White European preservation policies

Sure but the discussion is taking place in 2017, which means preserving some current characteristics.

But not actual DNA. Right?
It means some outward characteristics beyond genetics.

That would be culture and attitude.

For example, music is not forbidden so that produces a cultural heritage of orchestral music. And individual countries have specific styles of “folk” music and dance.

I don’t object to immigration itself. I don’t object to Muslims in particular. If Muslims come to Canada and adopt “Canadian values” then I see no problem.

I brought up Muslim attitudes to women as an example because it is being actively discussed. It represents an important conflict in values and a conflict which is not going away quickly.

In principle, I think that’s wrong. Dead Muslims can’t mix with dead Christians, Jews or atheists? What an idea.

You’re not going to say that everything is perspective and relative and that every society is basically equal to every other society … are you? :imp:

There are people who think it’s awesome that people of different racial backgrounds are mixing together and promote this in various ways.
I am in favour of the opposite, I am in favour of thinking and policies which promote segregation, discrimination.

Outward characteristics are a potential expression of a people’s genetics.
As White European power and influence dwindles in former colonial territories we see a change, a reversion to a culture and customs, kind of thinking, which is more in tune with the indigenous people of that place. What I am saying is that to preserve any outwards expression is to preserve said people, their genetic integrity.
As America becomes less White it will also become culturally more like those places where those immigrants and their descendants are coming from because institutions corrode and at the end it’s the people, their genetics which are the basis of any institution or cultural expression.

Also, this is not about objective superiority for me.
If Europeans/European ethnicities were dumb as rocks I’d still be in favour of preserving my people and being part of their destiny.

As for appeals to the so called human race (actually species) - Those who don’t see why it’s important to preserve the races and their evolutionary characteristics would destroy and dismantle the human species as well. Just the same way they can’t help themselves but wanting to destroy the races or the European race, neither would they preserve anything about the human species, same principle via desire for destruction and or carelessness, usually hedonism and cowardice.

This shows that “white European preservation” means different things to different people. Which is why it’s important to ask questions and clarify. :smiley:

Evidently, that’s correct. But all they require is a fence. What if they raised the money for the fence and so it didn’t cost the general public any money? It used to be that people with enough money to have land could bury the family on there own property, away from everyone else. And there were separate beggar’s graveyards. Where I live, there is a Polish cemetery, which i am not sure is still in use, but there is also a separate private jewish cemetery. And two Catholic only cemeteries. Are any or all of these unacceptable to you?

The cost is beside the point. My attitude, if I was in control of the cemetery, would be that you can bury Muslims anywhere in the cemetery and you can’t stop some Jew from being buried in the plot next to a Muslim.

Yeah, private property is a tricky question. But if you can own an apartment building and you can’t discriminate against minorities … can you own a plot of land and refuse to intern the bodies of minorities? :laughing:

All of those are “perverse”. But it’s again a question of private property … right? The land was owned by Jews or the Catholic church?

There are Muslim communities being built in Canada. They can’t legally prevent non-Muslims from buying the houses but I’m sure that non-Muslims would not feel welcome.
These are nice neighborhoods in the suburbs, not ghettos.

So the gentleman that asked told me that his mosque is very small (we don’t have a lot on Muslims in town) and they cannot afford their own cemetery (unless we are willing to give them a little land, which is another option.) So I guess if you’re rich enough you don’t need to go to the government for a little help. And yes, the land for the Jewish and Catholic Cemeteries is owned privately.

The rub is that the city is required by law to provide burial sites. But not fences. We do have a section for nonpaid (poor people’s) burials. It doesn’t have a fence.

Why do they need to be sectioned off by a fence?

According to the guy that asked me about it, it’s the minimal barrier between muslims and nonmuslims as required by their religion. He first asked if we (the city) could donate a small plot of land, enough for 15 or 20 graves, IIRC. He said his congregation was poor and had difficulty getting to the nearest acceptable facility, which is 40 minutes away, again IIRC. As maintenance would be an additional expense that he had not perhaps considered and as we are about to expand our city cemetery, I asked him if a small fenced off section would do. He said it would.

The expansion is maybe a year away, so we left it at that and he hasn’t contacted me since. The expense would be minimal and it would probably have to go before the governing board, but perhaps they (the congregation) could afford to donate the fence material. In other words, this could happen several ways, with or without tax money. Any land the city could donate for an entirely separate facility would be an odd, undevelopable piece that would be no financial loss to anyone.

I provide all these details because there may be, in some minds, a difference depending on cost to the public, which they are part of. Everyone pays taxes, if only through rent.

So all there posts about the fence to make the point that he is only asking for a small accommodation and I’m unreasonable in denying it.

Got it.

Of course if some neo-nazi was asking for some “small” accommodation then denying it would be reasonable. :evilfun:

You would be for a fence around the Aryan dead?

I didn’t know you were denying it. And how would I know before I mentioned the graveyard how you were going to react?

What are the Aryan dead?

I wrote that I did not agree to a fence. That was my position from the first time that you mentioned it. #-o

Oh. I thought you were kinda lukewarm about that. Anyway, since early on you have thought that i have been somehow singling you out for criticism. I am arguing against positions, not people. And mostly I am arguing against bad arguments and not positions at all, which has been my habit since I started at ILP. And long before.

By Aryan dead do you mean a graveyard for some sort of nazi club? No. I wouldn’t make that accommodation for a nazi club. It wouldn’t be fair to help people remember them forever as idiots.

You mean because I simply mocked the idea as ridiculous instead of saying “No fence, ever, under no circumstances”.

Didn’t you tie me into the Dearborn video, when in fact I never said anything about Dearborn.
Were you just confused???
What were those posts about???

Really? A lot of your posts seem to address positions more than arguments.

Maybe I have to reread your stuff. :-k

But you think that a Muslim fence is okay? Right?

Or did I misunderstand you completely?

Because you said it was wrong in principle. There are a lot of things i think are wrong but not important enough to act on. In politics, action counts. I must have been projecting. Maybe I wasn’t paying enough attention. I don’t know. My brain has weakened of late.

You seem to think this entire discussion is about you. it’s not.

No. I thought we covered that. I was responding to you and to others in the thread. I was unclear and apologized to you personally for that. Was I still unclear? I don’t know how to be more clear. But I may never have apologized to anyone else, ever, on ILP so I’m not going to apologize to you twice.

That’s because I am just getting started. I have seen inconsistencies in some poster’s posts. So I am trying to ferret out some coherence. I honestly don’t know if i am doing that with you. I’m not paying that much attention. It’s a message board, not a courtroom.

And yes, a group of law-abiding citizens with religious beliefs ask for something from the city they live in. Or a group of thugs ask. Og course, the first group is real and the second is not, so I get to assign attributes to them. Because they are not real. You just made them up. But what is a law-abiding, good-neighbor aryan group? Are there any? Holding bake sales for charity and helping kids stay safe at halloween? I mean, show me the group.