Cultural Enrichment

Multiculturalism ideologically speaking is about globalism and the elimination of nationalism or tribalism.

I would like anybody to prove me incorrect.

It has everything to do for the set up of global government eventually.

I don’t really see what the context, or your point is. It sounds somewhat apologetic. Are we not to condemn, villify, the perpatrators in these cases just because the US and its cronies invaded a few countries. Will everything be framed according to the greater crime commited elsewhere? “Sorry, for breaking into your home, but really it’s not that big of a deal, because don’t you know, that someone somewhere is doing something worse. Thanks.”

Either way, I’d burn them all (rapists, & politicians) at the stake.

But still, the nature of these crimes hasn’t been discussed. Why in gangs? Why only white women? Why Muslims?

This thread was started as an effort to provide proof that Muslims are evil scum who are trying to take over the West.

I am arguing that some Muslims are evil scum, but that their crimes are not on anything like the same scale as perpetual war in the Middle East (where the population is mostly Muslims). Furthermore, those wars create a lot of Muslim migration to the West, and hence the ‘invasion’ of Europe by Muslims is more a consequence of the West’s attempts to take over the Middle East than the other way round.

As I say, that’s because I’m failing to condemn these gang rapists in as strong terms as others on this thread, and that is how the mentality work when one is scapegoating - anyone failing to scapegoat to the same extent and in the same vociferous terms is seen as an apologist. It’s a ridiculous attitude to have.

Condemn? Sure, why not?

Vilify? Why bother? What purpose does it serve to create demons as a focal point for hatred? Particularly when one is being asked to do that as part of a racist dickhead agenda, as on this thread?

I think a sense of scale is important. Gang raping girls is pretty fucking horrible, but it’s not gang raping and then killing, or killing and then gang raping, an entire country. As I said, the reason the former is condemned but the latter is praised appears to be due to the colour of the girls involved.

This is an irrelevant analogy and a straw man.

Stop trying to prove how tough you are, you are convincing no one.

Why only discuss the nature of these crimes? To me, it’s far more important to ask: why fight wars? Why have a permanent standing army and arms industry? Why only Muslim countries?

When did this multiculturalism start. As far as I can tell premulticulturalism tribes were being eliminated by nation states.

And tribalism is already gone, taken care of by those nations.

Gangs are sort of like small armies. So we can then place this in a context of large armies, like the ones that have been playing checkers with the Middle East for centuries. Why is this not seen as multiculturalism? Why haven’t the people who complain about multiculturalism complained about, say, US foreign policy in Latin America, where US culture and desires were imposed on other cultures? Why do the anti-multiculturalists generally defend, say, the coloniztion of North America by Europeans, even though this was the mixing of cultures, the domination of other cultures and involved rape also. It’s like multiculturalism is OK as long as our team does it, but if it involves felafel stands in my neighborhood it is a crime.

Because all this really boils down to is ‘the globalised capitalist world makes me feel dislocated, alienated, and desperate for a sense of identity. Since I am white, and that’s not going to change, I’m going to make that my identity, and be racist in the name of protecting that sense of identity’. Basically, weakness+stupidity+lack of sense of self = opposition to what we call multiculturalism.

Start those threads. The OP has clearly shown in what direction he wishes to take this. You seem to be insisting on one particular facet of the subject besides it not being the one that has been put up for discussion here.

I’m residing in a mono-culture, and its dull. I like variety a tastes. It’s just that some taste better than others.

Two of the worst being American pop-culture and Islam.

Unlike the OP, I’m not so egotistical I feel the need to start a new thread in order to try to make one point in an argument from another thread.

A racist one?

And heaven forbid anyone disagree with the opening post in a thread and take a thread in a direction that actually, y’know, bears some relation to reality rather than just being the expression of racism.

The very fact you think that ‘Islam’ is just one taste is pretty daft…

I had trouble getting exactly what your view was here. I think it is meant as critical of the view presented, but I am not sure.

I have many concerns about globalization and the centralization of power. But some of this is inevitable given changes in technology. People are going to mix more, regardless of what power is doing behind the scenes. And many people will want to interact beyond their categories. We do this.

The kind of historyless hatred in Fent’s posts, with no acknowledgement of anyone’s crimes but those with darker skins or the wrong religion, is doing a lot of damage. It implies that that answer is to hate and separate out people who are less human than us, which is much easier than dealing with those with actual power.

I get the sense you have some agreement at least with this, but I couldn’t quite place your post.

If you can’t figure out that I’m critical of the view presented on this thread then, well, I don’t know what to tell you. I would have thought from all my posts that much was abundantly clear.

I don’t consider these people, however terrible their crimes, to be less human. If anything they are Human, all too Human. Dehumanising them is just one way of trying to deny that the capacity to do such horrible things is within all of us. Sexual consent does not really exist in the animal kingdom - if a horse sees a lady horse he likes, he will try to fuck it. He won’t go through some charade of promising the lady horse a bigger stable and a higher quality saddle and some exotic brand of grass. He’ll just try to fuck it.

