SIOE

[kamui]

[quote]
Can’t be taught. And so far you haven’t said anything other than that you’re related to a Muslim and you teach lots of Muslim kids. Nothing else.[/quote]

Why should i bother to tell more than that since you “can’t be taught” ?
It would be even more pointless than, say, discussing theology with Tiribulus. And it says a lot.

Right/left: meaningless terms. I’m a conservative. I oppose extremism.

Then, you are inconsistent.
Your premise is : “there is an extreme problem”.
Your conclusion should be “it requires extreme solutions”.

If it were your conclusion, and if you were open about it, we may very wel argue and debate productively. And i could even agree with you on a couple of points.

[quote]
So far I’ve been called an “Islamophobe” and a racist half a dozen times for raising…um, how shall I put it, “culturally specific social, political and religious problems” and demographic realities.[/quote]

I haven’t and won’t call you an islamophobe or a racist.

I don’t know what question you mean.

I owe you an apology. I somehow confused your posts and Sifu’s posts.

[quote]You’ve said you’re related to a Muslim and that you teach Muslim kids and that you’re a good barometer of the Islamisation of your country. But then instead of going on from there and giving an opinion you call me a “right-wing propagandist” and condescendingly claim that you could teach me “a few things about it” if it weren’t for that.

So are you for increasing Islamisation? Against it? Don’t believe it exists? Who knows? “Right-wing propagandists” can’t/don’t get to know. They’re “Islamophobes”/racists/(insert sly insuation here.)[/quote]

Yep, i haven’t said anything, and i won’t.
As long as the issue is formulated with those terms.

Many facts you interpret as signs of the islamisation of Europe are very real.
And actually very worrying.
Ethnic and religious factors do play a huge role in many cases.
These factors are not a “taboo” for me, and i have never and will never call you a racist for pointing them.
Some of your interpretations of those facts may very well be true.
And even your historical perspectives may not be wrong.

I don’t share the same perspective, i don’t interpret the same facts in the same way.
Because my starting point is not “islam is evil” but “Europe is weak”. What you call “Islamization of europe” is, in my eyes, a symptom of the “de-europeanization of Europe”.

But, you can’t be taught.
You already made your mind, and you will continue to post “facts” after “facts”, “evidences” after “evidences”, showing us how real and how extreme the issue is, letting the reader draw the extreme conclusions himself.

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:

Why should i bother to tell more than that since you “can’t be taught” ?
It would be even more pointless than, say, discussing theology with Tiribulus. And it says a lot.

[/quote]

I was referring to the fact that you said I can’t be taught. I then invited you to say whatever you wanted to say from your vast experience.

Then, you are inconsistent.
Your premise is : “there is an extreme problem”.
Your conclusion should be “it requires extreme solutions”.

Really? Getting control of immigration policy, the economy and spending is an extreme solution?

If it were your conclusion, and if you were open about it, we may very wel argue and debate productively. And i could even agree with you on a couple of points.

Now I’m the one not being open?

I haven’t and won’t call you an islamophobe or a racist.

I didn’t mean you. Other posters in this thread.

I owe you an apology. I somehow confused your posts and Sifu’s posts.

That’s okay. Maybe he has a good answer. Sifu?

Yep, i haven’t said anything, and i won’t.
As long as the issue is formulated with those terms.

Terms? I advocate a sensible immigration policy. I oppose attacks on free speech, freedom of religion, women’s rights and so on. There aren’t any other terms.

Many facts you interpret as signs of the islamisation of Europe are very real.
And actually very worrying.
Ethnic and religious factors do play a huge role in many cases.
These factors are not a “taboo” for me, and i have never and will never call you a racist for pointing them.
Some of your interpretations of those facts may very well be true.
And even your historical perspectives may not be wrong.

I don’t share the same perspective, i don’t interpret the same facts in the same way.
Because my starting point is not “islam is evil” but “Europe is weak”.

I agree Europe is weak. And whoever said “islam is evil” - (wasn’t me) - maybe they could contribute to the discussion.

What you call “Islamization of europe” is, in my eyes, a symptom of the “de-europeanization of Europe”.

Two different but related things. Oswald Spengler’s Decline of the West influenced me amongst other works. You seem to making insinuations again. You are insinuating that I blame Islam for Europe’s ills. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you have been paying attention to my posts you might realise this.

But, you can’t be taught.
You already made your mind, and you will continue to post “facts” after “facts”, “evidences” after “evidences”, showing us how real and how extreme the issue is, letting the reader draw the extreme conclusions himself.

