm sorry for you losses in San Bernardino) ?
I think the UK/Germany must be totally aware of this event.
If you don't know what the National Front is:
- they defend the Christian identity and the traditions of France (mainly against Islam),
-they want to leave / to quit the UE and they want France to have its own money.
-They want more "discipline" less laxity.
-They aren't liberal.
They are often accused to be racist and to make amalgam.
So, any reaction ? Do you think the next French President(2017) will be a Front National one ?
I'd imagine it's a temporary reaction to what's happened in paris. It'll die down eventually I'm sure. For now though their stance sounds suited to people's interests after the terrorist attacks.
-----
Dunno how I feel about discipline.
Not super happy about the liberal side of things personally. Some politically left idea are fine in my book (gay marriage, things not being so massively Christian) but it goes overboard in some areas.
If you mean the EU I know that at times it has gotten plenty of complaints (if we're talking the euro then it sounds annoying how you have to deal with some countries' debts and it's understandable).
Dunno about the traditions of france and personally I'm not really into religion overall.
On the subject of racism is this actual racism (people of certain races being beaten and specifically refused jobs for religious or ethnic reasons) or the accused racism for not having absolutely every job with absolute representation of all groups equally despite the proportions of people in the area and applying for such jobs and other such nonsense where joking about a stereotype equals instant racism or various other things.
-----
That said I'm not aware of what politics are like in france. It's not my country so i'll leave the voting to someone that lives there and actually lives out what's going on there.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 flamingkillamajig wrote:
On the subject of racism is this actual racism (people of certain races being beaten and specifically refused jobs for religious or ethnic reasons) or the accused racism for not having absolutely every job with absolute representation of all groups equally despite the proportions of people in the area and applying for such jobs and other such nonsense where joking about a stereotype equals instant racism or various other things.
Her father is a known anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, and the Front National attracts a lot of far-right extremists which are more or less openly racist (there were some Neo-Nazis IIRC).
Marine Le Pen tried for several years to hide these bad apples and "un-demonize" the FN (If this even means something).
26412
Post by: flamingkillamajig
 LethalShade wrote: flamingkillamajig wrote:
On the subject of racism is this actual racism (people of certain races being beaten and specifically refused jobs for religious or ethnic reasons) or the accused racism for not having absolutely every job with absolute representation of all groups equally despite the proportions of people in the area and applying for such jobs and other such nonsense where joking about a stereotype equals instant racism or various other things.
Her father is a known anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, and the Front National attracts a lot of far-right extremists which are more or less openly racist (there were some Neo-Nazis IIRC).
Marine Le Pen tried for several years to hide these bad apples and "un-demonize" the FN (If this even means something).
Whose father? I find it very odd a holocaust denier would have any weight but that does fit with the anti-Semite (anti-jewish) agenda.
Personally I don't understand neo-nazis and how they crop up anywhere outside of Germany. Didn't the original Nazis think of anybody not german and not Aryan as sub-human. If you're French and supporting this it seems like you're supporting a group that didn't support you. I just don't understand. Or is being a neo-Nazi more about pro-white? I've heard lots of weird neo-Nazi groups (including a homosexual Russian neo-Nazi group) and many of them sound like they're made by groups of people with lower than average intelligence.
You have to forgive me if I don't always believe the racism route as I've heard people complain about racist words, depictions and so on that ends up being fairly mild by my tastes. Some days it feels like if you're white and you joke about middle eastern people driving taxis you'll get a stereotype and racism ban hammer of sorts. Almost like people have gone overboard with being offended to the point where if somebody suggests things aren't 100% equal in skill, traits, physical aspects and everything between the races in different places you'll just set some people's brains to short-circuit and fry with anger.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
flamingkillamajig wrote:Some days it feels like if you're white and you joke about middle eastern people driving taxis you'll get a stereotype and racism ban hammer of sorts.
Well yes, why shouldn't you be criticized for that?
Almost like people have gone overboard with being offended to the point where if somebody suggests things aren't 100% equal in skill, traits, physical aspects and everything between the races in different places you'll just set some people's brains to short-circuit and fry with anger.
...
Would you like to explain yourself better? Because you seem to be implying that you're a racist, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you apologize/explain if this statement was just a mistake.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
flamingkillamajig wrote: LethalShade wrote: flamingkillamajig wrote:
On the subject of racism is this actual racism (people of certain races being beaten and specifically refused jobs for religious or ethnic reasons) or the accused racism for not having absolutely every job with absolute representation of all groups equally despite the proportions of people in the area and applying for such jobs and other such nonsense where joking about a stereotype equals instant racism or various other things.
Her father is a known anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, and the Front National attracts a lot of far-right extremists which are more or less openly racist (there were some Neo-Nazis IIRC).
Marine Le Pen tried for several years to hide these bad apples and "un-demonize" the FN (If this even means something).
Whose father? I find it very odd a holocaust denier would have any weight but that does fit with the anti-Semite (anti-jewish) agenda.
Marine Le Pen's father, Jean-Marie Le Pen. He had a lot of weight in the political balance, and almost beat Jacques Chirac back in the 2002 presidential elections.
21499
Post by: Mr. Burning
flamingkillamajig wrote: LethalShade wrote: flamingkillamajig wrote:
On the subject of racism is this actual racism (people of certain races being beaten and specifically refused jobs for religious or ethnic reasons) or the accused racism for not having absolutely every job with absolute representation of all groups equally despite the proportions of people in the area and applying for such jobs and other such nonsense where joking about a stereotype equals instant racism or various other things.
Her father is a known anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, and the Front National attracts a lot of far-right extremists which are more or less openly racist (there were some Neo-Nazis IIRC).
Marine Le Pen tried for several years to hide these bad apples and "un-demonize" the FN (If this even means something).
Whose father? I find it very odd a holocaust denier would have any weight but that does fit with the anti-Semite (anti-jewish) agenda.
Personally I don't understand neo-nazis and how they crop up anywhere outside of Germany. Didn't the original Nazis think of anybody not german and not Aryan as sub-human. If you're French and supporting this it seems like you're supporting a group that didn't support you. I just don't understand. Or is being a neo-Nazi more about pro-white? I've heard lots of weird neo-Nazi groups (including a homosexual Russian neo-Nazi group) and many of them sound like they're made by groups of people with lower than average intelligence.
You have to forgive me if I don't always believe the racism route as I've heard people complain about racist words, depictions and so on that ends up being fairly mild by my tastes. Some days it feels like if you're white and you joke about middle eastern people driving taxis you'll get a stereotype and racism ban hammer of sorts. Almost like people have gone overboard with being offended to the point where if somebody suggests things aren't 100% equal in skill, traits, physical aspects and everything between the races in different places you'll just set some people's brains to short-circuit and fry with anger.
Neo Nazis geneally have strong anti Semitic feelings ala Hitler and his loveable bunch of scamps.
Neo Nazis
26412
Post by: flamingkillamajig
Well I find it odd that they'd have so much weight then. I don't think the usa has crazy groups with so much power. Certainly everybody heading that group can't all be that bad. It'd be hard to believe any group with such odd ideals coming to power.
I always thought neo-nazis were like Nazis in that they just didn't like anybody that wasn't white and possibly not german. I mean Nazis felt non-germans were inferior so it's an odd idea to want to join a group which hates you.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
flamingkillamajig wrote:Well I find it odd that they'd have so much weight then. I don't think the usa has crazy groups with so much power. Certainly everybody heading that group can't all be that bad. It'd be hard to believe any group with such odd ideals coming to power.
These are not official ideals. In recent days, most of the racism outbursts came from various minor FN personalities who "slipped" by comparing black people to monkeys or establishing a list of Muslim children in their town, etc.
21499
Post by: Mr. Burning
flamingkillamajig wrote:Well I find it odd that they'd have so much weight then. I don't think the usa has crazy groups with so much power. Certainly everybody heading that group can't all be that bad. It'd be hard to believe any group with such odd ideals coming to power.
I always thought neo-nazis were like Nazis in that they just didn't like anybody that wasn't white and possibly not german. I mean Nazis felt non-germans were inferior so it's an odd idea to want to join a group which hates you.
People do funny things when scared or pressured or they have had enough of the status quo.
I'd hazard a guess that FN in France are now getting votes from generally intelligent and and sane citizens. The true knuckle draggers were always voting for FN.
26412
Post by: flamingkillamajig
text removed.
reds8n
48412
Post by: treslibras
flamingkillamajig wrote:Well I find it odd that they'd have so much weight then. I don't think the usa has crazy groups with so much power.
Tea Party?
I mean, you have a legitimate chance that your next President will be Looney Trump. Need I say more? 
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Not sure what you expected to happen other than that. After some horribly, horribly led socialist years that caused huge problems in the country itself and drastically weakened the economy /and/ the islamistic terrorist attacks, this was bound to happen.
34390
Post by: whembly
If Tea Party is considered "crazy groups"... then they've been quite tame (other than fueling the rise of Republicanism during Obama's tenure).
I mean, you have a legitimate chance that your next President will be Looney Trump. Need I say more?
Trump doesn't really conform to a typical US politician... he's simply a *Media Personality* running for President.
Would it be crazy if he actually won? You betcha. Does he have a chance? I don't think so....
As for the NF in France... I wonder if it's more of a reaction to the Paris attack AND the voters rejecting the current ruling party than a desire to put NF in charge...
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
flamingkillamajig wrote: I've heard lots of weird neo-Nazi groups (including a homosexual Russian neo-Nazi group) and many of them sound like they're made by groups of people with lower than average intelligence.
If you think the Russian gay Nazis are weird, you haven't even seen the Russian Communist Nazis yet... Marx, Stalin and Hitler are all turning around in their graves with horror  Also in Russia: A liberal party that advocates collectivisation and state ownership of the means of production, a communist party that has allied itself with the church and a leftist progressive party that is racist and anti-immigration. And people still wonder why Russians vote for Putin
48412
Post by: treslibras
 Sigvatr wrote:Not sure what you expected to happen other than that. After some horribly, horribly led socialist years that caused huge problems in the country itself and drastically weakened the economy /and/ the islamistic terrorist attacks, this was bound to happen.
Well between Mitterand and Hollande there were Chirac and Sarkozy, and it is general agreement that Chirac in particular fethed up. Not saying that Hollande was not a loser, generally speaking, and Sarkozy not a practical joke played on the French but credit where credit is due. 
