Support NeoGAF

[jorma]

Of course ... thing is it isn't illegal to openly criticize these homophones and sexists ... unless of course they're Muslim.

Where is it illegal to criticize muslim homophobes?

 

[Always-honest]

I criticise people quite often. On various things. None of my criticism involves deportation, taxes on clothing, book banning or any other such thing.

I don't think he is talking about criticism, he is talking about bringing into law the kind of restrictions that are the hallmark of old school European fascist movements. Mass deportation, book banning, ethnic registration.... is that criticism to you?

yeah, he has some stupid ideas, i agree.
That´s not critism, no. Please try to stay sane. I´m not his messenger and im not him.

I´m also out of here. Can´t stand these emotional nonsense reactions, and this thread is heading there swiftly.

I agree with him on some points, but I refuse to believe that his approach is the right way to solve the problems most west European countries are facing. Although I don't really see other political parties solving the problems soon, so I guess he has a good reason shouting nonsense every now and then.

I have to say I really oppose his ideas about ' AOW-gerechtigde leeftijd', foreign policy and education. But that is not his core business.

No, it only leads to agression. especially with people who are easily agressive.

 

[OttomanScribe]

While this is true, it is exactly this line of thinking that has caused an immigration problem in the Netherlands. People looking for wealth were invited to come here when we needed them. The problem was there weren't any restrictions. So wives, kids etc could also come over. After years this became a problem, but a problem that could not be discussed.
It could not discussed because 'we' had an evil colonial past.

Because the immigration problems could not be discussed an asshole like Wilders could rise and get shitloads of votes. There IS a problem with immigration, this problem could never ever be discussed (then you'd be called a racist) so the problem festered and as a result we have Geert.

In recent years, Dutch immigration policy has been changing, since as early as 1998 restrictions were increasingly enacted in order to limit the flow of immigration. Immigration is now drastically reduced, so I don't know what you mean when you say that it hasn't been discussed, it clearly has been discussed enough to have a bunch of laws changed.

 

[AppleSmack]

I'm surprised how much support this guy is getting for very discriminatory views. He is basically proposing that the Netherlands become a Western Saudi Arabia. Banning the Quran? Taking away non-westerners right to vote? Seriously?

 

[Furret]

Why is it a problem?

That is a two part question, the first is why is it deemed a problem by you, the second is why does it occur.

Would you say that it might possibly have something to do with the wealth of Europe? Are these people coming from wealthy countries, going to Europe for the weather or the cultural heritage? Or are they coming seeking oppurtunities?

Why would they seek oppurtunities? Could it be that Europe is wealthy?

Why is Europe wealthy and these countries not? Could it possibly have something to do with the brutal colonialism fostered by European countries for more than a hundred years? Colonialism that devastated economies, while Europe got fat off the proceeds of blood money?

If Europeans didn't want people coming to Europe to seek a better life, maybe they shouldn't have created the conditions for that to occur?

Do you have any solutions that don't involve a time machine and/or a gross misunderstanding of history?

 

[OttomanScribe]

yeah, he has some stupid ideas, i agree.
That´s not critism, no. Please try to stay sane. I´m not his messenger and im not him.

I´m also out of here. Can´t stand these emotional nonsense reactions, and this thread is heading there swiftly.

The way I see it is that you placed it as an issue of 'criticising Islamic people', I think that it is less 'criticism' and more the things that you agree are not criticism that are the problem here.

Which of these responses would you say are 'emotional nonsense reactions'?

 

[Casp0r]

Again, that word, 'criticism'. Does book banning sound like critique to you? Does ethnic registration?

People seriously stretch the definition.

Who are you and why are you quoting me?

I was replying to badcrumble's post ... not you and definitely not book banning.

However since you bring that up, Muslims don't seem to give a shit that the bible is banned in numerous Islamic countries ...

Until they stand up in their own countries, their own mosques and their own homes for these very ideals of free speech, equality and tolerance ... people like Geert Wilders will continue to garner support.

 

[OrangeYouGlad]

Who are you and why are you quoting me?

I was replying to badcrumble's post ... not you and definitely not book banning.

However since you bring that up, Muslims don't seem to give a shit that the bible is banned in numerous Islamic countries ...

Until they stand up in their own countries, their own mosques and their own homes for these very ideals of free speech, equality and tolerance ... people like Geert Wilders will continue to garner support.