But you can’t point to anything “extreme” or anything that would lead anyone to draw “extreme” conclusions? I’ve outlined some of what I advocate above. That’s not extreme.

[kamui]

[quote]
Really? Getting control of immigration policy, the economy and spending is an extreme solution?[/quote]

Actually, it is not a solution at all.
It’s a (quite legitimate) goal.

A solution is how you concretely achieve this goal.

Europe, as we currently now it, is unable to get control of immigration or spending.
It would require some drastic political (and cultural) changes to make it able to do that again.
And history teach us that such drastic political and cultural changes comes at a heavy price.

The problem(s) we are currently facing DOES require extreme solutions. Even a significant shift in public opinion toward immigration control won’t be enough.

But then, there is two kind of extreme solutions : extremely complex ones, and extremely simplistic ones (aka : extremism).

I favor the first ones and i reject anything that would help the last ones to grow.

In my eyes, anyone and anything that does not explicitly propose extremely complex solutions to these extremely complex problems actually feed the gigantic troll.
Voluntarily or not : de facto.

I don’t think we have such a disagrement about the facts, nor about the values. We simply don’t have the same “posting ethics”, because we don’t have the same background.
I’m fully aware of the threat you’re speaking about. But i live in a country that is slowly condemning itself to a fascist future, and for this reason, i won’t “debate” in a topic titled “latest rape gang”.

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:

Actually, it is not a solution at all.
It’s a (quite legitimate) goal.

A solution is how you concretely achieve this goal.

Europe, as we currently now it, is unable to get control of immigration or spending.
It would require some drastic political (and cultural) changes to make it able to do that again.
And history teach us that such drastic political and cultural changes comes at a heavy price.

The problem(s) we are currently facing DOES require extreme solutions. Even a significant shift in public opinion toward immigration control won’t be enough.

But then, there is two kind of extreme solutions : extremely complex ones, and extremely simplistic ones (aka : extremism).

I favor the first ones and i reject anything that would help the last ones to grow.

In my eyes, anyone and anything that does not explicitly propose extremely complex solutions to these extremely complex problems actually feed the gigantic troll.
Voluntarily or not : de facto.

[/quote]

Okay, let me see if I’ve got this straight: first I’m a right-wing propagandist who can’t be taught. Then you agree with me but what I advocate is not extreme enough. And not complex enough. Well I’ll make it simple:

Western Europe will be convulsed in revolution/stasis within the next few decades. Conservatives seek to prevent, or if not prevent delay that through the political process and in public discourse and writing. They seek to establish and grow conservative movements that espouse conservative principles. They seek to create a climate where people are more receptive to conservative ideas.

I don’t think we have such a disagrement about the facts, nor about the values. We simply don’t have the same “posting ethics”, because we don’t have the same background.
I’m fully aware of the threat you’re speaking about. But i live in a country that is slowly condemning itself to a fascist future, and for this reason, i won’t “debate” in a topic titled “latest rape gang”.

You don’t like the thread title. Okay I’ll change it for you kamui.

[kamui]

[quote]Well I’ll make it simple:

Western Europe will be convulsed in revolution/stasis within the next few decades. Conservatives seek to prevent, or if not prevent delay that through the political process and in public discourse and writing. They seek to establish and grow conservative movements that espouse conservative principles. They seek to create a climate where people are more receptive to conservative ideas.[/quote]

Ok. Let’s try this.
Where/who are “the conservatives” in France ?

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Well I’ll make it simple:

Western Europe will be convulsed in revolution/stasis within the next few decades. Conservatives seek to prevent, or if not prevent delay that through the political process and in public discourse and writing. They seek to establish and grow conservative movements that espouse conservative principles. They seek to create a climate where people are more receptive to conservative ideas.[/quote]

Ok. Let’s try this.
Where/who are “the conservatives” in France ?[/quote]

Ha ha! There aren’t any. There aren’t any real conservatives in Europe. There are some people standing for conservative principles and fiscal responsibility - Daniel Hannan for example. But he’s no conservative. He endorsed Obama over McCain in '08. No, Europe has been riddled with socialism for a long time. I support conservative principles and many people stand for these but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.

[SexMachine]

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-275104-radical-islamists-taking-over-french-suburbs-le-pen-says.html

[kamui]

[quote]
Ha ha! There aren’t any. There aren’t any real conservatives in Europe.[/quote]

Indeed.
Instead, we got various brands of “socialism” and populism. And both of them instrumentalize the issues we are speaking about in this thread.

Therefore, here, in Europe, those of us who don’t deny the existence and the severity of these issues must make an extra-effort to not become the tools of these instrumentalizations.