But I understand you need simple messages, and your message must be "socialists are bad", Siggi. So yes, of course everything and her mother is the socialists' fault. 
BTW, Nice avatar!
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
I'll keep it short to avoid overburdening you with complicated info, but economical changes tend to go into effect quite some time after they were made. France, under the socialist government, took a few of downright terrible decisions that satisfy the lower class voters, but will result in long-term loss of economic productivity...which is a problem because there /need/ to be more economically strong countries in the EU. Most EU countries are solely dependant on Germany and even its star is starting to dim. You cannot create political balance by having a political union mostly reliant on a single country.
What other countries do not realize is that once TTIP is through, they get a /huge/ problem as long-term trade relations with the US become much more attractive.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
godardc wrote:
So, any reaction ? Do you think the next French President(2017) will be a Front National one ?
It's a possibility if more attacks and deaths occur. I foresee a more of a compromising right-wing politician taking the popular votes rather than extreme one. Still, that's a move to a 'right wing' view. I have no idea how Frances's elections work so take that with a once of salt.
I've been wondering how things can keep going on like the are before Europe, says enough. I really can't see why Germany's politicians side with refugees over the safety of their own people. Its seriously nuts over there. Of course, we naïve citizens can't handle the truth so things are being played down here in the US because anything otherwise doesn't fit the media or government agenda.
There are similar parallels playing out here in the US. Your called a bigot and a racist if you don't support Muslim refugee relocation. Not sure why its like this anymore we're but we're being taught to be PC for the sake of being PC and big brother government will protect us from harm. I just see the potential danger and wonder is it worth 10, 20, 100 or 1000 deaths of our citizens. I live far from harm, being very rural. So I have very little fear of what's going on; real or perceived. I just think that should the worst happen would others lives be worth the risk. Left wing say yes. Right wing says no. How about their friends or family? who will take responsibility? surely the President would....doubtful.
San Bernardino is apparently being twisted into work place violence and a call for gun regulation. Mostly to deflect from the truth of the matter. I guess calling terrorism something incorrect like, Isolated incident or cultural misunderstanding, will help people feel safe. Surely, the loved ones of the fallen will feel comfort in that, right?
I can accept the label of racist and even coward, if it means I'm more concerned for my countrymen than some refugee. After all I'd rather be wrong and error on the side of caution than see one person die from terrorism on their home soil, even French and Germans.
95191
Post by: godardc
Your called a bigot and a racist if you don't support Muslim refugee relocation.
And this is why FN is so high.
The gooders called so many people racist so many times, they banalized it.
People can stand being told what they are allowed to think anymore.
I don't think the FN will loose momentum, because they are becoming more and more populareach year for a decade now.
This is not something new, but I agree the illegal aliens crisis made it easier for the FN.
The fact is, it is not in their official speechs, but Jean-Marie LePen, the founder, is a well-known anti semite (or at least, is viewed as one) and some random guys says bad things sometimes.
To give an idea, Marion-Marechal LePen (the beautiful young woman I used as an avatar !  ) said: "Musilm people can be French only, and only, on condition. The condition to respect and follow 16 century of Christianity..." etc etc.
Some think this is racist, some don't think so.
There is such a HUGE bashing everyday here in France, I don't knowif it is / it was / the same in your country for a party ?
Every artist, tv presenter, even newspapers give up profesional conduct to bash the FN^^
I just heard Germany will dissolute their own "FN" ? Is that true ? Just when the FN is about to lead and maybe prove they can rule correctly, Germany ensures it can never happens ... Such a disgusting and anti democratic decision...
4042
Post by: Da Boss
What do you guys propose should be done with refugees fleeing ISIS genocide?
Send them back?
Apparently the only help we can offer is the kind that explodes and kills everyone nearby.
23
Post by: djones520
 Da Boss wrote:What do you guys propose should be done with refugees fleeing ISIS genocide?
Send them back?
Apparently the only help we can offer is the kind that explodes and kills everyone nearby.
Provide more support for them. Honestly, it may just be time to start supporting Assad as much as it pains me to say it. His government is the only power in Syria that is "stable", relatively speaking. Our best bet would be to work with Russia, working to unite the "good" rebels, with the Syrian government, and then stomping out ISIS and the "bad" rebels behind a coordinated front.
This would hopefully enable a speedier resolution, and ensure there is a government in place to handle the refugees needs.
34390
Post by: whembly
We... and when I say *we*, I mean more than one country.
This is like Bosnia of the 90's... the U.N. need to get involved.
Also, collectively, does Syria as a country still exist?
Does Iraq??
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 whembly wrote:We... and when I say *we*, I mean more than one country.
This is like Bosnia of the 90's... the U.N. need to get involved.
Also, collectively, does Syria as a country still exist?
Does Iraq??
Iraq ? Yep, definitely. Syria, I'm not sure.
Does Libya still exist ?
95191
Post by: godardc
Maybe, they should fight for their country ?
I mean, there are about 30-50k terrorist, fighting 2 country.
Two country with MILLIONS of people.
It looks like a GW Space Marine battle when a squad conquers a planet...
How can 30k conquers tens of millions of people ?!
Did you see the migrants ? All youngs, mainly mens.
ISIS is just an excuse for them to come here and have more money.
I never liked Nasser (for example) but he tried to develop Egypt.
He didn't say: let's go to Europe to have more money !
Ok I know it is war, that's horrible and maybe if I were at war I would just cry.
But it can't be true for ALL OF THEM.
They choose to leave their country occupied, they don't deserve a good life.
And absolutely not a good life at my expense.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Assad is a murderous scumbag, but he's less of a murderous scumbag than ISIS. But defeating ISIS will probably not end the civil war in any kind of acceptable fashion.
I agree (beatnik pacifist scum that I am) that we need to do more to stop the war.
Send in troops.
Economic sanctions for Turkey, Saudi, and any other Gulf states that have large numbers of private citizens supporting ISIS.
UN supervision of the government.
AND take care of the refugees from the crisis like human friggin' beings.
We've got a bunch of Syrian refugees that come around to my school to learn English. Really nice, normal people, wouldn't look out of place in any supermarket. How we can shut the door to them is beyond me, given the situation. I read a story the other day about a family who went back to Syria from Turkey because they heard ISIS was not in their home region any more.
Their village got bombed by the Russians for not being supportive of Assad, and their five year old daughter and the nephew who tried to shield her with his body was killed.
godardc: You have no fething idea, do you? Which side should they fight for? Assad, who was brutalising them and denying them freedoms before, or one of the various rag tag militias fighting him and ISIS? Or ISIS?
I see the migrants - and they were a mix of middle aged people, kids, and yeah, young people. You know, people.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
godardc wrote:Maybe, they should fight for their country ? I mean, there are about 30-50k terrorist, fighting 2 country. Two country with MILLIONS of people. It looks like a GW Space Marine battle when a squad conquers a planet... How can 30k conquers tens of millions of people ?! Did you see the migrants ? All youngs, mainly mens. ISIS is just an excuse for them to come here and have more money. I never liked Nasser (for example) but he tried to develop Egypt. He didn't say: let's go to Europe to have more money ! Ok I know it is war, that's horrible and maybe if I were at war I would just cry. But it can't be true for ALL OF THEM. They choose to leave their country occupied, they don't deserve a good life. And absolutely not a good life at my expense.
We'll see what you do next time France is directly threatened ? Me ? I'll be abroad trying to live a normal life. Am I a coward ? Yep.
23
Post by: djones520
It's easy to say when you don't have several hundred guys with weapons marching through your town godardc.
These "millions" of people aren't there in one location. Daish is hitting town after town, using overwhelming force to conquer small areas in a rapid fashion.
It forces these thousands to flee with little more then the clothes on their backs, trying to stay one step ahead of the bad guys, never getting time to stop and organize.
This isn't something that is just centralized to the Middle East either.
http://ww2today.com/16th-june-1940-civilians-continue-to-flee-the-war
95191
Post by: godardc
Hey, I said "if I were at war I would just cry".
I was pointing that in two country, there must be some courageous people...
Look at the kurdish !
The solution is not to take everyone here.
If you throw millions of poor people in a country, the country will impoverish, and everyone will be poor.
Imagine, when the Peace will be here again on Syria and Iraqi: where will be all their engineers, their doctors, etc...
In Europe.
Because their elites will stay in Europe, for the most.
If you let them come in, it is bad for Europe AND bad for them.
Don't let your emotions take on your rationality.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
The migrants are mostly young men, but there is also older people and entire families with kids (and they are right here in my town)
They are not fleeing anymore though. Sure, most of them fled Syria for either ISIS, one of the so-called "moderate" groups or Assad's soldiers. But virtually all of them fled to Turkey. Turkey is safe. Their going from Turkey to Europe is not fleeing anymore, it is simply hope for a better life, which is an illusion. The refugees come here thinking there will be houses, jobs and lots of money for them. The truth is that they simply are sent to refugee centers (or given the current crisis and lack of space, emergency shelters in gyms, schools, hotels or abandoned buildings) just like in Turkey.
95191
Post by: godardc
This, exaclty what Captain Putin said.
There are others counties closest than France, Germany and England (and not as cold^^ )
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Turkey's capacity to deal with all of these refugees is simply not there.
The conditions in Turkey are not tenable.
I agree that the situation is far from ideal - emigration is devastating for the countries afflicted (I'm Irish, we know all about it).
But we've got to deal with the situation as is.
79243
Post by: Swastakowey
Da Boss wrote:Turkey's capacity to deal with all of these refugees is simply not there. The conditions in Turkey are not tenable. I agree that the situation is far from ideal - emigration is devastating for the countries afflicted (I'm Irish, we know all about it). But we've got to deal with the situation as is.
Wouldn't dealing with the situation as is be more about fixing the source of the problem instead of dealing with the results of the situation, while the situation keeps on going? Not only is immigration bad for the countries, it's also bad as a fix even short term and gets worse long term. If this is the current way of dealing with immigrants/refugees then it's easy to see why people are starting to vote for people who might actually do something about it over simply picking up the crap without removing the source of the crap. Regardless, if you support the refugees would it not be better to support a safer method of extraction, at the moment their journeys are pretty bad with bodies being found etc. It seems like the current solution is "we will help those who survive the journey". Imagine a firefighter doing that, waiting for those in danger to escape the burning house THEN helping them. It's not really helping them, it's just helping the fortunate bunch who had the resources or luck to get there. It also does nothing to save the burning house.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
Da Boss wrote:Turkey's capacity to deal with all of these refugees is simply not there. The conditions in Turkey are not tenable. I agree that the situation is far from ideal - emigration is devastating for the countries afflicted (I'm Irish, we know all about it). But we've got to deal with the situation as is.