Doing something because they did it doesn't make you any better.

 

[jorma]

Who are you and why are you quoting me?

I was replying to badcrumble's post ... not you and definitely not book banning.

However since you bring that up, Muslims don't seem to give a shit that the bible is banned in numerous Islamic countries ...

Until they stand up in their own countries, their own mosques and their own homes for these very ideals of free speech, equality and tolerance ... people like Geert Wilders will continue to garner support.

1: Where in the west is it illegal to critizise muslim homophobes (repeat qeustion)
2: These numerous islamic countries that bans the bible, what countries are they?

 

[lexi]

And yet if he were assassinated, Van Gogh style, people would blame HIM, and not the people who killed him.

Now that's bigotry.

 

[Enosh]

1: Where in the west is it illegal to critizise muslim homophobes (repeat qeustion)

well aperantly in the netherlands given that Wilders is on trial for what's basicly blasphemy
a show trial at that, that was proven to be one big political atack more than once

Why is Europe wealthy and these countries not? Could it possibly have something to do with the brutal colonialism fostered by European countries for more than a hundred years? Colonialism that devastated economies, while Europe got fat off the proceeds of blood money?

Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden etc never had a colonial empire ala the UK yet are still rich nations so your argument that european nations are rich due to exploiting of their colonies falls apart right there

 

[Kabouter]

I'm not seeing it. Moderate muslims can still live the way they always have. He's trying to curb the spread of Islamic culture in the Netherlands, and rightfully so, even though I don't agree with all his methods.

The spread of Islamic culture? The CBS (The Dutch statistics bureau) predicts that at most they will comprise eight percent of the Dutch population. HEAVENS NO, THEY WILL TOTALLY DOMINATE THE OTHER 92%!

Not to mention that, you know, the notion of there being an 'Islamic culture' is ridiculous.

He has a point, why shouldn't Europe be for the Europeans? immigration from the middle east and africa into Europe is a big problem.

Europe indeed does have one massive issue with immigration, the flow of immigrants into Europe is entirely insufficient to make up for disastrous birthrates. Personally, I'd like to retire before I hit 75. An economy can't run on senior citizens.

Of course, to actually deal with a significant flow of immigrants, there needs to be a society adapted to dealing with the challenges it brings. And one should do anything from strictly enforcing already existing laws to making it more attractive for employers to hire employees on the lower end of the economic ladder by lowering taxes in the right ways. Restricting benefits for the first few years of people being here could also help.

And there is of course plenty of evidence for the focus on Islam being ridiculous, because we see all the problems visible in for instance the Moroccan community to a stronger degree in the Antillean community. Even higher unemployment, higher crime rates, and the general view on things like homosexuality isn't exactly different between the two communities.

The problems just simply aren't unique to Muslims, they are cultural and economic problems prevalent in immigrant groups from all low-opportunity countries. But the fact of the matter is that we do need people, and not a few, and as such we should adjust our government to deal with such an influx and presence in the best way possible. And of course, some will say we should simply get more people from rich countries, but surprise surprise, you're never going to get any significant numbers from countries people have no major incentive to leave.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Do you have any solutions that don't involve a time machine and/or a gross misunderstanding of history?

Feel free to come at me on the history angle I lost a debate on it recently and I'm looking to regain some pride.

Solutions? Who is talking about solutions? I am talking about reality. The movement of people is a reality of history and society. This is especially true considering the legacy of colonialism. The question was 'why shouldn't Europe be for the Europeans', that was my answer.

Who are you and why are you quoting me?

My name is Will, and I am quoting you in order to respond to what you said, which I disagreed with.

I was replying to badcrumble's post ... not you and definitely not book banning.

This is what Geert Wilders is advocating, and part of the reason that he has been taken to court. So it is certainly an apt response, since you were under the impression that what is illegal is 'criticising Muslims', which is not illegal.

However since you bring that up, Muslims don't seem to give a shit that the bible is banned in numerous Islamic countries ..

You are going to have to back this up. Which countries, show me a single one.

Until they stand up in their own countries, their own mosques and their own homes for these very ideals of free speech, equality and tolerance ... people like Geert Wilders will continue to garner support.

So you are saying that until Muslims preach free speech, equality and tolerance, people in europe will not do the same? What a strange thing, I thought the whole point was showing that Europe had the superior culture?