[kamui]

the Le Pen clan is a perfect example, actually :

they created their party in uniting various far right groupuscules :
the maurassian nationalists
the nostalgics of petainism
the christian fundamentalists
the neopagan “Nouvelle Droite”
the monarchists
the poujadists
etc

Most of these groupuscules has been mutual ennemies for decades (or, in some cases, a century). The only thing keeping them together was the personnality and the electoral skills of Jean Marie le Pen.

During the 80s, the Socialists brilliantly used them to undermine the communists, and the National Front somewhat managed to become a far right party with a far left electorate.
After that, the national front kept capitalizing on the stupidity of the mainstream political parties, and they attracted an important popular support, despite their constant demonization by the medias.

But…
they are not conservatives.
they are still a ridiculous mix of far right ideologies, led by people who insist to make a good racist joke here and there, to publicly support negationnist assholes, or to play with bronze gladii in the wood, asking the Old Gods to give them victory in the imminent “ethnic war”.

They are totally unable to govern anything beside themselves and totally unable to apply any working solutions to the issues we are speaking abou here.

Since they won’t govern and don’t influence the mainstream parties in any remotely useful way, their only real achievement, beside the undermining of the communist party, is that they make a quarter of the french electorate worried, angry… and powerless. De facto.

Now, what will do all the people they convinced when they will realize that their political investment is (and was from the beginning) totally vain ?

They will radicalize themselves, and it won’t be pretty. It will be “breivikly” ugly.

[optheta]

So your telling me I should start having kids?

Is it okay if im brown?

[Bambi]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Well I’ll make it simple:

Western Europe will be convulsed in revolution/stasis within the next few decades. Conservatives seek to prevent, or if not prevent delay that through the political process and in public discourse and writing. They seek to establish and grow conservative movements that espouse conservative principles. They seek to create a climate where people are more receptive to conservative ideas.[/quote]

Ok. Let’s try this.
Where/who are “the conservatives” in France ?[/quote]

Ha ha! There aren’t any. There aren’t any real conservatives in Europe. There are some people standing for conservative principles and fiscal responsibility - Daniel Hannan for example. But he’s no conservative. He endorsed Obama over McCain in '08. No, Europe has been riddled with socialism for a long time. I support conservative principles and many people stand for these but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.[/quote]

You don’t think Hannan is conservative? Are you serious?

[BlueCollarTr8n]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
…but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.[/quote]

Sorry to break the bad news, but I live in a red state and their isn’t any conservatives here either.

[BlueCollarTr8n]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
…but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.[/quote]

Sorry to break the news, but I’m from a red state and there are no conservatives here either.

[SexMachine]

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Well I’ll make it simple:

Western Europe will be convulsed in revolution/stasis within the next few decades. Conservatives seek to prevent, or if not prevent delay that through the political process and in public discourse and writing. They seek to establish and grow conservative movements that espouse conservative principles. They seek to create a climate where people are more receptive to conservative ideas.[/quote]

Ok. Let’s try this.
Where/who are “the conservatives” in France ?[/quote]

Ha ha! There aren’t any. There aren’t any real conservatives in Europe. There are some people standing for conservative principles and fiscal responsibility - Daniel Hannan for example. But he’s no conservative. He endorsed Obama over McCain in '08. No, Europe has been riddled with socialism for a long time. I support conservative principles and many people stand for these but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.[/quote]

You don’t think Hannan is conservative? Are you serious?[/quote]

I like Hannan, that’s why I mentioned him. He stands for many conservative principles. But he lacks the social conservative component.

[SexMachine]

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
…but there aren’t really any real conservatives anywhere in the world outside of the red states. There’s my answer.[/quote]

Sorry to break the news, but I’m from a red state and there are no conservatives here either. [/quote]

Get rid of the RINOs then.

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:
the Le Pen clan is a perfect example, actually :

they created their party in uniting various far right groupuscules :
the maurassian nationalists
the nostalgics of petainism
the christian fundamentalists
the neopagan “Nouvelle Droite”
the monarchists
the poujadists
etc

Most of these groupuscules has been mutual ennemies for decades (or, in some cases, a century). The only thing keeping them together was the personnality and the electoral skills of Jean Marie le Pen.

During the 80s, the Socialists brilliantly used them to undermine the communists, and the National Front somewhat managed to become a far right party with a far left electorate.
After that, the national front kept capitalizing on the stupidity of the mainstream political parties, and they attracted an important popular support, despite their constant demonization by the medias.

But…
they are not conservatives.
they are still a ridiculous mix of far right ideologies, led by people who insist to make a good racist joke here and there, to publicly support negationnist assholes, or to play with bronze gladii in the wood, asking the Old Gods to give them victory in the imminent “ethnic war”.