Maybe it is different in Germany, but the Netherlands doesn't have the capacity either. They have been stuffing refugees in the weirdest of places all over the country because refugee camps simply are not large enough.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
No, "we" don't have to. It's the decision made by individual governments and they did not "have to" make those decisions.
In the end, I will be laughing my buttocks off in a notsolong time, when most Germans suddenly realize that #refugeeswelcome actually means #youpayforit. It already is extremely expensive and will be even more expensive. No tax cuts, in the contrary, you're looking at /way/ higher taxes. I'll enjoy the uproar. A lot.
98121
Post by: Morikun
Mon Cher Godardc,
J'ai pris le temps de parcourir l'ensemble de ce thread avant d'intervenir. J'avoue que je ne comprends pas bien ta démarche initiale à part vouloir faire la promotion du FN de façon faussement innocente :
"le FN a fait 30% qu'en pensez vous ? Est ce que vous pensez qu'on pourrait avoir un Président de la République FN ?"
Allons donc !!
Le FN n'a jamais progressé en France en raison de la justesse de ses idées ou de ses programmes : il a juste prospéré en raison du laxisme des autres partis politiques français qui ont chacun agité consciencieusement l'épouvantail qu'il représente afin de draguer des électeurs supplémentaires.
Le programme du FN ? Uniquement de la haine et la négation totale de l'autre que l'on habille avec le vernis de la laïcité ajoutées à la peur en reprenant des idées politico-racistes vieilles de 2 siècles.
Certes le FN a fait une sérieuse poussée aux élections régionales mais uniquement grâce aux abstentionnistes (1 abstentionniste sur 2, bravo !) et au contexte socio-politique actuel.
Depuis une cinquantaine d'années que le FN existe et que la famille Le Pen se plait à dénoncer les travers de la société française qui n'existent parfois que de façon putative, force est de constater qu'à l'opposé de leurs discours, ils n'ont jamais désiré le pouvoir sinon ils l'auraient déjà eu depuis longtemps et profitent du système.
Ils sont contre l'Europe ? Ils sont pourtant députés européens et profitent largement du train de vie qui va avec (indemnités tout ça...)... Ils ont même créé un groupe de travail avec d'autres partis politiques ouvertement racistes... Pour faire quoi ? Quels sont les travaux qu'ils ont publié à ce jour ?
Les Le Pen sont des patriotes proches du Peuple Français ? Pas compliqué d'être proches des "petits" quand on est millionnaires grâce aux ciments Lafarge entre autres.
Juste pour rappel, le FN n'est que l'héritier direct de mouvements politiques foncièrement racistes comme "jeune nation" et "ordre nouveau", des partis politiques qui se sont constitués à partir des cendres du IIIe Reich allemand et de la France de Vichy qui étaient encore chaudes.
Certes, les Le Pen ne sont pas les derniers des cons, certes ils ne disent pas que des conneries, certes tu as un avatar beaucoup plsu sexy que Marie Aubry mon cher Godardc mais le FN incarne tout sauf le renouveau et l'avenir de la France. C'est plutôt le contraire mais on le sait tous les deux.
Je ne te dénierai jamais le droit à la parole car j'ai toujours été partisan de la liberté d'expression et je l'utilise autant que je le peux... Mais le discours que tu tiens n'a absolument pas sa place sur un forum de figurines, même étranger (où les users ne sont pas forcément au fait de la situation exacte du FN) : aurais tu le courage de te pointer sur un forum français avec un tel avatar ? On connait tous les deux la réponse à cette question.
Rien de bon ne peut sortir de la haine et de la négation de l'autre. La Laïcité (la vraie, celle avec une majuscule) n'a jamais été d'imposer sa culture à l'autre mais de vivre ensemble en cherchant à les concilier... et ça a marché : à Jérusalem, avant que les croisés ne viennent y mettre le souk et tuer tout le monde au nom d'un Dieu qui a dû pas mal pleuré de voir les atrocités commises en Son Nom), il y avait eu un gouvernement tri-partite de chrétiens, de juifs et de musulmans qui vivait en parfaite harmonie... Ah oui et tant que j'y suis, les populations juives et musulmanes sont présentes en France depuis l'Antiquité où elles ont favorisé l'essor de celle-ci notamment grâce aux échanges commerciaux... Alors au temps pour "la France pays de race blanche" hein...
Nous ne sommes pas du même bord politique mon cher Godardc et ta tentative faussement naïve de faire la promotion du FN sur Dakka Dakka me donne la nausée. C'est dommage car en d'autres circonstances, nous aurions pu avoir des conversations beaucoup plus enrichissantes... d'autant plsu que tu peins très bien.
Serviteur,
Morikun
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Sigvatr: Of course, you are also right. There will be a large economic cost to helping these people, and we will all pay for it. And there will likely be uproar from people who haven't thought that far ahead.
But when millions of people are displaced by war and disaster, it is not humane to turn your face away. If it costs, and it's difficult, them's the breaks. It sucks, and we will probably have problems stemming from these decisions for a long time, but the alternative is worse.
On "we should do more than just take refugees" I actually agree fully. I am normally anti-military intervention, and Syria is a goddamned vipers nest of factions and fanatics, but I think given that the major powers all agree and the UN has given the go ahead, we should take ISIS on, and leave a peace keeping force to stop Assad brutalizing his own people when we're done. That will also be expensive and difficult, but ISIS have to be fought. Lobbing a few bombs from aircraft won't cut it.
But I'll say again, they should be fought by every means we have - economic, military and social. Sanctions on Turkey and the Gulf states who support them are required. Taking care of displaced refugees and showing them that "the West" is not the monster some think it is, and unfortunately, putting soldiers in harms way is part of this.
It's hypocritical of me to want military action when I know I will not be required to fight, too. I know that. But I reckon this situation needs resolving, and we all have to share the cost.
22162
Post by: HudsonD
So, for those of you who can't read French, Morikun is basically writing directly to Godarc, and claiming he's promoting the FN under cover of "honest discussion", and breaking a few of the myths around the FN, like how easy it is to look like you care for blue-workers' interests, when you've inherited your money...
Having read the whole wall of text, I have to say his claims are very valid and his explanations well backed.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Morikun : Bien dit. C'est mieux formulé que tout ce que j'aurais pu écrire.
TF;DR (Too French;Didn't Read) : Well said.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Da Boss wrote:Sigvatr: Of course, you are also right. There will be a large economic cost to helping these people, and we will all pay for it. And there will likely be uproar from people who haven't thought that far ahead.
That's the important difference - it will not be all of us who pay for it. It will hit those the hardest that we actually need the most: the middle class and, apart from them, lower classes too. Statistically, single parents will be among the top suffering. In Germany, as a small company, small entrepreneur or middle-class worker, you very quickly end up paying roughly 50% taxes. I, for example, pay an effective tax rate of 15-20% because I, and others in the upper class, have the means to do so. Those refugees will cost billions, a lot of billions, over the year as most of them are highly unqualified, can, of course, not speak German and thus need governmental support, or not even speak English and thus be useless in regards to the working force. The middle class are the ones who will pay for them and it's not going to be pretty. The current government's policy of not having a policy will significantally weaken Germany's economy and thus the entire EU.
The smarter move, as usual, would have been to first force all states to take part in taking refugees and then act upon such a decree. Right now, it's chaos and even the public opinion starts to sway against the government's policy of "Oi, come everyone!", heavily fueling the right side of politics (European right) with the AfD now hovering around 11%, more than doubling in a short time.
As stated in another thread, the problem is that most people just react emotionally to it and are too short-sighted to see that taking more than 1.000.000 refugees might make you feel better in the short run, but will make you feel bad in the long run.
Anyway, as I said, I will enjoy it. Actually, I am already starting to profit from it as prices for housing started to rise quite remarkably and owning several of them...hah. Furthermore, the increased need for security highly satisfies our company and if worse comes to worst, we'll just bail and re-locate to the US.
98121
Post by: Morikun
So, for those of you who can't read French, Morikun is basically writing directly to Godarc, and claiming he's promoting the FN under cover of "honest discussion", and breaking a few of the myths around the FN, like how easy it is to look like you care for blue-workers' interests, when you've inherited your money...
Having read the whole wall of text, I have to say his claims are very valid and his explanations well backed.
Thank you very much my Dear Hudson.
I beg the pardon of those who can't read French. That's right I would like to re-focus the debate on an important point : the Front National (aka "FN") is NOT and will NOT be the ideal of the French Republic. I won't lie : we, in France, must face to a very strong politics crisis + social crisis because of the Daesh attacks of the november 13th. Peoples are affraid, peoples have the impression to be left on their own... BUT the FN is not and will NOT the answer.
Maybe you, foreigners, would not have a very good information about the FN on your media (for us, french, the KKK from USA, Forza Padania from Italy or the Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands from Germany for examples are just "some extremists groups" but the truth in details are more even dark) but FN is everything but fight for blue-workers interests.
The main credo of FN has always been "foreigners go home or get out and keep out" (except if you're white and christian). All politics partys in France use it to lauch fear on peoples to win several elections... But nothing, really nothing could grow on the fear, the hate and racism.
(And just for your information : if Godardc would come with his avatar on french fora, he perfectly knows that he would be banned in 5 sec. Would you wear "KKK" or "NPD" as an avatar ? I don't think so.)
Excuse me for my bad english please.
Morikun : Bien dit. C'est mieux formulé que tout ce que j'aurais pu écrire.
Merci mon Cher LethalShade.
Voir ce genre de topic s'étaler jusque dans un forum de figurine, c'est proprement écœurant... Surtout qu'avec son air faussement innocent, Godardc prend les étrangers pour des cons. J'espère qu'au 2e tour des élections régionales le peuple français va se réveiller !!
Habituellement je ne fais pas de politique... Mais là il ne faudrait pas déconner non plus : ou est "Je suis Charlie" ? Plus que jamais nous devons défendre notre devise : "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité". Jamais les extrémismes ne parleront au nom de la France !
Serviteur,
Morikun
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
 Sigvatr wrote: Da Boss wrote:Sigvatr: Of course, you are also right. There will be a large economic cost to helping these people, and we will all pay for it. And there will likely be uproar from people who haven't thought that far ahead.