That is not to trivialise rape, or at least that is not my intention. I’m just saying that applying such tags does nothing to confront and deal with the problem, it’s a psychological coping mechanism - we file these people under ‘less human’ or ‘inhuman’ and therefore give ourselves a reason not to think about them and the terrible things they did, and the possible reasons they did them.

There you go. You freely admit to changing the direction in favour of this “reality.” Ironic considering you claim to not be the egoist here.

Besides that, I’m still interested to hear your explanation of these rapes in “relation to reality.”

I’ll concede to that.

Yeah, I got it, just being cautious assuming.

I suppose I sort of agree. I certainly agree that that stuff is in me also. And seems to be there tucked away in other people also.

I don’t need to weigh in on what these men’s crimes were or what it says about them to point out that ‘we’ have treated entire nations of people as less than human in the kinds of ways that go into the rape mindset. Fent is using these incidents to reinforce a hatred, and keeps the whole thing out of any context that might humble the act of dehumanizing whole groups of humans.

Actually, multiculturalism does’t become a ‘policy’ until the 1970s. Furthermore, there are quite a number of programs of ‘positive’ discrimination today in favour of Aboriginals.
I wonder if you’d be equally condemning other countries/tribes/groups/peoples that have invaded others over the past few thousand years? Or is it only when whitey does it that it becomes a problem?

Actually, it boils down to letting who we want in the country. And a large population of Muslims in a non-Muslim country is potentially a recipe for disaster.Most religions and ways of life fit into Australia quite well. It’s only the Muslims that seem to have problems with it. Whether they can be re-educated into the 21st century and out of 7th century barbarism is the issue.

This Muslim problem isn’t even really a racial issue, it’s more cultural than anything. You’ve only deemed it racist because that’s what trendy lefties like yourself have been trained to say when white people have an opinion about others that don’t happen to be white. If you think whites are the only racists around, then you’d be ignorant. Do you know what the Japanese think of the Koreans, and those of Southern Asia? How about the Turks and the Kurds? But let me guess, racism is only a problem when whitey does it. Maybe you like to hang out in south-western Sydney for a while with ‘lebs’ and see where your trendy tolerance gets you. Give it a go, I’d really like to hear about how that experiment goes

This coming from a white Australian - :laughing:

Define ‘a large population of Muslims’.

Wow, like, it had literally never occurred to me before that non-white people could be racist. What a revelation!

Fuck off.

I see. You have nothing. You know I am right in that Islam is not compatible with liberal democracy. Whether you’re honest enough to admit this is another question.

Incompatible? That has been said at different times about all immigration. It’s far from perfect, but history has basically proven the multiculturalists right on that one. Particularly when the incoming culture has superior food and brings with it its fair share of pretty girls.

We don’t live in liberal democracies. Basically, your argument is everything you’ve been fed about nationalism, regurgitated without reflection. It’s also extremely funny to hear a white Australian complaining about immigration. Just like it’s funny to hear one lot of West African immigrants complaining about another lot of West African immigrants, or to hear British Pakistanis complaining about British Indians. A sense of tribal identity is quite natural and in most ways no bad thing, but mix it with globalised politics and you’ve got a recipe for some extremely silly conversations. Like the one you’re having with the person you assume that I am but in reality I am not.

:laughing:

Nationalism doesn’t play too much of a role in this problem at all. (Even if it did, I wouldn’t have much of a problem with it). The issue is one of crime and a 7th century mindset. The Chinese, Indians, and most other people can fit in, but why not the Muslims?

Europe spent a considerable amount of time trying to separate the church and state, however, with Muslims, Islam is all-encompassing: It is political in nature and has little time for negative freedom. It is pre-modern in the sense in that its honour to Allah’s laws override all secular concerns. Import too many people with this mindset and huge social problems ensure.

You do realise that of the millions of Muslims in the West, those who became gang rapists are very much in the minority, don’t you? And that non-Muslim immigrants (and even - SHOCK HORROR - white people in the West) can also become gang rapists?

No. Oh, OK then…

I think you’ll find a lot of Muslims are more pragmatic about the stringent nature of many of Islam’s rules than you’re giving them credit for being. But it is a problem, how to mature Muslim culture in the West. I just think you’re choosing a particular stupid, thuggish and racist way of going about talking about it, which is doomed to fail. You’re just saying ‘it’s a problem, it’s a big problem, and they should all just fuck off somewhere else’, and grasping at any of the same, tired old defences of racist arguments that you can hear in any pub in any part of the world. It really isn’t very interesting, you’re telling me nothing I haven’t heard a million times before in a Murdoch-owned tabloid. Ironic, really, that Murdoch, an arch-globalist propagandist, spreads monocultural nationalism in all the different countries where he owns newspapers…