They are totally unable to govern anything beside themselves and totally unable to apply any working solutions to the issues we are speaking abou here.

Since they won’t govern and don’t influence the mainstream parties in any remotely useful way, their only real achievement, beside the undermining of the communist party, is that they make a quarter of the french electorate worried, angry… and powerless. De facto.

Now, what will do all the people they convinced when they will realize that their political investment is (and was from the beginning) totally vain ?

They will radicalize themselves, and it won’t be pretty. It will be “breivikly” ugly.

[/quote]

Breivik was a lone nutcase. Europe is not experiencing an epidemic of Breiviks. But I take your point about the National Front being problematic.

[kamui]

[quote]
Breivik was a lone nutcase. Europe is not experiencing an epidemic of Breiviks.[/quote]

Of course.
But i didn’t say it will be “breivikly” violent, but “breivikly” ugly.
I was thinking about his manifesto.
If the political climate continues to rot as it currently does, some parts of Breivik’s ideology (which is definitely not neo-nazism) could very well spread in Europe in the future.
It’s already happening, and it’s not surprising.
When people are prevented to apply political solutions to what they see as a vital problem, they start radicalizing themselves, and, if the problem persists, violence ensue.

Fact is that what you call “islamization of Europe” is currently instrumentalized by virtually all our political camps (even those who pretend to fight it), which prevent de facto the application of political solutions.

Granted, immigration control and more secure borders could be (part of) a solution. But, precisely, it can’t happen in our current political configuration. And it won’t happen if our current political dynamics doesn’t change substantially.

The next question is “why is there no conservatives in Europe ?”.
And i’m afraid the answer is not socialist international conspiracy. But conservatism own (and i would say intrinsic) weaknesses.

But it’s another story. For another thread maybe.

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:

Of course.
But i didn’t say it will be “breivikly” violent, but “breivikly” ugly.
I was thinking about his manifesto.
[/quote]

The idea of there being a threat that people will radicalise themselves as a result of disenchantment with their political party is not something I can take seriously.

If the political climate continues to rot as it currently does, some parts of Breivik’s ideology (which is definitely not neo-nazism) could very well spread in Europe in the future.

Breivik didn’t have an ideology. His manifesto is a hodge-podge of all sorts of stuff. His “ideology” - whatever it is - is not spreading anywhere. Like I said, he was a lone maniac and has nothing to do with conservatism.

It’s already happening, and it’s not surprising.
When people are prevented to apply political solutions to what they see as a vital problem, they start radicalizing themselves, and, if the problem persists, violence ensue.

I don’t agree with your line of reasoning at all.

Fact is that what you call “islamization of Europe” is currently instrumentalized by virtually all our political camps (even those who pretend to fight it), which prevent de facto the application of political solutions.

The answer is as simple as it is old. Take over the party. If you can’t take over the party, split it and take as many of their members with you as possible.

Granted, immigration control and more secure borders could be (part of) a solution. But, precisely, it can’t happen in our current political configuration. And it won’t happen if our current political dynamics doesn’t change substantially.

There’s no “solution.” Just good policy and bad policy.

[kamui]

[quote]
The idea of there being a threat that people will radicalise themselves as a result of disenchantment with their political party is not something I can take seriously.[/quote]

Why ?
because you doesn’t see this as a threat but as a good and desirable thing or because you think it won’t happen ?

[quote]
Breivik didn’t have an ideology. His manifesto is a hodge-podge of all sorts of stuff.[/quote]

Yep.
But that’s exactly how most ideologies started.

[quote]
Like I said, he was a lone maniac and has nothing to do with conservatism.[/quote]

Never said it had anything to do with conservatism.

[quote]
The answer is as simple as it is old. Take over the party. If you can’t take over the party, split it and take as many of their members with you as possible.[/quote]

Ok. sounds simple. sounds good. Which party would you advise me to take over ?

[SexMachine]

[quote]kamui wrote:

Why ?
because you doesn’t see this as a threat but as a good and desirable thing or because you think it won’t happen ?

[/quote]

It just doesn’t make sense. Surely they’d be just as likely to “radicalise themselves” due to disenchantment with the mainstream parties?

Yep.
But that’s exactly how most ideologies started.

There is no Breivik ideology! Not in the making. Not anywhere.

Ok. sounds simple. sounds good. Which party would you advise me to take over ?

I meant that is the political example to follow for the conservative movement. Conservatives must not only engage at all levels of the political process but also co-opt or destroy rival parties.