 

[Chuckie]

In recent years, Dutch immigration policy has been changing, since as early as 1998 restrictions were increasingly enacted in order to limit the flow of immigration. Immigration is now drastically reduced, so I don't know what you mean when you say that it hasn't been discussed, it clearly has been discussed enough to have a bunch of laws changed.

No only the entry of new immigrants has been discussed, not the problems with immigrants already living here.

 

[Enosh]

Europe indeed does have one massive issue with immigration, the flow of immigrants into Europe is entirely insufficient to make up for disastrous birthrates. Personally, I'd like to retire before I hit 75. An economy can't run on senior citizens.

this can be simply solved with genourus benefits for couples with children, daycare centres that alow people to work and have people take care of their children, tax breaks etc etc, basicly make it easy for people with multiple children

but ofcourse the politicians went with "lets bring in more skilles people, that will fix everything" as if people leaching off welfare will allow you to retire anytime soon

 

[Kabouter]

this can be simply solved with genourus benefits for couples with children, daycare centres that alow people to work and have people take care of their children, tax breaks etc etc, basicly make it easy for people with multiple children

but ofcourse the politicians went with "lets bring in more skilles people, that will fix everything" as if people leaching off welfare will allow you to retire anytime soon

Yes, that is what many European politicians thought too when many years ago they implemented all those in many different countries. The effect has been negligible. The only way to solve the problem at this point is immigration. (Or doing wacky things like banning birth control)

 

[OttomanScribe]

He is not on trial for blasphemy, he is on trial for inciting hatred and vilification.

Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden etc never had a colonial empire ala the UK yet are still rich nations so your argument that european nations are rich due to exploiting of their colonies falls apart right there

Germany never had a colonial empire? I'll tell New Guinea right away

Denmark, Sweden and Norway were enriched through trade with colonial states, trade which occured on an equal footing. They did not suffer the unequal trade that was pushed upon colonial holdings, nor did they suffer the devastation to the economy that came with that. Through investement and military power, they maintained independence from colonial rule, directly benefiting from colonisation that they did not directly take part in.

 

[jorma]

well aperantly in the netherlands given that Wilders is on trial for what's basicly blasphemy
a show trial at that, that was proven to be one big political atack more than once

Wilders was on trial for critizising muslim homophobia?

 

[OttomanScribe]

No only the entry of new immigrants has been discussed, not the problems with immigrants already living here.

It seems that they have been discussed extensively. Not just by Wilders but more generally.

 

[SmokyDave]

Hate breeds hate breeds more hate.

That's why I run a hate farm. Business is good.

 

[Arjen]

And yet if he were assassinated, Van Gogh style, people would blame HIM, and not the people who killed him.

Now that's bigotry.

I'm sure that if Wilders would be assaninated like van Gogh, the shitstorm would be massive and whoever would step up as succesor to him would win an insane amount of votes.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Denmark, Sweden and Norway were enriched through trade with colonial states, trade which occured on an equal footing. They did not suffer the unequal trade that was pushed upon colonial holdings, nor did they suffer the devastation to the economy that came with that. Through investement and military power, they maintained independence from colonial rule, directly benefiting from colonisation that they did not directly take part in.

Correction: Denmark and Norway had shared colonial holdings in Africa, the Carribean and India. These were given up when Norway was given to Sweden following the Napoleonic wars.

Sweden had colonial holdings in East Africa and the Americas.

 

[Bento]

Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden etc never had a colonial empire ala the UK yet are still rich nations so your argument that european nations are rich due to exploiting of their colonies falls apart right there

Well Sweden did own an island called Saint Barthélemy (bought by King Gustav the Third in 1784) that was used as a trade port for slavery across the Atlantic ocean and the Swedes that lived there even had slaves themselves. Absolutely not as expansive as the colonial rule of the British, Dutch or Portuguese but we dipped our toes

EDIT: Might have been more even if Ottoman Scribe is correct, that was the only one I knew off.

EDIT2: With that said though I don't think the deeds of the past forces us into being irresponsible with our borders today. After all, a poorly thought immigration plan is something that strikes against everyone in society (well not the rich perhaps). But I'll leave it at that.