That's the important difference - it will not be all of us who pay for it. It will hit those the hardest that we actually need the most: the middle class and, apart from them, lower classes too. Statistically, single parents will be among the top suffering. In Germany, as a small company, small entrepreneur or middle-class worker, you very quickly end up paying roughly 50% taxes. I, for example, pay an effective tax rate of 15-20% because I, and others in the upper class, have the means to do so. Those refugees will cost billions, a lot of billions, over the year as most of them are highly unqualified, can, of course, not speak German and thus need governmental support, or not even speak English and thus be useless in regards to the working force. The middle class are the ones who will pay for them and it's not going to be pretty. The current government's policy of not having a policy will significantally weaken Germany's economy and thus the entire EU.
The smarter move, as usual, would have been to first force all states to take part in taking refugees and then act upon such a decree. Right now, it's chaos and even the public opinion starts to sway against the government's policy of "Oi, come everyone!", heavily fueling the right side of politics (European right) with the AfD now hovering around 11%, more than doubling in a short time.
As stated in another thread, the problem is that most people just react emotionally to it and are too short-sighted to see that taking more than 1.000.000 refugees might make you feel better in the short run, but will make you feel bad in the long run.
Anyway, as I said, I will enjoy it. Actually, I am already starting to profit from it as prices for housing started to rise quite remarkably and owning several of them...hah. Furthermore, the increased need for security highly satisfies our company and if worse comes to worst, we'll just bail and re-locate to the US.
And once the refugees have been integrated and Keynesian economic effects have been included? Then what? You're talking up all the costs while completely ignoring the economic advantages.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Da Boss wrote:I agree (beatnik pacifist scum that I am) that we need to do more to stop the war.
Send in troops.
Whose troops? Automatically Appended Next Post: Da Boss wrote:AND take care of the refugees from the crisis like human friggin' beings.
We are taking care of the refugees. We can send more food, supplies, medical assistance, etc. The only objection to Syrian refugees is that we do not have any soft of system to detect hostile infiltrators who have threatened to carry out terrorist attacks. Automatically Appended Next Post: Da Boss wrote:I agree that the situation is far from ideal - emigration is devastating for the countries afflicted (I'm Irish, we know all about it).
Thank you for taking up the mantle and speaking on behalf of the Irish community...
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Morikun : You're exaggerating a bit. As much as I despise the Front National, I feel obligated to point out that they are not comparable to the KKK.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
Da Boss wrote:What do you guys propose should be done with refugees fleeing ISIS genocide?
Send them back?
Apparently the only help we can offer is the kind that explodes and kills everyone nearby.
Yes, UN safe zone communities have been done before and successfully. However, we also must declare war on ISIS and frack them up so hard, they realize they should have never been born. They want the Wrath of God then give it to them, Reign fire on them. But, since we have a an apologist $uss$ for a president it'll never happen.
98121
Post by: Morikun
LethalShade wrote:Morikun : You're exaggerating a bit. As much as I despise the Front National, I feel obligated to point out that they are not comparable to the KKK.
Really ? Ok FN is not burning crosses but behind the varnish of the democratic debate, ideology is the same : hate, fear, homophobia... and Marine Le Pen is weel known to accept some of very violent guys that support national-socialism/white power... Despite the fact that she pretended to ban this way of thinking.
Some of the racial groups such " Le Bloc Identitaire" are not so different from the "white hoods" I mean... Even if the FN is not (officially) Le Bloc identitaire...
I don't reproach to Godardc his politics opinion but I don't agree the fact that he tries to disguise the truth.
Serviteur,
Morikun
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
 Rune Stonegrinder wrote: Da Boss wrote:What do you guys propose should be done with refugees fleeing ISIS genocide?
Send them back?
Apparently the only help we can offer is the kind that explodes and kills everyone nearby.
Yes, UN safe zone communities have been done before and successfully. However, we also must declare war on ISIS and frack them up so hard, they realize they should have never been born. They want the Wrath of God then give it to them, Reign fire on them. But, since we have a an apologist $uss$ for a president it'll never happen.
How did that Shock and Awe work out last time?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
 Dreadclaw69 wrote: Da Boss wrote:I agree (beatnik pacifist scum that I am) that we need to do more to stop the war.
Send in troops.
Whose troops?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote:AND take care of the refugees from the crisis like human friggin' beings.
We are taking care of the refugees. We can send more food, supplies, medical assistance, etc. The only objection to Syrian refugees is that we do not have any soft of system to detect hostile infiltrators who have threatened to carry out terrorist attacks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote:I agree that the situation is far from ideal - emigration is devastating for the countries afflicted (I'm Irish, we know all about it).
Thank you for taking up the mantle and speaking on behalf of the Irish community...
A UN force of troops from different nations is the best idea with regard to troops.
The problem of infiltrators is a real one, alright, but it is just not a good enough reason to close the door to refugees.
And you are welcome - I'm happy to speak for the Irish community on Dakka whenever you want. (Seriously, are you going to argue that emigration has historically been a positive for Ireland?!)
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
When improperly done it does not make for an effective bludgeon. If your going to "Shock and Awe" or "Reign Fire" you don't tie one hand behind your back. You show your enemy not only was he wrong to challenge you, but that he had no chance EVER. Playing patty cake in the sand only makes him think he had a chance. If our leadership wasn't so weak they'd be less incline to do anything.
Question: Why aren't middle eastern christian refugees allowed entry?
79481
Post by: Sarouan
Well, it's the same in Belgium. Recent events were kinda gold for the NVA, that is exactly the same (if not worse) than FN in France.
I don't think it's just a matter of fear, but also a feeling of "having enough with it". People know politicians in charge are useless, so they give their vote to someone else who was out of power for a very long time.
Holland? Sarkozy? You seriously expect people choosing only one of those? FN is the answer; not Holland and PS, not Sarkozy and its UMP (changing the name doesn't mean they're not the same thing than before).
And yes, it will make things worse (not, Right Wing isn't right but obviously there are a lot of people wanting to believe their lies). But then, History likes to repeat itself...
Won't be surprised if the next war comes in a near future. Ignorance is spreading fast, unfortunately.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
Is it Ignorance that given the opportunity these many of the refugees would persecute other Muslims for not following their pure version of Islam? Or, that they support the death of all other religions and infidels even if they don't want to pull the trigger themselves?
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
Is it Ignorance that given the opportunity these many of the refugees would persecute other Muslims for not following their pure version of Islam? Or, that they support the death of all other religions and infidels even if they don't want to pull the trigger themselves?
Isn't "Refugees are all terrorists" on the Dakka Bingo already ?
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
Not sure what dakka bingo is....
But would supporting terrorist actions make you a terrorist? let me ask you this. Nazi sympathizers are they/were they just as bad as the Nazi's or not?
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Wait what ? How could refugees all support terrorists if they're fleeing from them ? + Dakka Bingo : It is outdated though.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
And once the refugees have been integrated and Keynesian economic effects have been included? Then what? You're talking up all the costs while completely ignoring the economic advantages.
The cost of such a project are so high that it will take generations to even, in an ideal situation, get close to "getting back" what was paid for. The problem with applying Keynes in this case is the German welfare system that pays people for...just being there. Rent, food, electricity, water, etc. That's why immigration needs to be controlled. There are extremely qualified refugees who were doctors or scientists back in their home. Pay more attention to /those/ people! They are high priority immigrants because they will gladly integrate and appreciate getting back into their former job, in another country. That is money well spent. Controlled immigration is good immigration and that also goes along with refugees. Create safe zones and then, properly, work through them, prioritizing those that are most beneficial. Yes, that will mean living in, compared to ours, poor living conditions, but that still is far better than the life they fled from.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
LethalShade wrote:Wait what ? How could refugees all support terrorists if they're fleeing from them ?
I never said ALL
I stated:
"Or, that they support the death of all other religions and infidels even if they don't want to pull the trigger themselves?"
To support something you only need to believe that what someone else does is right or just? Thus, you are just as bad/evil as they are.
so I asked...Nazi sympathizers are they/were they just as bad as the Nazi's or not?
If yes then ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE IDEAL OF GENOCIDE for religion is as bad as a terrorist even if they have zero desire to pull the trigger themselves.
Just as Nazi sympathizers by supporting the Nazi's are just as guilty of the Holocaust.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yGN8SlIEZ8
she might as well be a terrorist. she supports death.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Rune Stonegrinder wrote: LethalShade wrote:Wait what ? How could refugees all support terrorists if they're fleeing from them ?
I never said ALL
I stated:
"Or, that they support the death of all other religions and infidels even if they don't want to pull the trigger themselves?"
To support something you only need to believe that what someone else does is right or just? Thus, you are just as bad/evil as they are.
so I asked...Nazi sympathizers are they/were they just as bad as the Nazi's or not?
If yes then ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE IDEAL OF GENOCIDE for religion is as bad as a terrorist even if they have zero desire to pull the trigger themselves.
Just as Nazi sympathizers by supporting the Nazi's are just as guilty of the Holocaust.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yGN8SlIEZ8
she might as well be a terrorist. she supports death.
So what ? Prison or death penalty for everyone ?
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
LethalShade wrote: Rune Stonegrinder wrote: LethalShade wrote:Wait what ? How could refugees all support terrorists if they're fleeing from them ?
I never said ALL
I stated:
"Or, that they support the death of all other religions and infidels even if they don't want to pull the trigger themselves?"
To support something you only need to believe that what someone else does is right or just? Thus, you are just as bad/evil as they are.
so I asked...Nazi sympathizers are they/were they just as bad as the Nazi's or not?
If yes then ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE IDEAL OF GENOCIDE for religion is as bad as a terrorist even if they have zero desire to pull the trigger themselves.
Just as Nazi sympathizers by supporting the Nazi's are just as guilty of the Holocaust.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yGN8SlIEZ8
she might as well be a terrorist. she supports death.
So what ? Prison or death penalty for everyone ?
I never suggested that.
79194
Post by: Co'tor Shas
LethalShade wrote:Wait what ? How could refugees all support terrorists if they're fleeing from them ? + Dakka Bingo : It is outdated though.
Try this. I think Ouze does it. http://www.grimdarkforge.com/bingo/ Automatically randomizes too.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
I know, I'm just too tired to argue properly and refrain myself from exaggerating.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
For me it's one of the questions society needs too but can't fully answer.
Other than to fell good about ourselves and to say we did a good thing, why are we welcoming a can of bees into our countries? Why is it ok to risk peoples lives to feel good about ourselves, saying its a just sacrifice for freedom? whose sacrifice yours, mine, or some random person on the street? Is your life worth importing someone who wants genocide or supports death on a genocidal scale? What ratio of peaceful Muslim vs. non-peaceful Muslim makes the risk ok?
Neither of us have the answer, but at the end of the day I enjoy a good argument.
79481
Post by: Sarouan
Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
Why is it ok to risk peoples lives to feel good about ourselves, saying its a just sacrifice for freedom? w
Because doing otherwise is exactly playing the game of terrorists, that's why. They want us to be afraid, to change our way of life and our beliefs. If we do, they are winning.
Killing them to the last? What's the point if you give them even more followers by acting like the monsters they're saying we are?
It's when we stop acting like humans that humanity is lost. IMHO, of course...but still, I believe more people should have this in mind more often, nowadays.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
 Sarouan wrote: Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
Why is it ok to risk peoples lives to feel good about ourselves, saying its a just sacrifice for freedom? w
Because doing otherwise is exactly playing the game of terrorists, that's why. They want us to be afraid, to change our way of life and our beliefs. If we do, they are winning.
Killing them to the last? What's the point if you give them even more followers by acting like the monsters they're saying we are?
It's when we stop acting like humans that humanity is lost. IMHO, of course...but still, I believe more people should have this in mind more often, nowadays.
Except that will do nothing to stop them. It will not stop their flow of recruits. It will just allow them to get stronger, to continue radicalizing the local population, spread into more neighboring countries, and slowly take over those countries. Then they will have more freedom to radicalize people living here in the West and/or send more terrorists to infiltrate us.
79481
Post by: Sarouan
I didn't say we have to just watch them doing what they want. But the day people will understand we are all on the same planet and that the troubles of others are actually affecting us in the end will be a great day. Sure, you could stay safe in your rich, safe country while thinking everything outside of it doesn't concern you, but there will be a time that way of thinking will have a price. This is just the beginning.
And no, I don't think bombing everything is the right solution. This will just make them right in their beliefs. You should ask why they manage to find young people ready to die for their cause. This isn't just brainwashing - to be ready to die is like having nothing to lose in this life and everything to gain with their death.
It gives a lot of desperation - or wish of redemption - to come to that ending.
But yeah, you can just say "feth this, let's put all our rage on innocent people trying to find a better life elsewhere". It will not solve anything, however.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
Sarouan wrote: Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
Why is it ok to risk peoples lives to feel good about ourselves, saying its a just sacrifice for freedom? w
Because doing otherwise is exactly playing the game of terrorists, that's why. They want us to be afraid, to change our way of life and our beliefs. If we do, they are winning.
Killing them to the last? What's the point if you give them even more followers by acting like the monsters they're saying we are?
It's when we stop acting like humans that humanity is lost. IMHO, of course...but still, I believe more people should have this in mind more often, nowadays.
There are other options that worked I the past, so again. Why risk someone else's life, It's easy to risk your own life out of bravery, but can you live with the responsibility that you caused peoples death? How about if children were to die for that belief?
Oh and refugees have been historically refused entry in this country before.
No one ever said we need to ignore them, hate them, or not help them. We're just saying not here.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Da Boss wrote:A UN force of troops from different nations is the best idea with regard to troops.
And which nations will have the impartiality and expertise to navigate and restore order between Syria, Turkey, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, France, UK, USA, Iraq, the Kurds, ISIS, and all those other wonderful state actors?
Do you think that Russia will accept a UN security force and not use their veto?
Will the UN have another opportunity to spread Cholera among a refugee population?
Da Boss wrote:The problem of infiltrators is a real one, alright, but it is just not a good enough reason to close the door to refugees.
The calls have been to establish actual screenings for refugees. Instead of actually addressing legitimate concerns the counter has been that dissenters are scared of orphans and women. No serious calls have advocated for just closing the doors. That sort of false dilemma helps no one.
Da Boss wrote:And you are welcome - I'm happy to speak for the Irish community on Dakka whenever you want. (Seriously, are you going to argue that emigration has historically been a positive for Ireland?!)
You're claiming special authority to speak on a matter merely because of your country of origin, that is what is being objected to. Don't try and deflect.
79818
Post by: bound for glory
My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
42342
Post by: Smacks
Breotan wrote:It's hard to blame people for adopting protectionist attitudes.
In the same way it's hard to to blame people for throwing water on a grease fire. I understand why people do it, but it's still tragically ignorant and dangerous.
21971
Post by: Mozzyfuzzy
bound for glory wrote:My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
Citation needed?
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
bound for glory wrote:My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
If you're so worried about us, how about you stop stalling and take more of the refugees?
50541
Post by: Ashiraya
Our country's being destroyed? Good to know, we didn't notice.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
bound for glory wrote:My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
And if they bite you, you become a refugee too ?
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
So I guess we're taking Sweden off the map now it's gone?
98121
Post by: Morikun
bound for glory wrote:My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
???
How can someone writes such words ?! O_O'
Ragnarok is coming ? Does that means the sweddish are running away on drakkars to invade one more time Europe ? (in this way, are they invaders or refugees too ?)
What a good atmosphere near Xmas in approach...
Serviteur,
Morikun
39188
Post by: Bullockist
bound for glory wrote:My wife has family in sweden. That country has been destroyed by "refugees". Rape, murder, general destruction.
And all because the people can't speak out against these animals that have flooded the country.
I was all ready to go off like a bomb on your statement, but then i looked up the figures.
Sweden is about the highest per capita of refugees. the closest seems to be germany with another 50 natives per refugee.
Maybe sweden is experiencing the troubles of absorbing too many people from wartorn countries at once.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
 Bullockist wrote:I was all ready to go off like a bomb on your statement, but then i looked up the figures.
Its like WOW isn't it?
Mainstream Media will not report it because it doesn't, follow their agenda...nor the governments agenda apparently.
Should we ignore them....no
Should we hate them...no
Should we help them....Sure
Do they need to come to our countries to cause problems....No, but they are.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Jihadwatch ? Muslimstatistics ?
Sure look like impartial and objective sources.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Sweden and Germany are struggling to integrate so many, for sure. Which is why it would be nice if a few more countries (including my own) stepped up to help out a bit more instead of plugging their fingers in their ears.
Germany gets a lot of stick for it's leadership role in Europe, but France is practically signed out under Hollande and Britain basically pretends like it's not part of the club, so I dunno what Germany is supposed to do.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
You get an F on your course in providing objective sources. Try again, taking into account that Sweden has one of the broadest definitions of rape in the world and that differences in internal reporting practices between police authorities in different countries make cross-country comparisons difficult even if one is doing it properly, which you aren't even near.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Da Boss wrote:Sweden and Germany are struggling to integrate so many, for sure. Which is why it would be nice if a few more countries (including my own) stepped up to help out a bit more instead of plugging their fingers in their ears.
Germany gets a lot of stick for it's leadership role in Europe, but France is practically signed out under Hollande and Britain basically pretends like it's not part of the club, so I dunno what Germany is supposed to do.
Why? That creates a heterogeneous culture with inherent increases in violence, crime, and breaking in the social cohesion. While it also creates distinct advantages, why do cultures that don't want that have to have it?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Because there's a genocidal war going on?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Actually its a turf war. And? Whats new? There are also similar conflicts in Libya (way to go there guys), and Central Africa with Boko Haram and Al Shabab. There is also a conflict in Ukraine, intertribal conflicts in Africa, the conflict in Burma, and Central America is a kill zone.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Your point is?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Humans are evil. As a result we have horrific wars going on all the time. Are you arguing Europe and the US have a duty to collect all refugees?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
We have a duty to collect refugees who make it to us, yes.
There will hit some point where we have to say "Alright, we took as many as we could, but we can't take any more" if there is a flood like the one from Syria focused on one or two countries.
But that point comes a lot further along than the pitiful numbers that some of our EU "partners" have suggested.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Why do they have that duty? How is putting refugees in an alien environment without skills better for the refugees? What is the impact of the high percentage of adult males in the group have? How are they going to be employed and productive members of where they end up? What about the native populations there now?
Note I am not trying to be jerk, I am asking on a philosophical basis. As a Texan these things have massive impacts that you should be aware of and should not be blithely ignored, but discussed before you do the deed.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
I have previously stated....
That they need help and even said we should help, and they should not be hated. Just not in our countries. That's my belief.
Truth is a three edged sword: Right, Left, Truth. Liberal media is all unicorns and rainbows, conservative media is all doom and gloom. I may not be in the middle where truth lies, but I'm far closer than anyone who refuses to see danger in "migration" or ignores the problems that are occurring because of it.
If increased rapes of native women, beating of native people (teen boys mostly) and Christian refugees, Increased crime by "migrants", forced displacement of native people by their own government to make room for "migrants" is acceptable. Then keep on keeping on.
I got it. Its ok to ignore the safety and rights of native citizens and to place Christian refugee in harms way all for the sake of being politically correct and feeling good about yourselves.
Peace out I'm done here!
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Refugees who exhibit criminal behavior should be swiftly expelled, of course. However refugees as a whole should still be allowed in.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
Find me a 100% unbiased source and I'd gladly read it. I watch the news at night so I got the liberal side. I look on line and find the conservative side. last time I check there were no unbiased middle news sources. So I have to attempt to interpret the middle
Sorry now I'm done
221
Post by: Frazzled
LethalShade wrote:Refugees who exhibit criminal behavior should be swiftly expelled, of course. However refugees as a whole should still be allowed in.
They won't be if history is a guide.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Ah, I see where you are coming from with this now, Frazzled.
Hmmm. Well, yes, it is a big problem. And it does not have a perfect, neat solution.
I think saying no to everyone on principle is not the solution though.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Da Boss wrote:Ah, I see where you are coming from with this now, Frazzled.
Hmmm. Well, yes, it is a big problem. And it does not have a perfect, neat solution.
I think saying no to everyone on principle is not the solution though.
Then how do you address these concerns?
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
The fact that no one is completely unbiased does not mean that we should look to the worst possible sources imaginable. Again, you can't just claim that the high incidence of rape in Sweden is due to immigration and then just stubbornly keep repeating it when people point out that the sources you linked were biased as gak and that your methodology is off by so much that you risk hitting Papua New Guinea instead of Sweden. There's no argument to be had if you cannot adhere to even the basics of proper sourcing and methodology.
95191
Post by: godardc
Hi there,I'm back^^
Wow, I didn't think the thread would be that kind of thread.