 

[2San]

Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden etc never had a colonial empire ala the UK yet are still rich nations so your argument that european nations are rich due to exploiting of their colonies falls apart right there

So when will the UK or the Netherlands for that matter for everything they stole with interest of course? I'm pretty sure those poor countries would be a lot richer then and those imperialistic European states would be pretty much bankrupt. You are borderline delusional if you think Imperialism doesn't play a big role in their current wealth. Hell the dutch people where scared to death when they found they where losing Indonesia. We just got lucky, because we found gas source. The Dutch "golden age" is pretty much based on slavery and imperialism. Germany and Denmark did have a colonial empire.

And yet if he were assassinated, Van Gogh style, people would blame HIM, and not the people who killed him.

Now that's bigotry.

That's straight up bull shit. No one blamed Pim Fortuyn.

 

[Chuckie]

It seems that they have been discussed extensively. Not just by Wilders but more generally.

No they have not. Up untill around 2001 it was not done to say: "Hey... it seems there is a problem with a large part of the Moroccan youth. They are causing more crime than the average of all youngsters in the Netherlands".
Reactions would be in the line of: Racist! etc. etc. This slowly changed when Pim Foruyn entered the political field, but he got shot. So an even worse 'populist' came in play... Geert Wilders.

But trust me, political correctness was almost absurd in the nineties in the Netherlands.

 

[jorma]

Well Sweden did own an island called Saint Barthélemy (bought by King Gustav the Third in 1784) that was used as a trade port for slavery across the Atlantic ocean and the Swedes that lived there even had slaves themselves. Absolutely not as expansive as the colonial rule of the British, Dutch or Portuguese but we dipped our toes

Also, it's not like Sweden was a wealthy nation back then. We made our money in the wake of WW2.

 

[gutter_trash]

Sun TV was talking about this; but they were using a Fox News style type of pundits to talk about... then they cut away to a two headed baby without warning then I spit out my coffee

fuck Sun TV

 

[Kabouter]

So when will the UK or the Netherlands for that matter for everything they stole with interest of course? I'm pretty sure those poor countries would be a lot richer then and those imperialistic European states would be pretty much bankrupt. You are borderline delusional if a large part of the former imperialistic, aren't rich because of their exploits. The Dutch "golden age" is pretty much based on slavery and imperialism. Germany and Denmark did have a colonial empire.

Slavery wasn't that profitable for Dutch merchants, certainly not to the degree you would expect. Initially, the (then Spanish) Netherlands became rich through trade in the Baltic, grain most importantly. During the Golden Age, the second important source of income became the Spice trade. The Netherlands mostly profited in the 19th century from having actual colonies in the traditional sense, being able to keep up in terms of wealth despite not being industrialized by exploiting the East-Indies to the point of starving the farmers because they had to grow an ever greater portion of cash crops and couldn't grow enough food.

And Germany certainly didn't become rich because of its colonial empire, it did have one of course, but Germany's source of wealth is the same as it is today, industry.

 

[Kabouter]

Also, it's not like Sweden was a wealthy nation back then. We made our money in the wake of WW2.

Yes, Sweden, much like the rest of Scandinavia was relatively poor for a long time, much like the German states were. Dutch merchants (specifically the Trip patrician family I believe) used to outsource cannon production to Sweden because it was significantly cheaper. And the Netherlands received rather a lot of immigrants from those areas, certainly not to everyone's satisfaction.

 

[OttomanScribe]

No they have not. Up untill around 2001 it was not done to say: "Hey... it seems there is a problem with a large part of the Moroccan youth. They are causing more crime than the average of all youngsters in the Netherlands".
Reactions would be in the line of: Racist! etc. etc. This slowly changed when Pim Foruyn entered the political field, but he got shot. So an even worse 'populist' came in play... Geert Wilders.

But trust me, political correctness was almost absurd in the nineties in the Netherlands.

One of the largest immigrant groups in the Netherlands came from Indonesia, the former colony, and, having had time to settle down, exhibit none of these issues. If the statistics indicate anything it is that the crime rates are highest for second generation youths, however when the youth age, the disparity in crime rates disappear. Third generation and fourth generation immigrants show a marked difference, with little to no difference with the general population.

This seems to be tied up in cultural dissonance, where second generation youths are stuck between two cultures, and this is overwhelmingly the cause of crime. This criminal activity however appears to drop off with age, and then disappear with a third generation.

Arguing, as Wilders does, that such a thing is caused by Islam, is vilification because it is clearly not the case across all Muslim immigrant groups, nor can it be seen as particularly remarkable. Cultural dissonance is simply a factor to be taken into account within immigration policies, and if anything is an argument for more inclusivity, not less.