To Morikun (I'm speaking english for everyone to understand):
Hi, Morikun, If you are the Morikun I think you are, I very surprised and pleased (Temple de Morikun ?) !
So,
In fact, I am very curious of what others countries think about France, their biases etc... I often read english/american news on the Internet to have their point of view (I had this idea following the riots in 2005 when I saw a US news covering this issue).
When I made this thread, I wanted to be really objective and just to know what the other countries had heard about the FN and France, as it is a contested party on the verge to lead a big country.
I even put a quote of Marion Marechal LePen I consider a bit "extreme", attacking EVERY muslim and not just the extrem ones.
But I agree with you, I may have lost objectivity and diverted my own topic.
I beg you to believe I didn't intended to make the pub/advertise for the FN on a non-French forum, I mean, they can't even vote ^^
Nevertheless, I will be more cautious in the future.
It is a bit overpowered to compare the FN to the KKK, the FN is totally legal, when the KKK is openly racist, and thus, illegal in France.
And, unfortunately, I'm only on this forum^^
About the refugees Crisis: I think this thread highlights why the extrem are winning in Europe: people, with the same arguments which are being said here, are afraid. Afraid of loosing their jobs to people willing to work for cheapers, afraid of being raped by "uncivilized outlandish", afraid to loose their identity...
And the Europeans elites have the exact same arguments than these on Dakka Dakka: there isn't any problem, we HAVE to take all of them etc...
It is a total lack of understanding, and the only parties to speak the same language than the people, on this issue, are the extrem.
Maybe we have done with this thread, I mean, it seems we have said everything about France, FN and illegal immigration ?
79818
Post by: bound for glory
Sorry boys, i went to bed before you all started to mock my wife.
I can only repeat what her family members have told her.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
bound for glory wrote:Sorry boys, i went to bed before you all started to mock my wife.
I can only repeat what her family members have told her.
We're not mocking your wife, we're mocking the opinion that Sweden is collapsing. We had a 3.9% increase in GDP (2.8% per capita) the third quarter 2015 compared to the same period 2014, unemployment is going down, and an increase in GDP since 1993 of a whopping 50%, despite handling two economic crises and the refugee waves from the Balkans and now Syria and Afghanistan.
Source in Swedish, quoting the Swedish equivalent of the Census Bureau.
221
Post by: Frazzled
godardc wrote:Hi there,I'm back^^
Wow, I didn't think the thread would be that kind of thread.
To Morikun (I'm speaking english for everyone to understand):
Hi, Morikun, If you are the Morikun I think you are, I very surprised and pleased (Temple de Morikun ?) !
So,
In fact, I am very curious of what others countries think about France, their biases etc... I often read english/american news on the Internet to have their point of view (I had this idea following the riots in 2005 when I saw a US news covering this issue).
When I made this thread, I wanted to be really objective and just to know what the other countries had heard about the FN and France, as it is a contested party on the verge to lead a big country.
I even put a quote of Marion Marechal LePen I consider a bit "extreme", attacking EVERY muslim and not just the extrem ones.
But I agree with you, I may have lost objectivity and diverted my own topic.
I beg you to believe I didn't intended to make the pub/advertise for the FN on a non-French forum, I mean, they can't even vote ^^
Nevertheless, I will be more cautious in the future.
It is a bit overpowered to compare the FN to the KKK, the FN is totally legal, when the KKK is openly racist, and thus, illegal in France.
And, unfortunately, I'm only on this forum^^
About the refugees Crisis: I think this thread highlights why the extrem are winning in Europe: people, with the same arguments which are being said here, are afraid. Afraid of loosing their jobs to people willing to work for cheapers, afraid of being raped by "uncivilized outlandish", afraid to loose their identity...
And the Europeans elites have the exact same arguments than these on Dakka Dakka: there isn't any problem, we HAVE to take all of them etc...
It is a total lack of understanding, and the only parties to speak the same language than the people, on this issue, are the extrem.
Maybe we have done with this thread, I mean, it seems we have said everything about France, FN and illegal immigration ?
Just a note, while I can tell you are ESL (English as a Second Language) my complements on your ability to use English. I appreciate the many non-US posters who attempt the difficult step of posting in a different language - more brave than I am.
(I especially appreciate the British who attempt British to English... )
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
AlmightyWalrus wrote:The fact that no one is completely unbiased does not mean that we should look to the worst possible sources imaginable.
Really, I believe that I state that in an above post. Three edged sword and all. I see what the news say AND AMERCIAN NEWS IS WORTHLESS BECAUSE IT IS EXTREMELY BIASED, so I search on the internet I SEE BIASED CONSERVITVE NEWS or sources with alternate agendas. I see no trustworthy sources, so I am left to find a middle ground between: unicorns and Rainbows and Doom and Gloom.
The article for Sweden stated 77% increase in rapes committed by a 2% Muslim minority, and well we know that libtards will say its 0% or close to that or play it off as cultural misunderstandings. So, I need to at least assume; because I can't find an unbiased or better statistical source, that 30%-40% increase rapes committed by most likely...Muslims....Still a lot of fracking raping. You say Sweden has a loose definition of rape. So what are they varying degrees of sexual assault? Does that make it better?
To be honest if a source came up stating we tell only the fact and try to eliminate bias I'd find such a source refreshing and I have hopes that I'm wrong and they'd be able to show me proof.
we can argue till we puke, we do not have the power to stop anything. I said I was done and I made another reply sorry but this time I'm truly done. sorry to cause a flame argument.
79194
Post by: Co'tor Shas
You know, this is a great way to get people to ignore what you say.
37231
Post by: d-usa
That's the kind of thing that makes you think someone ignores "liberal" news which are "biased" simply because they don't say what someone wants to hear.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
The article for Sweden stated 77% increase in rapes committed by a 2% Muslim minority, and well we know that libtards will say its 0% or close to that or play it off as cultural misunderstandings. So, I need to at least assume; because I can't find an unbiased or better statistical source, that 30%-40% increase rapes committed by most likely...Muslims....
Bollocks. You came to that conclusion because it fit your worldview. The only thing you "had" to do was conclude that all you had was far-right sources bashing immigration and that you thus didn't really have a clue. You could have searched on Wikipedia to get the same answers I gave you, with multiple sources. You'd even find some sources in there supporting your claim about immigrants and rape, so the fact that Wikipedia is doing a better job of arguing your point in two minutes than you are really ought to tell you that you're missing something.
21971
Post by: Mozzyfuzzy
bound for glory wrote:Sorry boys, i went to bed before you all started to mock my wife.
I can only repeat what her family members have told her.
Nobody mocked your wife, what we mocked was the use of the "I have an X" argument, to justify whatever comment you made. As it's kind of a bad precursor to an argument and doesn't exempt you from what you followed it up with.
98121
Post by: Morikun
@ All : excuse my very bad english please.
@ Godardc :
To Morikun (I'm speaking english for everyone to understand):
Hi, Morikun, If you are the Morikun I think you are, I very surprised and pleased (Temple de Morikun ?) !
Yes, I'm the Morikun you think I am.
In fact, I am very curious of what others countries think about France, their biases etc... I often read english/american news on the Internet to have their point of view (I had this idea following the riots in 2005 when I saw a US news covering this issue).
Sure. This is always intersting to know about how we'are seen in foreign countries. I won't arguing about that. We can even learn a lot from them (and sometimes more than we could expect).
When I made this thread, I wanted to be really objective and just to know what the other countries had heard about the FN and France, as it is a contested party on the verge to lead a big country.
I even put a quote of Marion Marechal LePen I consider a bit "extreme", attacking EVERY muslim and not just the extrem ones.
But I agree with you, I may have lost objectivity and diverted my own topic.
I beg you to believe I didn't intended to make the pub/advertise for the FN on a non-French forum, I mean, they can't even vote ^^
Nevertheless, I will be more cautious in the future.
Really ? Maybe you would have been more objective starting not wearing Marion Maréchal- Le Pen aka the 3rd leader of the FN as your avatar ? If you love blond women to put them as your avatar, I think there are plenty of pics (with clothes or not) which can match your choice.
The FN is (and has been) always contested because he NEVER promotes French Republic Values and he has never been "the first" in France. That's right Jean-Marie Le Pen (the 1st leader) reached the first round of the french presidential elections on the 2002/04/21 but he has been kicked down by Jacques Chirac by 82% of votes. This being said, the FN has always been "the third" in french elections (he could thank very much the poor turnout at elections years after years only).
You would have been very objective if you started by saying that this is the first turn of the regional elections and this sunday there is the second turn and as always, except (maybe) in the North region or PACA region, FN will be (fortunately) kicked down. You would have been very objective if you inform Dakka Dakka Users that your avatar is MArion Maréchal- Le Pen, the 3rd leader (to avoid getting only comments "wow dude she's cute indeed !!"). You would have been really objective if you told all the truth about FN (ok they want to exit from Europe... But the leaders are in european parliament with all the benefits attached) : they claim they're patriot but they hate foreigners...
I think your path is longer than you expect about being "more objective" you know ?
It is a bit overpowered to compare the FN to the KKK, the FN is totally legal, when the KKK is openly racist, and thus, illegal in France.
Oh dear !! Please : don't insult my intelligence please... And don't insult yours will you ? If it's right that KKK is not a political party, it is composed with a lot of lots of organizations : some are illegal... and other are absolutely well known and legal. More : in USA the freedom of opinion is higher than in France. That's why a guy can wear a KKK symbol without immediately being arrested.
In France ? The freedom of opinion is fortunately more restrictive : you can think what you think in your private life (if you want to support FN, I don't mind, it's up to you) but you can't show it in public... if it could hurt other peoples. I won't teach you that FN is all but tolerant : FN is openly racist : you can ask any followers : the excuses are known : they love France, they want it strong, they want a better life...etc etc etc... and just after this beautiful words, the solutions are always the same : no jews, no muslims, no mosques, no foreign people (except tourists who came in France to spend their money before come back home), no Europe... no ... no... etc etc etc...
Must I remind you all files were FN was prosecuted for racism ? Jean-Marie Le Pen is well known for its little words about nazis, gas chambers, supporting the Maréchal Pétain etc etc etc... And look at his friends : Alain Mégret, Alain Soral, Dieudonné... All this peoples are violent racists. Must I remind you all the guys near Marine Le Pen known for their nazi salute on facebook pages, their words against no-white peoples etc etc etc ??
Well, if you really dont think that FN is not openly racist it's very amazing indeed !! Keeping that in mind, maybe, after all, Donald Trump is a really good and gentle man, the perfect next President of the USA who would the perfect man for keeping peace in the world...
FN will never be the solution because he use hate, fear, violence (spoken or not) and lies.
You have the absolute right to speak about what you want but as long you'll wear such an avatar like yours and don't tell the entire truth (more than all to foreigners that are not awared precisely about FN, I'll never trust you when you tell me "I wanted to be really objective and just to know what the other countries had heard about the FN and France, as it is a contested party on the verge to lead a big country. "
Serviteur,
Morikun
42342
Post by: Smacks
Rune Stonegrinder wrote:The article for Sweden stated 77% increase in rapes committed by a 2% Muslim minority, and well we know that libtards will say its 0% or close to that or play it off as cultural misunderstandings.
I'm fairly liberal (or completely libtarded if you prefer). But I don't think something like that should be played down at all. However, one thing I've realized in my time here arguing on dakka is that statistics are incredibly untrustworthy. Even completely honest reputable studies can be presented in ways that support almost any argument. For example: in many of the gun control arguments, people who are in favour of gun rights cite figures that say gun ownership is going up while crime is falling, thus proving that there is no connection between guns and rising crime (or even a negative correlation). People on the other side of the debate point out that while there are more guns than ever, they are being owned by fewer and fewer people, so in fact the number of households with a gun has been falling, along with crime, thus proving their side of the argument. So you see, the same figures are being presented differently to support diametrically opposing views. Rune Stonegrinder wrote:So, I need to at least assume; because I can't find an unbiased or better statistical source, that 30%-40% increase rapes committed by most likely...Muslims....
The words "assume", "can't find", and "most likely" aren't instilling a great deal of confidence in this argument. It doesn't even sound like you are that confident in it yourself, there seems to be an awful lot of uncertainty. If we're going to start "hypothesizing" then I find a good rule of thumb is to look at people's motivations and agendas. Do they have something to lose or gain? Do they have a reason to lie? As a liberal, I find I have little reason to lie about refugees. I don't wake up in the morning and think "Hey! You know what would just make my fething day? A whole bunch of smelly refugees costing me money!". The reason I'm in favour of helping these people is because I don't want to turn my back on people who might really need our help. It's not just about "feeling good", because I don't feel especially good about it. Reluctantly, in fact, I know it's the right thing to do. It's like the man said: "do unto others", I wouldn't want people to turn their back on me if I were in their situation. I concede that it may bring social problems, it may mean I'm a little worse off than I was before, doing the right thing isn't always easy. On the other side of the argument there is a lot of fear, there is racism, there are a lot of people who don't want to share, who think "the right thing" is looking out for themselves. I think those people have a lot of reasons to lie. If you want to start speculating on "who do I trust", right there is a big red flag. Rune Stonegrinder wrote:To be honest if a source came up stating we tell only the fact and try to eliminate bias I'd find such a source refreshing and I have hopes that I'm wrong and they'd be able to show me proof.
That's not really how arguments work. You made quite an extraordinary claim, which displayed all the hallmarks of fear-mongering (red flag). The burden of proof is now on you to persuade us (the reader) that what you said has any real merit. Otherwise you're just Chicken Little, saying the sky is falling.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
There's also the compare violent crime fun. "Look, yours is higher" when "yours" reports far more things under violent crime than "theirs".
39550
Post by: Psienesis
Crass said all that needed to be said about National Front in 1977...
... spoilered for video with NSFW lyrics. It's Crass, what else were you expecting?
98121
Post by: Morikun
Yaba-daba-dooo !! ^^
My Dear Fellowes,
I am very proud and very happy to inform you that the 2nd round of the french regional elections has ended tonight... an the front national has been totally erased !! He looses all the regions he might win !!
No region will belongs to the FN and this is a very good new for the french democracy !!
As I said before (contrary to Godardc who tried to confuse you), the FN never has been the 1st party in France and will never !!
So, try again FN... and loose again !!
How I would like all FN supporters open their eyes and see that they would never build any democracy on hate, fear and racism basis...
Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité pour toujours !!
Serviteur,
Morikun
62229
Post by: Minx
 Morikun wrote:I am very proud and very happy to inform you that the 2nd round of the french regional elections has ended tonight... an the front national has been totally erased !! He looses all the regions he might win !!
No region will belongs to the FN and this is a very good new for the french democracy !!
...
Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité pour toujours !!
Good news indeed. Well done France!
30305
Post by: Laughing Man
While I'd normally say gloating is unbecoming, the FN really is rather slimy...
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Good news: FN is out.
Bad news: This was only possible because of another party gaming the system.
Really on the fence on this one. We can agree that the FN is, mostly, consisting of idiots and better not being at the power. On the other hand, it's not a good sign if you can only force them out of the elections by undemocratic methods.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Maybe you should addres their concerns.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Now you need to tackle what feeds them.
Adress the issues they obviously are making traction on and are resonating with people as if they did not this would not happen..
, and only trickery kept them out. Still massive problems at Calais, UK truckers are basically calling it a warzone at times. Tunnel has had to become a fortress, port too.
Its a victory, but the war is all still to play for. There a long way from defeated.
21720
Post by: LordofHats
Sigvatr wrote:Good news: FN is out.
Bad news: This was only possible because of another party gaming the system.
Really on the fence on this one. We can agree that the FN is, mostly, consisting of idiots and better not being at the power. On the other hand, it's not a good sign if you can only force them out of the elections by undemocratic methods.
We have our obscure party dynamics here in the US, that have largely prevented political radicals from gaining traction in general elections at the national level (why most of our Presidential and Congressional elections in particular are usually between political moderates, regardless of how people mud sling). It's not very democratic, but pure democracies have a tendency to spiral into madness. Arguably, a pinch of undemocratic power gaming infuses a degree of harsh pragmatism into a system that left to its own devices tends to be self destructive.
EDIT: To borrow a phrase, Democracy dies when people lose all sense. Some things that would otherwise be distasteful can be useful as a means to prevent such an outcome.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Sigvatr wrote:Good news: FN is out.
Bad news: This was only possible because of another party gaming the system.
Really on the fence on this one. We can agree that the FN is, mostly, consisting of idiots and better not being at the power. On the other hand, it's not a good sign if you can only force them out of the elections by undemocratic methods.
As far as I understood they got ousted because the Socialist party, realizing that they wouldn't win, encouraged their voters to vote for Republican candidates to keep the FN out. If the Republicans get more votes, how is that undemocratic?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
It's not solving the problem of the FN increasing support, so that still needs to be addressed.
I think a bigger question is the shocking amount of apathy and cynicism among the french population which allows the FN to prosper.
Glad they didn't increase their grip though. But this "gaming" of the system will feed the anger and resentment of FN voters.
Shameful on Sarkozy to accept votes from the Socialists but to refuse to take part in the pact in seats where socialists were likely to beat a FN candidate. Did he backtrack on that? He's a slimeball nearly as odious as Le Penn.
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
As I understand it, the Socialist Left was almost wiped out, forcing Leftists to vote tactically for mainstream conservatives. They might not have taken power themselves, but I think the Front Nationale can see that as a small victory, because they've shifted French politics closer to their end of the spectrum.
Now the question remains, will the French government bother to tackle the issues that have fed into the FN's rise? Or will they continue to allow political correctness to obstruct national interest?
The Front Nationale are not the real problem here, they are the symptom of the backlash against the failure of Left Wing policies.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:As I understand it, the Socialist Left was almost wiped out, forcing Leftists to vote tactically for mainstream conservatives. They might not have taken power themselves, but I think the Front Nationale can see that as a small victory, because they've shifted French politics closer to their end of the spectrum.
Actually the Socialist Party and the Republican-UDI alliance both took/kept 7 regions. Nobody really won or lose these elections.
What's baffling though is the percentage of non-voters (50% for the first round, around 40% for the second one).
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
Nothing baffling about it. People are so disillusioned with mainstream politics that they're either turning to fringe parties, or they're just not bothering to vote. We're seeing the same thing to a lesser degree in Britain.
The established parties in Britain, France and elsewhere have been an abject failure in the last decade.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
AlmightyWalrus wrote: As far as I understood they got ousted because the Socialist party, realizing that they wouldn't win, encouraged their voters to vote for Republican candidates to keep the FN out. If the Republicans get more votes, how is that undemocratic?
A representative democracy is intended to allow people to vote for the people they want to see in charge. Gaming the system by, at the last second, withdrawing most candidates people wanted to see / vote for and thus forcing them to vote for another mainstream party, you nullify their intended votes. This is undemocratic as you are denied the vote you intended to do and are forced to redirect it another party indirectly chose. Now, the end result, as I said, is good, but I'm not sure if a good result justifies abusing / exploiting the system. In the end, the belief in democracy is what keeps the system working and it's already fading with voting participation in the main EU countries being at an all-time low.
98121
Post by: Morikun
You're absolutely right : If we can say that Democracy is a little saved, We must pay attention to the fact that the Right won just because the Left called to vote for the other side.
We'va got a real problem in France with politic men who only search for being elected and don't work for the French People...
Sarkozy is nothing but the shame avatar : while the Left called to vote for the Right in territories threatten by the FN, he refused to do so... Fortunately he was not entire obeyed but the facts are here.
Democracy could make that the Right could win the nextpresidential elections... But everything but Sarkozy !!
Serviteur,
Morikun
21720
Post by: LordofHats
I'd argue it's only really undemocratic if we assume political parties don't have rights of their own, namely the right to put forward and withdraw candidates of their own volition. On the one hand, that right means that parties can deny the people the ability to pick who they want, but at the same time we can't really compel someone/ones to put forward candidates they don't want.
It was most certainly gaming the system, but I think it's a leap to assume that is automatically undemocratic. Politicians and political parties have rights as well.
89522
Post by: Dropbear Victim
 LordofHats wrote:I'd argue it's only really undemocratic if we assume political parties don't have rights of their own, namely the right to put forward and withdraw candidates of their own volition. On the one hand, that right means that parties can deny the people the ability to pick who they want, but at the same time we can't really compel someone/ones to put forward candidates they don't want.
It was most certainly gaming the system, but I think it's a leap to assume that is automatically undemocratic. Politicians and political parties have rights as well.
But do political parties rights trump the rights of the electorate?