 

[theignoramus]

well aperantly in the netherlands given that Wilders is on trial for what's basicly blasphemy
a show trial at that, that was proven to be one big political atack more than once


Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden etc never had a colonial empire ala the UK yet are still rich nations so your argument that european nations are rich due to exploiting of their colonies falls apart right there

Germany did have a colonial holdings in Africa. It was there (in Namibia) that they managed to carry out the first genocide of the 20th century.

 

[Kabouter]

One of the largest immigrant groups in the Netherlands came from Indonesia, the former colony, and, having had time to settle down, exhibit none of these issues. If the statistics indicate anything it is that the crime rates are highest for second generation youths, however when the youth age, the disparity in crime rates disappear. Third generation and fourth generation immigrants show a marked difference, with little to no difference with the general population.

One certainly shouldn't forget the issues the Netherlands did have with one specific subset of Indonesian immigrants.

 

[pestul]

Someone please press the reset button on human civilization.. seriously, I don't like the direction we're heading in. Instead of sheltering ourselves behind borders/skin colour/religion, we should be moving towards a more united global society. Fuck.

 

[2San]

Slavery wasn't that profitable for Dutch merchants, certainly not to the degree you would expect. Initially, the (then Spanish) Netherlands became rich through trade in the Baltic, grain most importantly. During the Golden Age, the second important source of income became the Spice trade. The Netherlands mostly profited in the 19th century from having actual colonies in the traditional sense, being able to keep up in terms of wealth despite not being industrialized by exploiting the East-Indies to the point of starving the farmers because they had to grow an ever greater portion of cash crops and couldn't grow enough food.

And Germany certainly didn't become rich because of its colonial empire, it did have one of course, but Germany's source of wealth is the same as it is today, industry.

Oh you mean the free spice trade where we pretty much committed genocide when they didn't sell exclusively to us(Banda-eilanden)?

 

[TheOddOne]

I found it funny that Geert went all "you should not be dissing my team in your newspaper" and then went on to say "freedom of speach for everyone".

His lawyer talked to some Dutch law students and one of them said "Geert is like Hitler!", the lawyer replied "If you think that, then your stupid". Well, I am glad that I never signed up to see him at my school.

 

[Kabouter]

Oh you mean the free spice trade where the dutch pretty much committed genocide when they didn't sell exclusively to the dutch?

Yes, do you know any other spice trade?

I found it funny that Geert went all "you should not be dissing my team in your newspaper" and then went on to say "freedom of speach for everyone".

His lawyer talked to some Dutch law students and one of them said "Geert is like Hitler!", the lawyer replied "If you think that, then your stupid".

Well, I am glad that I never signed up to see him at my school.

That was such an exceedingly ignorant remark, certainly considering who the lawyer is.

 

[2San]

Yes, do you know any other spice trade?

Yeah, now that I think about it it wasn't really imperialism in the strictest sense. But defacto was a colony of the Netherlands.

That was such an exceedingly ignorant remark, certainly considering who the lawyer is.

It was well in line with the whole the Koran is like Mein Kampf thing though. Both lines reek of ignorance.

 

[[Nintex]]

Well, for one thing it's never boring with Geert around and all the crazies show up when he's around.

 

[Kabouter]

Yeah, now that I think about it it wasn't really imperialism in the strictest sense. But defacto was a colony of the Netherlands.

I wouldn't really call it a colony at that point in history, more like firmly lying within the sphere of influence. When I think a colony, I think of actually possessing all the land, and administrating it all. At that point, it was mostly still trading outposts.

It was well in line with the whole the Koran is like Mein Kampf thing though. Both lines reek of ignorance.

Oh, that is absolutely ignorant as well. But one needn't respond to ignorance with further ignorance :/. And Moszkowicz certainly should be applauded for remaining so calm after hearing that remark, with a family history like that, I would've completely lost my cool.

 

[StevePharma]

Yes, do you know any other spice trade?


That was such an exceedingly ignorant remark, certainly considering who the lawyer is.

True, then again the student (which seemed to be from Arabic or African descent) appeared pretty dumb and prejudiced. You should seriously check the average law-student nowadays in our beautiful country, 80% are a fucking joke. Comparing this man, who seems to insult with his words, is something else entirely than the systematic eradication of Jews and cultural minorities. I'm not a big fan of Wilders and a few of his antics, but Godwinning the discussion isn't helping.

And Moszkowicz certainly should be applauded for remaining so calm after hearing that remark, with a family history like that, I would've completely lost my cool.

Exactly, he pulled off some Louis Theroux type shit there. What I've noticed from several dicussion I've had with young Muslims is that they lost their temper really, really fast when I critiqued aspects of their religion. It seems self-mockery and sarcasm is something that needs to be worked on for the people I interacted with.

 

[Goldrusher]

Just ship the troublemakers back to their own country. If they can't behave, they're not welcome.

 

[jorma]

I wouldn't really call it a colony at that point in history, more like firmly lying within the sphere of influence. When I think a colony, I think of actually possessing all the land, and administrating it all. At that point, it was mostly still trading outposts.


Oh, that is absolutely ignorant as well. But one needn't respond to ignorance with further ignorance :/. And Moszkowicz certainly should be applauded for remaining so calm after hearing that remark, with a family history like that, I would've completely lost my cool.

If he has no problem taking on a client who does the same thing, why should he be any more bothered when some random student go the godwin route?

 

[Chuckie]

One of the largest immigrant groups in the Netherlands came from Indonesia, the former colony, and, having had time to settle down, exhibit none of these issues. If the statistics indicate anything it is that the crime rates are highest for second generation youths, however when the youth age, the disparity in crime rates disappear. Third generation and fourth generation immigrants show a marked difference, with little to no difference with the general population.

This seems to be tied up in cultural dissonance, where second generation youths are stuck between two cultures, and this is overwhelmingly the cause of crime. This criminal activity however appears to drop off with age, and then disappear with a third generation.

Arguing, as Wilders does, that such a thing is caused by Islam, is vilification because it is clearly not the case across all Muslim immigrant groups, nor can it be seen as particularly remarkable. Cultural dissonance is simply a factor to be taken into account within immigration policies, and if anything is an argument for more inclusivity, not less.

The immigrants from Indonesia aren't very comparable though. A lot of them were repatriating, not immigrating and even though they do have a distinct (sub-)culture it is partly dutch culture too, they are of mixed blood, Indonesian and Dutch and of mixed culture (more often associating with Dutch then Indonesian culture). They repatriated because either they didn't feel welcome anymore in the former colony or because they'd rather live in Holland.
The immigrants that weren't partly Dutch were the Moluccans and they were lied to by the Dutch Government and 'forced' to move 'temporarily'.

You are right though that Wilders is using the fear and hate that some people have for Islam and connect this to problems the Netherlands seem to be having with Moroccon youngsters, which is exactly the reason why I think Wilders is full of shit.

 

[Enosh]

He is not on trial for blasphemy, he is on trial for inciting hatred and vilification.

oh please, the whole thing is a show trial, trying to silence him through obviously biased courts beacose they can't do it with politics

Germany never had a colonial empire? I'll tell New Guinea right away

Germany didn't become a country until late into the 19th century, any colonial holdings germany had sure as hell didn't contribute much to the building of the country, which was your original point

Denmark, Sweden and Norway were enriched through trade with colonial states, trade which occured on an equal footing. They did not suffer the unequal trade that was pushed upon colonial holdings, nor did they suffer the devastation to the economy that came with that. Through investement and military power, they maintained independence from colonial rule, directly benefiting from colonisation that they did not directly take part in.

so their fault in the whole colonial deal is that the weren't a country that the colonial powers could conquer, due to their own military power or aliences that would force the colonial power into a war with someone on equal footing?
I guess that's one way to assign blame to those countries that didn't have or only had colonies in a very limited extend

 

[OttomanScribe]

oh please, the whole thing is a show trial, trying to silence him through obviously biased courts beacose they can't do it with politics

Your original assertion was that it was a 'blasphemy' trial. So it is not? It is people trying to silence him? Well clearly they are trying to silence him, silence his hate speech. I mean he talks about 'Morrocan street terrorists' and asserting the 'cultural superiority of Judeo-Christian traditions' in the constitutions.

People can call me on Godwin, but damnit the comparison is apt. Imagine if he said this stuff about Jews, making them submit to an 'ethnic register', banning them from building synagogues and banning the Torah. Would you be so ready to defend what he is saying as not being hate speech?