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
LordofHats wrote: It was most certainly gaming the system, but I think it's a leap to assume that is automatically undemocratic. Politicians and political parties have rights as well.
RIght are not responsibilities. In a democratic system, parties are supposed to serve the public, not the other way around. Promoting anything but this as a party undermines the political principle modern states are built upon.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
So when the party realizes that they're not going to win, they go into damage control and attempt to serve the public by lessening as much of the damage they percieve will be done as possible. How is that undemocratic?
21720
Post by: LordofHats
AlmightyWalrus wrote:So when the party realizes that they're not going to win, they go into damage control and attempt to serve the public by lessening as much of the damage they percieve will be done as possible. How is that undemocratic?
^^^ This
Everyone has responsibilities, and certainly some matter more than others, but societies ability to force responsibility is limited. Usually we judge that issue by what is considered best for the public good, but what bests serves the public good is often a matter of opinion as much as fact. Politicians and political parties do not lose their right to self determination by sheer virtue of being political. Especially given the size of a modern state, we can't really operate via direct democracy, which is why we have parties in the first place.
Further, I'd argue that parties do not serve the public interest, nor is it their responsibility. Parties serve their own interest, namely to get their members elected so said members can serve the public interest in whatever way the party/member feels is best. Parties exist in representative systems to leverage and broker power between the political elite, which sounds exactly like what happened in this election. Power was brokered by parties who realized that something bad was about to happen, so they pushed their support to a group that they viewed would prevent that end.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back....
They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily.
There not gone by a long shot.
221
Post by: Frazzled
jhe90 wrote:Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back.... They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily. There not gone by a long shot.
More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
98121
Post by: Morikun
Yeah. That's right : we have a big problem about wath we call the "Jungle of Calais".
The great idea of Sarkozy (when he was our President), was to close it destroying poor houses here. "If we destroy it, immignants would run away"...
But the main problem that immigrants never wanted to stay in France : they always wanted to go to the UK or Scandinavia. The problem is the same and immigrants are still here... But they don't have temporarly houses.
This is a big shame for us... for France... the "Land of the Man Rights"...
Serviteur,
Morikun
84405
Post by: jhe90
All the trouble from the jungle migrant camps near Calais. Population is now near 7000, trying to enter uk by breaking into trucks, caravans or force access to tunnel and port by breaching security to enter UK to claim asylum.
Truckers routinely run gauntlets of migrants trying to force on board, some have had rocks thrown at windows, uk has spent millions to bolster security, every night groups are trying to enter uk to claim asylum, only to do so you have to "break in"
Regular running battles with truckers, cops, migrants, tear gas and riot police often are deployed to stop them.
Camp is growing from 1,500 early summer to 7000 now, very few getting through. Camp population is growing daily, too many people stokes trouble. UK put up a massive set of fencing, miles of razor wire and steel barriers, people come but less leave.
Jungle is a illegal camp French tolerate near Calais on old waste ground. Kept alive by small charities, food, clothes, build shelters etc. Its a slum.
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
 Frazzled wrote: jhe90 wrote:Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back....
They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily.
There not gone by a long shot.
More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
Whoever told you that is a liar.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Frazzled wrote: jhe90 wrote:Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back....
They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily.
There not gone by a long shot.
More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
Whoever told you that is a liar.
EU wants you to think that...
In real life we can be just as fethed up as USA with less guns!
98523
Post by: LethalShade
jhe90 wrote: Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Frazzled wrote: jhe90 wrote:Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back....
They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily.
There not gone by a long shot.
More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
Whoever told you that is a liar.
EU wants you to think that...
In real life we can be just as fethed up as USA with less guns!
Come near Paris, you'll doubt about the "less guns" part.
84405
Post by: jhe90
LethalShade wrote: jhe90 wrote: Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Frazzled wrote: jhe90 wrote:Ignore them all you want however if you do not tackle the root cause that they feed off they will be back....
They still have alot of support, and the situation there using is not going away any time soon. Calais is a warzone at times, hundreds still land on Greece daily.
There not gone by a long shot.
More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
Whoever told you that is a liar.
EU wants you to think that...
In real life we can be just as fethed up as USA with less guns!
Come near Paris, you'll doubt about the "less guns" part.
OK , so we are just as fethed..... No wonder Paris is currently got security on extreme setting.
221
Post by: Frazzled
This is why if you don't address their concerns the revolution will come. Its a weird day when I agree completely with Robert Reich:
The Revolt of the Anxious Class
Posted: 12/14/2015 4:03 pm EST Updated: 12/14/2015 4:59 pm EST
MIDDLE CLASS SHRINKING
Share 109
Tweet
Comment 42
Share on Google+
Print
The great American middle class has become an anxious class -- and it's in revolt.
Before I explain how that revolt is playing out, you need to understand the sources of the anxiety.
Start with the fact that the middle class is shrinking, according to a new Pew survey.
The odds of falling into poverty are frighteningly high, especially for the majority without college degrees.
Two-thirds of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Most could lose their jobs at any time.
Many are part of a burgeoning "on-demand" workforce -- employed as needed, paid whatever they can get whenever they can get it.
Yet if they don't keep up with rent or mortgage payments, or can't pay for groceries or utilities, they'll lose their footing.
The stress is taking a toll. For the first time in history, the lifespans of middle-class whites are dropping.
According to research by the recent Nobel-prize winning economist, Angus Deaton, and his co-researcher Anne Case, middle-aged white men and women in the United States have been dying earlier.
They're poisoning themselves with drugs and alcohol, or committing suicide.
The odds of being gunned down in America by a jihadist are far smaller than the odds of such self-inflicted deaths, but the recent tragedy in San Bernadino only heightens an overwhelming sense of arbitrariness and fragility.
The anxious class feels vulnerable to forces over which they have no control. Terrible things happen for no reason.
Yet government can't be counted on to protect them.
Safety nets are full of holes. Most people who lose their jobs don't even qualify for unemployment insurance.
Government won't protect their jobs from being outsourced to Asia or being taken by a worker here illegally.
Government can't even protect them from evil people with guns or bombs. Which is why the anxious class is arming itself, buying guns at a record rate.
They view government as not so much incompetent as not giving a damn. It's working for the big guys and fat cats -- the crony capitalists who bankroll candidates and get special favors in return.
When I visited so-called "red" states this fall, I kept hearing angry complaints that government is run by Wall Street bankers who get bailed out after wreaking havoc on the economy, corporate titans who get cheap labor, and billionaires who get tax loopholes.
Last year two highly-respected political scientists, Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, took a close look at 1,799 policy decisions Congress made over the course of over twenty years, and who influenced those decisions.
Their conclusion: "The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy."
It was only a matter of time before the anxious class would revolt.
They'd support a strongman who'd promise to protect them from all the chaos.
Who'd save jobs from being shipped abroad, slam Wall Street, stick it to China, get rid of people here illegally, and block terrorists from getting into America.
A strongman who'd make America great again -- which really means make average working people safe again.
It was a pipe dream, of course -- a conjurer's trick. No single person can do this. The world is far too complex. You can't build a wall along the Mexican border. You can't keep out all Muslims. You can't stop corporations from outsourcing abroad.
Nor should you even try.
Besides, we live in a messy democracy, not a dictatorship.
Still, they think maybe he's smart enough and tough enough to pull it off. He's rich. He tells it like it is.
He makes every issue a test of personal strength. He calls himself strong and his adversaries weak.
So what if he's crude and rude? Maybe that's what it takes to protect average people in this cruelly precarious world.
For years I've heard the rumbles of the anxious class. I've listened to their growing anger -- in union halls and bars, in coal mines and beauty parlors, on the Main Streets and byways of the washed-out backwaters of America.
I've heard their complaints and cynicism, their conspiracy theories and their outrage.
Most are good people, not bigots or racists. They work hard and they have a strong sense of fairness.
But their world has been slowly coming apart. And they're scared and fed up.
Now someone comes along who's even more of a bully than those who for years have bullied them economically, politically, and even violently.
The attraction is understandable, even though misguided.
If not Donald Trump, then it will be someone else posing as a strongman. If not this election cycle, it will be the next one.
The revolt of the anxious class has just begun.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
Frazzled wrote:More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
I think the word you were looking for is “Switzerland”. As in “Switzerland is a haven of safety”.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Frazzled wrote:More info on this "Calais is a warzone" thing? I'm constantly told Europe is a haven of safety, not like Evilz America.
I think the word you were looking for is “Switzerland”. As in “Switzerland is a haven of safety”.
...or Luxembourg.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
Do citizen in Luxembourg get assault rifles like citizen in Switzerland do? Else it's going to ruin the narrative .
37231
Post by: d-usa
What about Liechtenstein, I like that Ulrich fellow from there...
62229
Post by: Minx
Liechtenstein has been accidentally invaded by Swiss troops at least once in the last ten years; doesn't really sound like a safe haven
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
 Minx wrote:
Liechtenstein has been accidentally invaded by Swiss troops at least once in the last ten years; doesn't really sound like a safe haven
How do the Swiss accidentally invade anything?
37231
Post by: d-usa
 Grey Templar wrote: Minx wrote:
Liechtenstein has been accidentally invaded by Swiss troops at least once in the last ten years; doesn't really sound like a safe haven
How do the Swiss accidentally invade anything?
Probably a LT in charge of navigation, all those mountains do kind of look alike...
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Haven't the borders been the same for a couple hundred years? Seems like there wouldn't be any excuse for that.
62229
Post by: Minx
Grey Templar wrote: Minx wrote:
Liechtenstein has been accidentally invaded by Swiss troops at least once in the last ten years; doesn't really sound like a safe haven
How do the Swiss accidentally invade anything?
Some soldiers got lost during a manoeuvre in thick fog. At least that was their excuse / that's what i remembered.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Minx wrote: Grey Templar wrote: Minx wrote:
Liechtenstein has been accidentally invaded by Swiss troops at least once in the last ten years; doesn't really sound like a safe haven
How do the Swiss accidentally invade anything?
Some soldiers got lost during a manoeuvre in thick fog. At least that was their excuse / that's what i remembered.
There's a line on a map, that line in the real world is not always marked and fog can be very deceptive... A border post can be 20m,s away marking the line and never see it
34390
Post by: whembly
Heh... I see Marine Le Pen taking flak for tweeting/posting pictures of ISIL execution propaganda, in response to some French show that compared NF to ISIL.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
Yeah, that's mostly useless fuss imho.
“Much ado about nothing”, I think you English-speaker would say.
|
|