Germany didn't become a country until late into the 19th century, any colonial holdings germany had sure as hell didn't contribute much to the building of the country, which was your original point

Unfortunately, the reality of history is that nuance is involved. Germany was not rich based upon the colonial endeavours of Germany, it did however eventually benefit from the dominance of European powers. It was devastated and poor in the inter-war years, rose to become an imperial power in the Second World War and then was propped up by US and European wealth during the Cold War. It benefitted, like all of Europe, from the technological and military development that rode the back of colonialism. In many ways it began as a coloniser, not of the East or South, but of European nations itself.

so their fault in the whole colonial deal is that the weren't a country that the colonial powers could conquer, due to their own military power or aliences that would force the colonial power into a war with someone on equal footing?
I guess that's one way to assign blame to those countries that didn't have or only had colonies in a very limited extend

This isn't about blame, it is about historical trends. The reason for European wealth is undeniably colonialism. This is as much true of countries that benefitted indirectly as those that benefitted directly. It was not so simple as Britain taking Indian stuff and bringing it back to Britain, it was a complex system of trade and dominance, of which all European states (at some point in time) were benefactors.

 

[OttomanScribe]

True, then again the student (which seemed to be from Arabic or African descent) appeared pretty dumb and prejudiced. You should seriously check the average law-student nowadays in our beautiful country, 80% are a fucking joke. Comparing this man, who seems to insult with his words, is something else entirely than the systematic eradication of Jews and cultural minorities. I'm not a big fan of Wilders and a few of his antics, but Godwinning the discussion isn't helping.

I think comparisons with fascism are more than apt.

Exactly, he pulled off some Louis Theroux type shit there. What I've noticed from several dicussion I've had with young Muslims is that they lost their temper really, really fast when I critiqued aspects of their religion. It seems self-mockery and sarcasm is something that needs to be worked on for the people I interacted with.

I have had many discussions with many people, online and offline, I can't say I can pick any group that loses their temper more than another. This is most certainly true of young people.

 

[effzee]

I have a question regarding the claim I hear pretty often about culture and how due to immigration by Muslims many European nations are losing their identity. How true is this? I ask this seriously because I don't know. I live in the US and even though Muslims make up a sizable population in this country I do not see any of the American "culture" being lost or forced to change. Yes we have Halal butchers, many more restaurants from different parts of the world, accommodations for prayer, more mosques, and you see more people in the streets in their traditional clothing. But that would account for a very small % of American life. And I see all of the above mostly in the major cities. Not much in the suburbs.

Outside of that I do not see any "cultural" change on tv, in music, certainly not politics, nor any other measure on cultural trends. How is it any different in Europe?

 

[Arjen]

I have a question regarding the claim I hear pretty often about culture and how due to immigration by Muslims many European nations are losing their identity. How true is this? I ask this seriously because I don't know. I live in the US and even though Muslims make up a sizable population in this country I do not see any of the American "culture" being lost or forced to change. Yes we have Halal butchers, many more restaurants from different parts of the world, accommodations for prayer, more mosques, and you see more people in the streets in their traditional clothing. But that would account for a very small % of American life. And I see all of the above mostly in the major cities. Not much in the suburbs.

Outside of that I do not see any "cultural" change on tv, in music, certainly not politics, nor any other measure on cultural trends. How is it any different in Europe?

It isn't any different, it's basicly what you described.

 

[Kabouter]

I think comparisons with fascism are more than apt.

Really?

Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics.[3] Fascists seek to purge forces and ideas deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood".[4] Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[5] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state

a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

 

[Dude Abides]

Unfortunately, the reality of history is that nuance is involved. Germany was not rich based upon the colonial endeavours of Germany, it did however eventually benefit from the dominance of European powers. It was devastated and poor in the inter-war years, rose to become an imperial power in the Second World War and then was propped up by US and European wealth during the Cold War. It benefitted, like all of Europe, from the technological and military development that rode the back of colonialism. In many ways it began as a coloniser, not of the East or South, but of European nations itself.



This isn't about blame, it is about historical trends. The reason for European wealth is undeniably colonialism. This is as much true of countries that benefitted indirectly as those that benefitted directly. It was not so simple as Britain taking Indian stuff and bringing it back to Britain, it was a complex system of trade and dominance, of which all European states (at some point in time) were benefactors.

Irony.